UPDATE: Stephen Colbert prevails at FEC

Stephen Colbert was given the go-ahead from the FEC this morning, clearing the way for him to run his Super PAC.  Though no one should have a Super PAC, Stephen Colbert would be the most entertaining individual to head one.

It was a compromise decision, as shown here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/58130.html

As Bernie Sanders does from the Senate, Martin O'Malley does from Annapolis

Just a few days ago, Senator Bernie Sanders gave a riveting speech calling on President Obama to stand for working people, reject extremist Republican budget proposals, and have the rich to pay their fair share.  In addition, he has put out a letter to President Obama, and has been asking for co-signers.  


In a similar yet more measured move, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley released a statement to the President yesterday, calling for the same shared sacrifice as demanded by the Senator from Vermont.  The Governor also presented some important numbers in his statement.  As of yesterday, it read:

“More than 55 percent of the nation’s projected deficit is a direct result of the Bush era tax cuts - tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the very wealthiest 3 percent of Americans. 

“A return to the Clinton-era tax rates for millionaires and billionaires is a fiscally responsible and necessary step to help put our country on solid footing for recovery. I commend President Obama for his leadership on this matter. What we need right now is to remain laser focused on creating jobs, not on protecting special interest tax breaks for the wealthiest 3-percent of Americans.

“I urge Congress to come together and work to reduce the deficit in a balanced way that benefits all Americans.”

The Governor makes an important point.  The time has come to have all members of our country lend a hand in this time of need, and the wealthy should not be excused from this.  His secondary point is just as important: ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich would not be an extreme or leftist move, but would simply be a return to the centrist Clinton-era structure of taxation, under which America prospered in a way it truly has not in more recent years.  

Though it remains to be seen whether our President will respond positively to appeals from the Vermont Senator and Maryland Governor, it is certainly reassuring that there are at least a handful of elected officials who will stand for working people in this time of economic hardship. 

Colbert's joke might not be so funny

Synthesis.net

A front page story from Politico today shows just how dangerous Stephen Colbert's famous practical joke may become.  For those who are not regular viewers of the show, the joke referred to here is Colbert's Super PAC (political action committee), which he is starting to mock the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC.  Colbert's general idea is to expose how ridiculous it is to allow corporations to levy unlimited campaign contributions from their general funds, and to use his SuperPAC to fight against such interests (the irony being that his SuperPAC would itself be a sort of corporate extension of Comedy Central's Colbert Report).

Opponents of his PAC worry that it would open the floodgates for public figures such as Sarah Palin to siphon funds from Fox News or other conservative corporate interests into campaigns via a SuperPAC.  This argument seems very weak, however.  All Colbert would be doing is giving them a new idea, as the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United could already be interpreted as permitting such an egregious act without Colbert's FEC request even being granted.  In other words, the Supreme Court could be said to have opened the gate, while Colbert may only be showing others how to walk through.

Of course, Colbert's idea is great as a joke on his televised comedy show, but terrible when acted upon in real life.  The fact is that the humor and irony all go away when the joke is no longer a joke, and Colbert actually takes legal action to create something he would fight against: a corporately-funded political action committee.  Then again, perhaps the irony stays, but the humor definitely runs out.

Whether conservative of liberal, ironic or not, the idea of building a corporately funded political body out of a legal fiction is terrifying.  It essentially means that while individuals have caps on their campaign contributions to prevent the wealthy from buying a bigger voice than the poor could afford, the extremely wealthy can use their corporate funds to create a fictitious entity that knows no bounds when it comes to campaign contributions.  Though appreciable as a form of social commentary, Colbert's SuperPAC joke really may backfire as Politico contends.  In the end, however, it really does not matter if it is intended as a joke or not; it is still a SuperPAC, and therefore something that should never exist.

What the Dream Act means

Here is a little inspiration for the middle of the week - in the form of a video from Maryland State Delegate Rich Madeleno.  It tells the story of Maryland's Dream Act, from the points of view of activists, supporting legislators, and students who are actually effected by the legislation.  As news of an anti-Dream Act petition emerge in Maryland and anti-immigration views are espoused across America, it is important to bear in mind what the debate is really about: people who are all in search of a better life.

