More Light and More Heat

Wed 10/31/07 at 2:25 pm

Bush Says Congress Is Wasting Time - New York Times By BRIAN KNOWLTON

Referring to the current congressional session, Mr. Bush said: “We’re near the end of the year, and there really isn’t much to show for it. The House of Representatives has wasted valuable time on a constant stream of investigations, and the Senate has wasted valuable time on an endless series of failed votes to pull our troops out of Iraq.”

Tricky Dick Nixon thought Congress was wasting its time investigating Watergate. For the past 6+ years, Republicans stopped any and all investigations — there was NO oversight of the almighty executive and no accountability. During that time, America lashed out at the world, spied on its own citizens and ran up expenses and casualties that would have an honorable man gutting himself with a sword. Now, we’re just starting to shine a bright light on things and Duhbya and his cronies want that stopped ASAP. mjh


Bumpersticker

Tue 10/30/07 at 12:37 pm

Marty Chávez
The Republican Wing of the Democratic Party

Marty Chávez
A Democrat for Republicans

mjh

Note to readers from www.democracyfornewmexico.com/: Please look around a bit before you leave.


Former Gun Lobbyist Says NRA Aims Mostly for Money

Tue 10/30/07 at 9:26 am

Jeffrey H. Birnbaum - Former Gun Lobbyist Says NRA Aims Mostly for Money - washingtonpost.com
“Richard Feldman is a rarity — a former gun lobbyist who is publicly taking a shot at the National Rifle Association.

In his new book, “Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist,” Feldman accuses the powerful NRA of being in business primarily to raise money for itself and its executives, and of using self-defeating scare tactics to keep its coffers full.”
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/29/AR2007102902121.html?wpisrc=newsletter


2007 Spying Said to Cost $50 Billion

Tue 10/30/07 at 9:25 am

2007 Spying Said to Cost $50 Billion - washingtonpost.com
“By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 30, 2007; Page A04

The director of national intelligence will disclose today that national intelligence activities amounting to roughly 80 percent of all U.S. intelligence spending for the year cost more than $40 billion, according to sources on Capitol Hill and inside the administration.

The disclosure means that when military spending is added, aggregate U.S. intelligence spending for fiscal 2007 exceeded $50 billion, according to these sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the total remains classified.”
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/29/AR2007102902062.html?wpisrc=newsletter


Man Bites Wolf

Sun 10/28/07 at 1:46 pm

I’ve admired Jim Scarantino for years. Jim is both articulate and passionate. He uses those two qualities well in speaking and writing. Like clockwork, twice a week — once for the Alibi and once for KNME — Jim is out there, thoughtful and cuttingly clever.

On those rare occasions when he drops a dud, I forgive him. Sometimes, I struggle with his point, as in this week’s strange column lambasting effete urban treehuggers. (Jim did not use one of those words, a measure of his skill.)

Jim’s the real deal as an environmentalist. He walks the walk 50 miles at a time. He’s been deeper in the wild longer than I have and come back with words and pictures that one has to admire. Moreover, Jim has faced dangers few of us will: He was a pro-environment Republican. Talk about cojones. No wonder he doesn’t suffer people who *say* they love the environment but can’t prove it when the tread hits the trail.

There’s more than a little testosterone-poisoning in Jim’s column this week. He throws the word “enviro” around like he’s rejoined the Republican Party. You hear the sneer, even in print. Enviros live in cities and make life miserable for real people who don’t. After reading his column, anyone will feel like punching an enviro in the face.

Maybe that’s part of his clever plan. Perhaps, Jim’s giving a tough-love lesson: “Now you know how you’ve made those good country folk feel.” Perhaps, Jim can inspire (or humiliate) talkers into becoming doers. Unlike most mean-spirited screeds, his offers concrete actions that he suggests might make him stop despising, well, me, for one. (Uh-oh, are my hurt feelings showing? Typical wimpy tree-hugger!)

Trying to put aside the attack and look for substance, I have problems with Jim’s … — let’s generously call it “reasoning.” Most broadly, I despise the attitude that only selected people “count” or are entitled to an opinion on a subject. Jim’s argument about wolves is identical to the argument some make about Iraq: if you’re not there, shut the fuck up. That’s right: If you oppose the war but don’t actually go there, your opinion is worth less — no, worthless. (Unless that opinion is pro-war, paradoxically.) I can’t believe Jim feels that way about the war, but he cannot deny that that is precisely his argument regarding wolves.