Sanders stands for common man

Here is a small portion of Senator Bernie Sanders' compelling and stirring speech on the Senate floor, which he gave starting at 4pm yesterday.  Senator Sanders at this point in time appears to be the only Senator who is actually willing to fight for those who cannot afford lobbyists or admen to fight for them.  He speaks of the working people who are losing their homes, the millions who cannot see a doctor or dentist in the wealthiest society on earth, and even of a first generation law grad living in a pit in Barre, VT who cannot pay down his debt or have his family visit him because of his decrepit living conditions.

Take a look at this brief segment, and if it is compelling enough to you, consider signing the Senator's letter to the President on the same topic.  It it not for the Senator from Vermont; it is about average people who are struggling to live.

Double vision

In a recent interview with George Stephanopolous, Michele Bachmann not only stood by her statement that the Founding Father's worked tirelessly to end slavery, but also would not concede the point that John Quincy Adams was not a Founding Father, but the son of one:




Now here is Sarah Palin during her freedomy freedomness tour.  At this point she was in Boston, and made so many mistakes on the midnight ride of Paul Revere it is hard to keep count.



No doubt Michele Bachmann is a bigger political threat.  Though loose on her definition of reality, she is more intelligent and more educated than Sarah Palin.  That said, this is not the first time she has made a Palin-style flub: she is also famous for believing that the battles of Lexington and Concord happened in New Hampshire, not Massachusetts.  Whether Bachmann, Palin, or anyone else who throws their hat into the ring, it is simply unacceptable to have a candidate for office who does not even know the history upon which this country's politics, culture, and laws are predicated.  Ever.

The F*&!ing FCC

According to a business blog post published on the Washington Post website today, the Supreme Court will rule on the FCC's role in continuing to censor America's mass media.  Apparently, the suit comes out of a 2nd Circuit (New York City) decision which stated that the FCC overstepped its bounds in fining ABC for an episode of NYPD Blue in which a woman's backside was exposed before she entered a shower.

For those of you who do not remember the incident, back in 2003, America's innocence was taken as its collective eyes were burned by a 3 second image of buttcheeks.  Yes, buttcheeks.  A woman was shown quickly getting into the shower, and her back and butt were visible.  No breasts, no nipples, and nothing else.  Still, the FCC fined ABC.

The main argument against the FCC's alleged role is admittedly more policy than law.  In short, the public already has unbridled access to violent, pornographic, and crude material over the internet, and uses vulgar language throughout the day.  Children swear and talk about sex in school, and women are just as adult as men and should be treated as such.  Their sensibilities are not offended by the F word.  In such a climate, the federal government has little legitimate policy interest in enforcing public decency when there is no more public decency.  Furthermore, the rise of digital media has obliterated any spectrum scarcity justifications.  With no more policy concern upon which to predicate FCC fines, the sole defense which the FCC could legitimately offer is precedent - precedent which is starting to show its age.

It is likely that many folks with backgrounds in law will have their own precedent and citations to attack this argument, but that does little to weaken its validity.  The fact remains that in the age of an open internet, the idea of censorship is archaic.  Furthermore, at a time when women, children, and businessmen may all be more crude and vulgar than any stereotypical depiction of a working man, the idea that their eyes and ears must be protected is nearly insane.    We do not live on the set of Leave it to Beaver, and in truth never have.

If one does need to cite law - this being an impending Supreme Court case - there is always R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul.  Now please, what kind of speech in not protected now?

In conclusion, here is the article.  Please, leave any comments on this post that will spark lively discussion. Oh, and fuck...

Michele makes it official in Iowa

Its official.  Michele Bachmann is now a candidate for the Presidency - in case you failed to realize that point when she unofficially announced her candidacy during the CNN debate.

What is most alarming is one of this central points in this Politico article: that Michele Bachmann is more than just crazy - she is crazy and cunning.  She is not just the weird lady who looked at the wrong camera during her Tea Party response to the State of the Union, but a "polished politician" who can sincerely connect with conservative voters.

Fears of her loose grip on reality and her potentially tight grip on voters' attention are compounded by Matt Taibbi's penetrating article, shared on this blog last week.  If Taibbi's thesis is correct, and Bachmann is truly on a political "holy war", and she is as politically skillful as Politico's article claims, this could prove to be a perfect storm in which a veritable madwoman is regarded as serious by a large swath of the electorate.  While reading the articles linked in this post, please try not to play into the fear, and contemplate the possible outcomes as calmly as possible.

Senator Bernie Sanders and Shared Sacrifice

An articulate and compelling letter to President Barack Obama by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, asking the President to reject draconian Republican budget cuts and to place a fair share of the burden on corporations and the super wealthy. It is imperative that as many people as possible sign this letter so that the President knows just how important this matter is. As it stands, the overwhelming majority of Americans believe that a good way to help balance the budget is for the super rich to pay their fair share. Republicans, however, have taken the upper hand in framing the issue in the national media and would have everyone believe that fairly taxing the rich would be unpopular and economically unwise. The facts are of course to the contrary.

Please take a few moments now, read this beautifully written letter to the President, and sign your name to it if you agree.

Petition - Shared Sacrifice: U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (Vermont)

You an also find Senator Sanders and his updates on this issue on twitter @SenatorSanders

Obama at DNC Fundraiser

This clip comes from before the New York Senate passed the state's marriage equality bill and Gov. Cuomo signed it into law last night.  That said, it is just as relevant this morning.

President Obama speaks here of equal rights for all couples, the non enforcement of DOMA, and the extension of federal benefits to partners of federal employees.  However, he does not go as far as endorsing marriage equality - openly.  It seems though that in the smirks, smiles, and subtext of this speech, the President is leaking his own personal opinion on marriage equality.  He appears positive on the issue, and it even seems that he is hinting at his approval of same-sex marriage.

The problem for the President is that he is walking a tightrope on the marriage equality issue.  Gay Democrats and their allies comprise a vocal and wealthy subset of the party, while still many other Democrats of various backgrounds and positions are cold to the issue.  President Obama walks the tightrope again in this speech, and does so tactfully.  What has changed since that night, however, is the passage of marriage equality in the most populous state to do so yet, putting the ball back into Obama's proverbial court once more.

Funniest book ever

Its Saturday, and time for some lighter fare.  With that in mind, consider the following:



http://www.guardianbookshop.co.uk/BerteShopWeb/viewProduct.do?ISBN=9780857862655

Equality at Last!

After days of delay, the New York Senate has approved marriage equality 33-29.  29 Democrats and 4 Republicans have joined together to do what's right.

In short, tonight is a good night, and justice has been done.

Here's all the benefits for the soon-to-be happy couples.  Special thanks to the New York Times.  The only problem with the article is how reminiscent it is of a course in wills, trusts, and estates.

UPDATE: Deal Reached on terms of religious exemption

Update: Vote may not be delayed

New York's vote on marriage equality might come to the floor later tonight

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/25/nyregion/new-york-state-senate-to-vote-on-same-sex-marriage.html?hp

Friday afternoon laugh

A good laugh thanks to House Dems and Pat Bagley at the Salt Lake Tribune.

Equality Delayed

The New York Senate will not be voting on marriage equality until after the weekend, thereby extending the state's legislative session into another week.  Reuters story below.

New York same sex marriage vote delayed

Let's Get Ready to Rumble... over redistricting

Typical.

Apologies for the one word introduction, but nothing else sums up the situation as effectively and concisely.  According to The Hill, Illinois Republicans are set to file suit over the state's new redistricting map, which has recently been signed into law by the Democratic governor.  Republicans apparently are angry that they did not have control over the state when redistricting occurred, and are now threatening suit because the map looks suspicious to them.  The map, as it was when being proposed by the state legislature, is available here.

In defense of Republicans, Aaron Blake's article in the Washington Post does point to redistricting experts who find this redistricting comparable to one done by Texas Republicans nearly a decade ago to oust a half dozen Democrats.  What is difficult to square, however, is the dramatic reporting with the banality of the map itself.  If one simply looks at the map, it is plain to see that the rural areas are cut into large swaths of land, while metro Chicago is divided into linear tracts, spreading out into concentric suburbs.  No large hooks, no self-evident gerrymandering. 

As for state Democrats, the Governor has ensured that the map is fair, competitive, and protects the voting rights of minorities.  There is no need to mince words here: ensuring the rights of minority communities and individual citizens is far more important than than keeping a political machine comfortably in power.  Though written largely as personal opinion here, it is also law.  Still, Republicans will take to the airwaves and the courts to bemoan their plight.