Further, Jim explains that UNM students who care about the fate of the lobo not only look stupid but actually make matters worse because they antagonize the “salt of the earth” (Das Folk) living noble lives in places like Reserve. If you don’t drop out of school and go tend the wolves hands-on, you’re a hypocrite. Way to inspire! Nice lesson.

Moreover, while every column and columnist has limits, I’m not surprised that Jim leaves out some interesting facts. For example, people lived with wolves AND grizzly bears for millennia without the benefit of the 2nd Amendment or private property. We call those people Indians and after we swept them aside, the Federal Government proceeded to destroy all other competing predators. (Any wonder the Feds might not get it right this time?) Mind you, I’m under no illusions that Indians wouldn’t be as brutal as anyone else given guns and deeds. We only have to look at dozens of Isleta Pueblo billboards to see all people are alike.

But who owns the public lands ranching depends upon? “We” do, which includes Jim, me, college students and ranchers. Therefore, we’re all not just entitled to an opinion; we all have a stake in the use of public lands NO MATTER HOW FAR FROM THOSE LANDS WE LIVE and even if one never steps foot on public land. Public land is not private land.

Painting broadly, Jim chooses not to mention two types of ranchers. Everyone ignores the ranchers who figure they can put up with wolves. (Did you know you could buy “wolf friendly” beef from such ranchers?) More deceptively, Jim hides the ranchers who believe there is no public land, just their own private property. Like some nutty relation, they might distract from the appearance of reasonableness.

Most unforgivable is Jim’s adoption of a strawman, proof how weak his argument is. While this is *the* technique of lesser lights, I expect more from Jim who suggests that if you really love wolves, turn them loose in the city. You realize there are people (on both sides of the issue) who would be very happy with that solution. While we’re at it, let’s turn polar bears loose in New Mexico. Jim suggests you’re a hypocrite if you think wild things belong IN THE WILD and more so than domesticated animals. (Many years ago, I suggested grazing cattle on golf courses in response to some bloviation from St Pete. I fully support the voluntary relocation of all ranchers out of the Gila and onto the huge number of golf courses in desert New Mexico. Cows would readily take to the change and the long drive to town would be eliminated.)

By all means, let’s buy ranch land and grazing rights and let it go wild. Let’s put boots on the ground, in a friendly, non-confrontational way. Let’s give money to the good folk who accept that the wolf is back. Let’s do what we can, wherever we are, to save wilderness and wild things. The return of the wolf to New Mexico is far more important than anything Jim or I have to say. Make it work. mjh

PS: I agree with Jim, and many others, that the wolf reintroduction is not working now. I’m sure people on both sides have made it worse. I know Joe Skeen did everything he could to fuck it up and Steve Pearce will try even harder, ignoring any percentage of public lands stakeholders he chooses.


Pod People

Sat 10/27/07 at 12:55 pm

I’ve just completed ‘my’ first Podcast. Before I say more about that, allow me a moment to rail against the word “Podcast.” In doing so, I open a can of worms (nearly a pun, in this context). After all, language isn’t as logical as many would like to believe, being the most human of practices. I know: A crow can describe the type of gun a hunter carries. Still, a million monkeys would not come up with “Podcast.” (God bless them.)

Some will see in my resentment of “Podcast” roots in my OS orientation. Indeed, a problem with Podcast is that it stems from iPods, the viral product that revivified Apple, which used to be a computer company. My hat is off to iPple for making the recording and distribution of audio and video accessible to the masses. While Podcasts are to blogs what TV is to literature, it is all part of liberating and empowering us to reach each other.

But “Podcast”? pLease! My recent experience didn’t involve an iPod at any stage — how is it a Podcast? Talk about branding. If only Apple could get us to write it as “Pod©cast,” or some such variant.* It’s as if we all started calling handkerchiefs “Kleenex.” Good for a corporation; bad for a culture.

Understand, the main reason Apple has such a small niche of the computer market is that Apple products are expensive. They remain expensive because Apple has an iron grip on its products. Every CEO and petty dictator wishes for Steve Jobs’ power, especially over the masses. Whereas Microsoft is largely a software company that also sells hardware, Apple is a hardware company that also sells software. iPhone and iTouch are simply the latest examples.

I get the pun: broadcast –> Podcast. He-he. I have no problem with awkward language, like the word awkward itself or “blogosphere.” But “blog” is not a product like “Pod.” That capital “P” represents what disappoints me most about consumers. We are sheep. We are dim-witted animals slopping at the corporate troughs, squealing our delight at any swill thrown our way. Don’t like my analogy? Corporations clearly see us that way — just examine advertising.