This is typical because once again, Republicans are playing the victim while they in fact hold the upper hand.  In reality, they have no fear of loosing, and should secretly be preparing for a big win.  At present, Republicans hold a powerful majority of statehouses across the United States.  The states, of course, conduct the redistricting, which means that in all of those states in which Republicans hold a majority, they now have the power to carve up electoral territory as they see fit.  In principal, they can squeeze out many Democratic Congressmen while drawing up new districts just for new Republican contenders - not just in one state like Illinois - but across America.  The most frightening prospect here is conservatives being able to secure themselves a future in congress even while fast moving demographic changes are shifting the country away from such inland conservative ideology.

Republicans will not publicize these facts, and they certainly will not publicly celebrate their wins.  Instead, they will do what they do best, and cry about one state whose map they did not draw all by themselves.  

Gutsy, Gutless, or Childish

Yesterday, Congressman Cantor walked out on budget talks with the White House's budget team.  This blog called it childish, but David Mark over at Politico is asking another question: was it "gutsy" or "gutless"?

It is hard to think of it in those terms when the stakes are so high.  Yes, typically one would be viewed as gutsy when making a bold move despite great risk. In this situation, however, the potential for disaster is so real that engaging in brinksmanship seems more like a case of putting partisan victory over the best interests of the United States and its people.

Here is the debate at Politico's ARENA: Eric Cantor gutsy of 'gutless' on debt talk walk-out

Senator Bernie Sanders has strong reply at the top of the page at the moment.  Riveting as always.

Matt Taibbi: Great Piece on Michele Bachmann

This is truly a great example of opinion writing.  Matt Taibbi is on top of his game here, blending colorful language, piercing snark, and fun, light reference points.  He also effectively vacillates from the serious and analytic to the humorous, making for a truly enjoyable piece.

Though a rather long article to be dedicated to one individual, it gives great insight into the insane world of Michele Bachman.

MICHELE BACHMANN'S HOLY WAR

Town Halls on YouTube

Apparently, YouTube is now a very official looking public forum.  There is a podium, flags, and all - all digital!

Seriously though, YouTube town halls are a new way of putting Democrats and Republicans side by side on a given issue and letting viewers voice their opinion by voting for one or another official on a given issue.  There is no telling how this will play out in the near future, and it is the first time I have heard of the forum.  That said, it could be an interesting little sideshow as we move closer to more serious debates for the Republican primary.

Here is an example from Nancy Pelosi on immigration and the Dream Act:

Perry for President - Maybe

An unconfirmed report is out now about Texas Governor Rick Perry declaring his candidacy for the 2012 Republican nomination.  Perhaps we will now see a little shakeup in the otherwise abysmally dull cast of GOP contenders.

Source Says Rick Perry Is Running, Campaign Adviser Can't Confirm

Bipartisanship at Last

What can bring elected officials together from across the aisle in this hyper partisan age?  Well, at the state level, it often seems to be same-sex marriage, though even this exception only cuts slightly into the homogeneous Republican camp.  At the federal level? Enter Mary Jane.

That's right.  Democrat Barney Frank and Republican Ron Paul of Texas are working together to end federal prohibition of marijuana and to allow states to regulate the plant as they see fit.  Frank of course hails from a state which has already decriminalized marijuana, and Ron Paul is perhaps the day's most outspoken libertarian.  In that regard, this alliance would seem to make sense.

Frank and Paul to introduce bill to end pot prohibition

More from the Party of "Adults"

In the latest childish move by a leading GOP operative, Eric Cantor (R-Va) walked away from budget talks led by Vice President Biden today.  That's right.  From the Party that came into Congress in 2010 talking about having an "adult conversation" comes a grown man who walked out of a room when he failed to get all of what he wanted, when he wanted it.  Adult?  Not sure.  A lot of us did that before entering elementary school.

It would be an entirely different matter altogether if Mr. Cantor stormed out of a meeting over a trade dispute or refused to speak to a foreign dictator who had brutalized his own people.  But here the swarthy Virginian stormed out on a team headed by the Vice President of the United States over the budget, an issue which requires cooperation and urgent attention at a time when the country desperately needs a cohesive economic plan.  Seems as though the budget is not all that important to Mr. Cantor.  Maybe getting his way is really his number one priority.

Please see: Cantor pulls out of White House budget talks

NOTE: The above photo was in no way altered.  After much consideration, it was decided that no amount of digital alteration could render a goofy-er depiction of the Congressman than that shown in the photograph above.

At Last: Dems Winning a Messaging War

This is amazing.  Republican Rep. Paul Ryan is now the third most disliked Republican in America, and according to Politico, Democrats are winning a messaging war against him and his party.  It is truly refreshing to see Dems take control of an issue for once and not simply behave in reaction to Republican initiatives.

And now, time to take a moment and celebrate the first time Dems have led in a P.R. battle since late '08:



To read more from Politico, click here.

Marriage Equality in New York this week?

This week New York state legislators in Albany are struggling to decide whether to allow for a vote on a law that would legalize marriage for same-sex couples in the state.  Many proponents of the bill believe it would clear the state senate if put to a vote, as 29 out of 30 Democrats are in favor, as are a handful of Republicans.  Even more Republicans admit they are undecided and have not as of yet opposed the legislation.  New York’s State Senate counts only 62 members.

This past legislative session in Annapolis, state delegates and numerous groups tried to pass a similar piece of legislation for same-sex couples in Maryland.  Though a version did clear the senate with relative ease, the house bill could not garner enough support to be voted upon, and was sent back to committee. 

In Albany as in Annapolis, the same pivotal issue clouds the greater picture: exemptions for religious groups who do not want to marry same-sex couples or who refuse to permit such couples to celebrate their marriage at their facilities.  In addition to that point, opponents of marriage equality bills also would like religious exemption for non-religious groups, such as caterers and banquet halls who would refuse to work with same-sex couples on their wedding day.  This would of course then establish a certain prioritization of rights, putting those of business owners ahead of those of the happy couple.  It also risks raising certain questions of constitutional law, with contractual relationships being dragged into the realm of 1st Amendment rights.

What we all must remember in this debate in Maryland, in New York, and across the country, is that this is not a question of redefining marriage.  Married heterosexual couples will still be married, regardless of whether or not same-sex couples can do the same.  This is also not an issue of the State infringing upon the rights of the church.  A decision rendered in Albany or in Annapolis would only affect civil marriage between two citizens of the same sex.  Already, millions of heterosexual couples are married every year in a civil, non-religious setting, and a law legalizing same-sex marriage would only expand this same ability to all couples.  Houses of worship will always have their own rules and beliefs on marriage, regardless of the state’s civil marriage laws.

What also cannot be forgotten is that this is a matter regarding the happiness and future of couples in every state of this country.  It is not a question of creating a new holiday, or changing when the clocks go back, or even budgeting highway funds.  It is a question of whether a state allows couples who love each other to come together in marriage, or whether a state stands in the way of their happiness and their future together.  The questions citizens of all states must ask themselves now is which of those states could they support and live in.

Be Prepared to Discuss...

Here is the original Supreme Court decision handed down Monday on the Wal-Mart class action suit.  Once time permits a thorough reading and analysis of the decision, there will certainly be greater discussion on this blog.  Read along if you dare; it will only better prepare you for the commentary and exchanges to ensue.

WAL-MART STORES, INC. v. DUKES

Progressive Maryland

Here is something definitely worth checking out.

Progressive Maryland's new blog, launched today at the organization's offices in Silver Spring, MD, is the new center of information for the non-profit group.  It will be regularly updated with the organization's events, ways of getting involved, and fundraising efforts.  Additionally, the blog will be a clearinghouse of information for progressives across the state, and will be tackling issues ranging from marriage equality to progressive taxation and raising the minimum wage.

So far, the blog has paid special attention to public banking and income disparity in the United States.  In the near future, the site will also be educating readers on issues about which they have previously heard very little, such as establishing a State Bank of Maryland, The State of Working Maryland, and a report card that Progressive Maryland puts out every year on legislators in Annapolis.

For readers who do not already know, Progressive Maryland is a 15,000-member strong grassroots non-profit comprised of a full-time staff, interns and volunteers, and 40 affiliated non-profit, labor, and religious groups.  It maintains centers of operation at Silver Spring in the Washington, DC area, as well as in Baltimore.  The group is primarily concerned with the rights and economic well-being of working families within the state, though it does also promote progressive social agendas within its advocacy work.

To check out the new Progressive Maryland blog, please go to http://progressive-maryland.blogspot.com

Of Scalia and Wal-Mart

Today, the Supreme Court rendered yet another decision in favor of the business "community". You are hereby invited to take a look at the New York Times piece linked below.  It is a brief overview, and it gives a couple of snippets of the opinion that would normally be difficult to contextualize by one who has not been to law school.  What anyone can easily comprehend in this case, however, is the self-evident b.s.