It is the most Orwellian development that Apple, the subversive company bringing power to the people in the face of the Evil Empire (Microsoft), is really just Sharper Image. Mind you, I don’t object to the mass-production of expensive toys for the rich and wannabee rich. But people shopping at Sharper Image don’t think it brings “power to the people!” Apple customers have morphed from “cool” to “tool” without even noticing. Moreover, by convincing people that consistently buying one brand sets them apart — that Apple is cool, not corporate — puts Apple right there with Starbucks, Nike and the Republican Party. Now, go put on your iBlinders and jack back into the Matrix — Apple needs you. mjh

PS: Peace and love to all my Mac friends. I know you’re cool with a little bear-baiting. You joined the revolution in the garage days. (Apple II, anyone?) Only the newbies are tatooing corporate logos on their souls, right? It’s our corporate overlords I’d like to irritate. Don’t be their shills in the comments section.

PPS: Oh, yeah, that ‘Internet-based audio interview’ was with Benson Hendrix at UNM. The 37 minute file can be found at www4.unm.edu/unmlive/?p=34. There is hardly any corporation- or consumer-bashing in it (dude, I’ve got books to sell) and we didn’t have time to discuss Geek Culture.

*My buddy, cko sent me this link to a letter in which an Apple attorney renounces any claim on “podcast” and uses the lowercase form. OK — I retract the assertion that Apples wants podcast capitalized. Then why would anyone capitalize it? Respect? Deference? Slavish devotion? I don’t know. I dislike the word “podcast” almost as much as “Podcast,” but maybe I’ve been unfair to Apple. (Aw, look at that cute little corporation!) Perhaps iPple does “Think Different.” (That error is another entry.)


Why I Still Read Krauthammer

Sat 10/27/07 at 12:47 pm

Well, what about Reagan?, By Charles Krauthammer

Major grumbling among conservatives about the Republican field. So many candidates, so many flaws. Rudy Giuliani, abortion apostate. Mitt Romney, flip-flopper. John McCain, Mr. Amnesty. Fred Thompson, lazy boy. Where is the paragon? Where is Ronald Reagan?

Well, what about Reagan? This president, renowned for his naps, granted amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants in the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli bill. As governor of California, he signed the most liberal abortion legalization bill in America, then flip-flopped and became an abortion opponent. What did he do about it as president? Gave us Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy, the two swing votes that upheld and enshrined Roe v. Wade for the last quarter-century.


Air Pollution

Wed 10/24/07 at 8:16 pm

Perhaps you felt the latest slap in the face? Much of the past week, a plane has flown over Albuquerque towing an air-borne billboard. Imagine: burning precious fossil fuel while generating noise just to get you to look up and — if you are shockingly impressionable — to run into a local business, even though that business wants to irritate you for their own profit. Let’s go! You’d better hope this ideal is deeply unprofitable, because if somebody goes into that noxious place and says, “gee, I saw your sign and came right in,” we can expect more and more and more of this obnoxious advertising. Oh, well, it does distract us from all those damn helicopters. mjh

flying billboards over albuquerque
(… and the quiet.)


A Clear View

Tue 10/23/07 at 10:40 am

Sigh. I’m not often forced “to take a stand.” I have values and rules to live by, but I rarely get tested or asked to choose something I loathe in order to further something I love. In addition, I believe an open mind requires consideration of many things and a closed mind cannot grow.

I love taking pictures and I am very happy with — even proud of — some photographs I have taken. For me, a great photo is an intersection of art, craft and luck. I have been lucky to be in the right place at the right time a few times.

A noble artist works for himself or herself alone — the world means little. I am not noble. I want my photographs to be seen and — heart on my sleeve — loved. I should withdraw in shame at this point, but I must confess this unseemliness for the larger effect.

Today, two photographers I admire sent me an invitation to a photography competition. I’m not afraid to compete. I have entered other contests, sticking my neck out to bow before judges. In this case, the prize is extraordinary: To be seen all over Albuquerque. Wow.

Long before blogs existed, I frequently wrote letters to various editors and a few were printed (though I’m no Don Schrader). Occasionally, I’d run into someone who’d say, “I saw your letter….” (Often, they couldn’t recall what it was about.) I even saw one of my letters on someone’s office door once. That needy child within me — please, look away! — bubbled with joy.

Imagine: To be seen by countless Albuquerqueans. What a prize!