As a great law professor of mine  once said, "there are no apolitical decisions", and this is no exception.  The court's decision, written by Justice Scalia, seems to make every effort to disregard this class action suit as far fetched, frivolous, and baseless.  Reading the full text of the opinion will certainly be a joy, as it will no doubt be full of Scalia's classic bobs and weaves to avoid principles of precedent, history, and - let's be honest - the spirit of the law.

Further commentary on this decision must be saved for a reading of the full text of the decision.  No full analysis of the case can be made from the New York Time article alone.  In the meantime, please take a look at the original article here.  Also, keep an eye on your blood pressure while reading.

Illegal Immigrants Start Fires?

This one press conference ties together two unfortunate story lines: the increasingly nationalistic and xenophobic rhetoric of the Republican Party, and the inexorable decline of Senator John McCain.  For the former it is perhaps a sign of the times: a final push for return to a (largely fictional) 1950s-style past before the country finally moves forward on the social issues of race, ethnicity, and religion.  For the latter, it is a sorry display of a man who once stood for bipartisanship and moderation, but who now is behaving as an embittered old man - and one who is losing his grip at that.

Yes, John McCain, who once championed comprehensive and humane immigration reform, is now generating baseless accusations of Mexican-Americans.  Let there be no mistake: in this press conference, he is blaming fires which have forced the evacuation of 10,000 people from 4,300 homes on individuals crossing the US-Mexican border on foot.  Where is the John McCain who championed comprehensive immigration reform?


Then again, his endorsement of such reform was before 2008.  Before losing to then-candidate Obama, before his own party derailed his campaign, and before he decided to release his anger upon immigrants and the gay community.  That was closer to the time of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act, back when McCain could reach across the aisle, display a genuine smile, and most importantly, refrain from the crazy talk.


Perhaps now McCain is in fact more in sync with his own party.  Now he is sharing the same distaste for our neighbors south of the border, the anti-gay sentiment at the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, and the affinity for offensive comments that are sure to make a headline or two.  His moderation and self-distancing from racism, xenophobia, and extremism were always what set McCain apart from many other Republicans, and it was that which earned him much admiration across the aisle.  Unfortunately for the gentleman from Arizona, he is very quickly losing all the respect he earned over very many years, and now, nearly three years since the last presidential election, it is doubtful that he will be able to win much of it back.

UPDATE: Weiner Resignation Official

Just now officials in Washington and Albany received a letter from Rep. Weiner declaring his resignation, a move which now officially destroys any prospect of conspiracy theories or hilarious speculation based upon the previous post.

A Glimmer of Hope?

According to this blurb over on a POLITICO blog today, Rep. Anthony Weiner still has not yet officially resigned.  In truth, this man's career is beyond repair at this point and his lack of official resignation is probably due to an extended weekend trip to the Hamptons.  That said, it is intriguing enough to stimulate some idle speculation (please read comment at the end of the original article).

POLITICO: Weiner still hasn't officially resigned

Something New

Something new here in Maryland politics.  This is now the official blog for Progressive Maryland, a non-profit organization which focuses on issues such as:

• Raising the minimum wage
• Funding public education
• Progressive taxation
• Collective bargaining rights
• Health implementation
• State banking
• Combined reporting
• Fair development
• Marriage equality

The blog will contain useful information about the group, as well as new and exciting stories on many of their issues.  It will also include sources for further reading and information on how to get involved.   Comments are of course welcome.  

Check out the blog!

Saturday Morning Video

Its difficult to stay optimistic in these times, especially when you are awaiting the end of law school and the onset of stifling loan repayments.  It is even harder when the bad times have gone on since you were 14 or 15 years old.  The recession was the final straw, but the decline proceeded steadily for eight years before the market crash.  Terrorist attacks, wars, spending sprees, bigger houses, gas guzzling SUVs in every other driveway, and a previously unimaginable concentration of wealth.  Without delving into statistics or CBO publications, one must be blunt here: the recession was not unexpected; it was merely a culmination of many earlier events.  It is in that light that this video must be shared.  To quote the best line from it, "the 2000's suck".

The Uncler w/ Uncle Sam and Alyssa Milano from Alyssa Milan

UPDATE: New York Marriage Equality

Here it is everyone.  As of today, NY Governor Cuomo expects a marriage equality bill to be passed in Albany by the close of the legislative session next week.  This New York Times article points to a Long Island and a Hudson Valley Republican as being two of the tie breakers, though when this story initially broke the rumor was that the passage of the measure was contingent upon a yeah vote from a Staten Island republican whose quote is given in an earlier blog post on this same subject.


Yet another great quote has come along in this string of stories, this time from the Governor himself, who has recently declared "...this is marriage in a civil context — marriage as defined by government, not by a religion".  A very important point to be made by proponents of marriage equality, especially as religious groups seek to embed special exemptions from discrimination liability in marriage equality legislation.   It is a point hopefully more proponents will use and expound upon in the near future.  


To read the complete story, click here.

Disgraceful Display

There is no good defense for what Congressman Weiner has done, but the only person to whom this man caused any harm was his wife.  At the moment he decided to step down and apologize, people heckle him as though they were at a sporting event.

Rep. Weiner did something lewd, odd, and downright creepy.  That said, he did not break any laws, he did not molest any of the women with whom he exchanged photos online, and he did not engage in any violent behavior.  What should have been a shameful and tearful time between the Congressman and his wife became a media firestorm because he showed a photo of his clothed genitalia to an individual and coincidentally his name, which is German for the adjective 'Viennese', is also an American term for penis.  Funny.

Not really.  This man is a husband who wronged his wife in almost the worst possible way.  He was also a rare loudmouthed liberal who stood up for his constituents at a time when those of us from the East Coast are repeated called un-American by those whose home states are barely older than most of our parents.  Now that he has resigned, there is one less person to argue for what is right, to protect the interests of progressives in this country, and to defend those millions of us under attack in the so-called culture wars simply because of geography.

Watching this video is yet another harsh reminder of how crude and cruel those who appose men like Anthony Weiner can be.  Again, there is no defense for his own behavior. When a man has decided to apologize and bow out gracefully, however, those to whom he is apologizing must be graceful themselves, and let him.

Amazing Condensed Explanation of the Economy

The message in this video was already my point of view prior to me watching it.  So, in this particular instance, it was a case of preaching to the choir.  However, I hope that others willfind it useful in conveying some simple messages to friends and family, especially those caught in the useless and counterproductive battles of Point 5.  That point in particular is as old as time, and was especially prevalent during the 19th Century when owners of large factories would break up strikes being held by members of one ethnic group with strike busters from another, pitting the poor against the poor.

In short, this video give a correct and concise assessment of the so-called "big picture".  Unfortunately, to those for whom the brand MoveOn has already been tarnished, this message may be falling on deaf ears. What I will say in its defense is that this model view of the current economic climate is shared by many outside of that organization's ranks, including people from varying levels of education.

New York So Close to Marriage Equality

I love the quote: "They can take the job and shove it... I'm trying to do the right thing."

Check out this bit on NYS's Senate trying to pass marriage equality in that state.  Fingers crossed.


Gay marriage bill one vote shy of clearing NY Senate

Video: Keeping the Debate Moving

This was literally how the debate proceeded last night.  Every single candidate tried to squeeze three minutes into thirty seconds, and every time Jon King uttered an "uh-huh, uh-huh" to cut them off in the most polite way possible.  Truly a shame he could not keep the topics moving as cleanly as he could the candidates, especially when the debate took a turn towards the uglier social topics.  All video credits to POLITICO.COM.

Weiner Scandal Keeps Getting Worse

Rep. Anthony Weiner's scandal saga keeps getting worse.  This may just be a rumor, but according to a Washington Post article, the Democratic Congressman may be resigning in the near future.

Fellow New York Democrat Says Weiner May Resign Soon

Though his recent actions have been reprehensible, the Congressman's tough liberal stance would be greatly missed by his constituents and fellow progressives alike.  

The President in Puerto Rico

Today the President visited the US territory of Puerto Rico in the first presidential visit since 1961.   Viewed by many as a move to woo Puerto Rican and other Hispanic voters on the US mainland, the visit also highlights to referenda recommended by the current administration.

BBC NEWS: Barack Obama Makes Rare Visit to Puerto Rico

In Defense (partially) of Ron Paul

Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX).  No copyright to US Government work.