The Face of Albuquerque
Call for Entries

ClearChannel will be introducing seven new digital billboards into the Albuquerque area market in mid-November. The billboards utilize LED technology and their messages rotate every 8 seconds. As part of a testing period scheduled to run through December 2, 2007, they have agreed to display an exhibit of local photographers’ work on those billboards; the show will be titled, “The Face of Albuquerque.” Marc Gutierrez and Lisa Tannenbaum are working with ClearChannel to select approximately 40 photos for the exhibit.

In the end, doing nothing is always easy. I can do nothing and save my self-respect for another day. There is no need to be in anyone’s face, either on a billboard or in protest of the same. No need to snap at my friends. Still, I must protest: Billboards are litter. Billboards are a stick in the eye. Billboards are vile distractions for a populace barely able to focus on a txtmsg or 10 second commercial. Clear Channel wishes to use our art as a lubricant for that stick. I’ll have no part of it. mjh

electronic billboard in albuquerque

mjh’s blog — Puh-lease, god, no!
www.edgewiseblog.com/mjh/loco/albahquerque/puh-lease-god-no/


What’s a Social Conservative to Do?

Thu 10/18/07 at 2:06 pm

Brownback’s Out. Who’s Helped? - The Fix

It remains to be seen what impact — if any — Brownback’s departure will have. If he simply steps aside and does not endorse a candidate, it seems likely that many people attracted to his pro-family message would naturally migrate to Huckabee’s campaign. Huckabee, despite his own fundraising problems, is showing signs of life in Iowa and could benefit from an influx of former Brownback supporters in the Hawkeye State.

MIKE HUCKABEE: WISHY-WASHY REPUBLICAN, By Richard A. Viguerie

Some voters pining for a principled conservative Republican presidential candidate are pinning their hopes on former governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee. But while Gov. Huckabee stands strong on some issues like abortion that are important to social conservatives, a careful examination of his record as governor reveals that he is just another wishy-washy Republican who enthusiastically promotes big government.

I wonder what a close examination of Duhbya’s governorship revealed. Oh, yeah, a uniter-not-divider, compassionate conservative. I hope conservatives everywhere are weeping and tearing out their hair. mjh


Judge Rudd

Thu 10/18/07 at 10:48 am

MR on the trailIt’s very cool to see abqjournal highlight Merri’s efforts as Bernalillo County Probate Judge. In her years in office, she and her staff have taken on twice as many cases as in prior years. The court serves the general public and attorneys more effectively than ever. Never one to stop, Merri has more plans for the court in the years she has left in office.

Term limits will do what no opponent dared: boot her out of office in 2010. She’ll leave behind a great staff and model court. mjh

PS: Merri writes about probate matters every other week for abqjournal. (For a pittance, especially considering the effort and craft.) She recently wrote very movingly about her friend and mentor in Remembering Justice Pamela Minzner

ABQjournal Opinion: Probate a Little Easier

A death in the family is always painful, and any effort to ease the survivors’ burden is welcome. The Bernalillo County Probate Court is making just such an effort, with a new electronic system that makes it easier for family members to follow the progress of an estate through probate.

Instead of trekking up to the sixth floor of the county office building on Civic Plaza to check documents, or making repeated telephone calls to the court for information, members of the public can now make online searches at www.bernco.gov/probate.

Probate Judge Merri Rudd and her staff are to be commended for making a difficult process just a little easier for folks.

ABQjournal Metro: Old Probate Files Go Online
By Scott Sandlin, Journal Staff Writer

Say you are a beneficiary of your late uncle’s estate, and so is your brother— the one you’re not talking to.

You want to find out if the probate case has been filed.

Help is just a few mouse-clicks away, at a new online search feature of the Bernalillo County Probate Court, www.bernco.gov/probate.

The electronic case lookup is an innovation of Probate Judge Merri Rudd and her staff, allowing the public access to docket information on all cases filed between 1978 and now.

Bernalillo County is the only probate court in the state to offer online dockets— fittingly, because the biggest caseload is in the Albuquerque metropolitan area. The court handles more than 400 cases a year, almost double the number since 2000.

Rudd said people now can type in a name to find out if a case has been filed for a particular person— known as a decedent— or conduct more general searches on which cases were filed in a given month.

The latter function may be especially useful for creditors who need to file a claim against an estate.

Family members will be able to track the progress of a case already filed, or see if it has been filed at all. Rudd says she has dozens of calls daily from individuals wondering if a case has been filed.

Genealogists also will be able to research family histories.

Copies of the actual document still must be obtained in person at the Probate Court, on the sixth floor of the county office building on Civic Plaza downtown. They’re 50 cents a page.

Rudd, one of the few probate judges statewide who is also an attorney, has been active in reaching out to the public to explain the probate process. Her office has published free brochures on topics related to probate, including a court overview, duties of the personal representative, making claims against a probate estate, what constitutes an heir and what is real property in the probate context. She also writes a column for the Albuquerque Journal business section, helped devise do-it-yourself forms for probate filings, hosts a television show on GOV-TV, Channel 16 and has spoken to hundreds of groups about probate.

She also performs weddings.

The essence of probate is this: A dead person can’t transfer title to property. That means if someone dies and has title to property in his or her sole name, a personal representative must be appointed to represent the estate and handle the property.

The actual size of the estate doesn’t determine whether a case is filed in Probate Court or District Court, which also has jurisdiction over probate matters. Contested cases and other formal proceedings always go to District Court. Probate Court is for informal, uncontested cases.

Bernalillo County funded the case lookup system out of general funds for roughly $10,000 total, and ICON created the software. Now the office is turning to the task of making filings back to 1950 available.

Rudd, who by statute is a part-time elected official, oversees a historic domain. Among documents in the Probate Court files are documents in the flowing, lyrical hand script— and early typed documents— dating back to the late 19th century.

The oldest document in the probate file dates to Aug. 20, 1860. It is a handwritten household inventory, listing bees, chickens, rabbits, tame horses, oxen, burros and saddle blankets.

The owner also lists a house, worth $150, and land worth $13.


NM in National Political News

Tue 10/16/07 at 1:38 pm

All politics is local (so said Tip O’Neill). New Mexico’s local politics are attracting national interest. I recommend Chris Cillizza’s The Fix (blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/) as daily reading for all political junkies. I’ve highlighted two recent snippets below. mjh

The Fix Archive: Senate, By Chris Cillizza

N.M. Senate: Pearce’s Entry Sets up GOP Primary Clash

Rep. Steve Pearce (R) will run for the New Mexico Senate seat being vacated by Pete Domenici (R) and will announce his intentions in an letter to supporters tomorrow, according to sources close to the congressman. Pearce joins Rep. Heather…

By Chris Cillizza | October 16, 2007; 02:59 PM ET | Comments (3)

N.M. Senate: Another Democratic Opportunity

Sen. Pete Domenici’s (R-N.M.) retirement creates another major pickup opportunity for Democrats in 2008 as the state has been trending toward their party of late and the bench of candidates is deep. Democrats could barely contain their joy at the…

By Chris Cillizza | October 4, 2007; 02:14 PM ET | Comments (57)

blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/

The Fix Archive: House, By Chris Cillizza

New Mexico’s 1st District: Wilson’s Gone, Democrats Line Up

The dominos are starting to fall in New Mexico following Sen. Pete Domenici’s (R) retirement announcement late last week. The first major domino was Rep. Heather Wilson (R) who announced last Friday she would leave the 1st district seat she…
By Chris Cillizza | October 9, 2007; 09:45 AM ET | Comments (23)

blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/house/


Lower than Duhbya?!

Mon 10/15/07 at 5:20 pm

Make-Believe Reagan : Rolling Stone, by Matt Taibbi

It’s only after you run into this lobotomy act ten or eleven times that you start to see the dark essence of Fred Thompson. He is hard to dislike on a personal level: Unlike the overconfident district attorney he plays on Law and Order, the real-life Thompson comes off as a halting, humble, accidental celebrity who’s really just dern glad to be here. And his personality seems consistent with his Goldwater-era ideology: A believer in limited government, he seeks to achieve his ends by getting his frankly limited self elected to the White House.

His politics, though, are another matter. As a political animal, Thompson embodies the twisted core of the Sean Hannity/Rush Limbaugh era: He looks you right in the eye with that aw-shucks face of his and tells you shit that just isn’t true about who we are as a country. In his first few days on the campaign trail, he paces back and forth in front of crowds of Iowans and assures them without blinking that “we have the best health-care system in the world” — and you sit there wondering how the hell he can get away with saying that when America’s infant mortality rate is behind fricking Slovenia’s.

But by then Thompson is talking about how France and England are desperate to copy our market-based system of health care. And then he’s on to Iraq, where we “went in for the right reasons” because Saddam was planning a “nuclearized Middle East” that “would have defeated all of us,” assertions that leave the bad-news-weary crowd dewy-eyed with approval. Thompson represents the essential bullshit at the heart of modern conservatism: The fantasy that we are the benevolent envy of the world must be believed at all costs, no matter how much waste or mayhem or loss of young lives is suffered in deference to it.

That’s what Thompson is selling: a double dose of Middle American delusion. He’s a Grade A nice feller who isn’t running for president, even though he is, in a country that doesn’t launch unilateral and unwarranted invasions, even though it does. …

Standing on a riser in front of his bus, Thompson lays his Goldwater rap on the Decent Folk who have come to the park, telling them that the best thing government can do for the poor is to help them help themselves. “A government big and powerful enough to give you everything,” he declares, “is also powerful enough to take away anything.” The crowd cheers. [mjh: This is a direct quote from Raygun. Does his audience know or care?] …

What Thompson offers is a chance to drag the presidency itself into that bubble, leaving ugly reality behind. His campaign is basically a referendum on what America wants out of its president. Do we want an executive who solves problems and tackles issues, making decisions that are grounded in reality? Or do we want a lead actor to star in a television show about a fantasy America of our own creation, an America where poverty and war and insecurity can be solved simply by keeping them off camera?

That is a heavy, heavy question, a theme straight out of dystopian fiction, and those of us who would vote for reality should be chilled by Thompson because we know that even if America votes for the fantasy, someone is still going to be running the reality.

In the case of Thompson, that someone would be a slick frontman who might play the part of a Goldwater small-government Republican but in reality has made his living as an extravagantly paid pimp for government welfare. As a professional lobbyist in the 1980s, Thompson worked on behalf of Westinghouse, which was seeking billions in federal subsidies for nuclear power plants. (He conveniently leaves that part of his past out when, in his campaign speeches, he mentions nuclear power as one of the “other fuels” that “have to be part of the solution.”) He also lobbied for the deregulation of the savings-and-loan business — a Reagan-era move that helped lead to the infamous collapse of the industry. And between 2004 and 2006 he earned $760,000 lobbying to cut the asbestos liability of Lloyd’s of London.

Thompson is frequently compared to Ronald Reagan, with plenty of justice. Like Thompson, Reagan projected for voters a fantasy America, one that didn’t need to feel bad about Watergate and could still kick ass, despite having just been whipped by 2 million pajama-clad Vietnamese. But underneath Reagan’s goofy cowboy act was a raging ideologue, a deadly serious political force that also pitched to voters grandiose dreams of endless riches and world conquest. The dream America bought from Reagan was wrongheaded and stupid, but it was at least a big dream, a dream commensurate with the breadth and power of the American empire. The people who bought it were mean and overconfident, but they were at least still living on planet Earth.

What Thompson is selling is escapism, pure and simple. He’s selling America not as a vast adventure epic but as a timid, forty-seven-minute made-for-cable movie about a folksy small-town dad — a fantasy that makes no sense at all in the context of a massive militarized oligarchy currently occupying half the world’s deserts on borrowed money.

The people who are buying this fantasy are buying out of fear, because they can’t bear to look anymore. They’ve simply given up trying to deal. If Thompson wins — and he very well might — that’s what it’ll be: total surrender. The lowest we’ve ever sunk.

www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/16546031/makebelieve_reagan/print


the erosion of majority rule

Mon 10/15/07 at 5:06 pm

Harold Meyerson - The Silenced Majority - washingtonpost.com

In the past several years there’s been great concern about the erosion of individual rights as a consequence of the Bush administration’s “war on terror” and war in Iraq. I share this concern. But the administration’s critics, myself included, have been remiss in noting a development even more corrosive to American democracy — the erosion of majority rule.

A fundamental premise of democracy is that elections matter. That belief is being tested today as it seldom has before. In 2006, the Republicans were swept from power in Congress because the American electorate had had it with the war and with Congress’s unquestioning acquiescence to President Bush’s blind and obdurate faith in the eventual success of the American mission. In responding to the election by sending more troops to Iraq and keeping these troops there until the limits of our manpower compel their return next year, Bush merely doubled down on his unwinnable bet on his unwinnable war. …

If Democrats are to win in 2008, it will be because they represent a decisive break, not a partially veiled continuity, with George Bush’s policies, and with his war policies most of all. The Democratic candidates, Clinton especially, need to assure voters that their voice matters more than those of the Beltway theorists who supported the war at the outset and still can’t contemplate ending the occupation. They need to assure voters, in short, that they take democracy in America seriously.


#
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds. 47 queries. 3.002 seconds. Back to Top