Though his stance on creating an anarchic free market economy and limiting a woman's right to choose are quite unpalatable,  Representative Ron Paul's point of view on many pressing issues merit strong validation.  Perhaps most importantly, Paul is the only prominent elected official today who has offered proposals on how to save the federal government money without boxing out members of his opposing party.

Take for example Paul's stance on monetary policy.  The first and most important aspect of his viewpoint is that he is the only Republican candidate to have one; no other candidate could even effectively debate him on monetary policy last night.  His argument could win over members of both parties, as many left-leaning Democrats have just as many issues with the Federal Reserve System as many Republicans.  Paul realizes that a currency deflated by the Fed can mean more exports for the US in the short term, but ultimately a negative flow of capital out of the country, meaning a lack of jobs at home.  This stance has all the strength and ultra-Americanism of a Republican policy, while erring on the side of more typically Democratic economic conservatism  (in American politics, the conservative Republican Party is more economically liberal, while the more liberal Democratic Party tends to be more economically conservative).

Paul could also unite Democrats and Republicans over rarely discussed forms of government waste: militarism and the "war on drugs".  Paul realizes that the US has long lost the war on drugs, and that the people who are going to use narcotics will do so regardless of the law.  He also realizes that the law in this area is not the primary deterrent for those who refrain from using recreational drugs.  As he has asked before on numerous occasions, "How many people here would start using heroine if it were legalized today?"  Each time, no one raises a hand.

On US involvement overseas, Paul has the soundest propositions, bar none.  The United States must pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, reduce involvement in the Middle East, and close all unnecessary military bases.  This would reduce federal government spending by an almost unimaginable amount, and repatriate untold numbers of American tax dollars and citizens in uniform.  History is on the side of the gentleman from Texas as well.  At no time has a foreign occupying force been able to "nation-build" from the outside in, nor has it been able to spread democracy by force.  It is simply impossible.  The United States' engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan is an exercise in futility at this point, and the maintenance of many US bases is simply a massive drain on funds.  On these few quick points, Democrats, Greens, Libertarians, and many others could rally behind Congressman Paul.

Unfortunately for him, Rep. Paul will be squeezed out by the two party system.  His views are not shared across the spectrum of his party, and his analysis is often too academic to be effectively conveyed to the electorate.  It is disappointing, as Mr. Paul quite often has the most thoroughly researched position on many topics, and his heart is in the right place.  As I have already said, I vehemently disagree with the gentleman from Texas on a number of issues.  However, his perspectives on many of the days issues are valid, well-backed, and truly his own.  It would be a great thing to see Mr. Paul debate President Obama, and whether it is in the quest for elected office this year, or years down the road when the two come out of retirement for a symposium, I hope to have the chance to see it.

CNN GOP Debate: Anyone Else Catch the Obvious?

Republican Candidates in New Hampshire Debate | AP Photo

It is highly doubtful that I was the only viewer to catch the outrageous comments and topics on tap during last night's Republican debate.  What is shocking, however, is how easily CNN's moderator Jon King glossed over the outrageously offensive material without so much as an interjection.  Perhaps more shocking - and indeed saddening - is how the front pages of politico.com, nytimes.com, and washingtonpost.com all skipped over this topic.  Rather than focusing on the content of the debate and what that tells us about the Republican Party today, news outlets are much more honed in on the mild bantering between candidates and declaring who "won" last night's debate.

Our excursion into crazyland started once talk about the economy (which Romney and Paul were more than happy to stick to) grew dull and repetitive.  At that point the debate opened up for comments and attacks on the gay community, Muslims, immigration, and abortion.  That's right.  At a time when our country faces a burgeoning debt crisis, two and a half foreign wars, and abysmally slow economic recovery, the most important things to discuss were sealing off the US's borders to protect us from immigrants and keeping our troops safe from the evils of homosexuality.

It is safe to say that this was all off topic.  Day laborers working in fields and on lawns have nowhere near the economic influence of a reckless day trader on Wall Street, and gay people who serve our country in the armed forces certainly contribute more to our national security than heterosexuals who take advantage at the peace and security provided to them by those brave men and women.  Further, abortion must be the most utterly irrelevant topic after a lengthy debate on what should be done to re-stimulate the economy and repatriate outsourced jobs.

This then brings us to the commentary on the Muslim community and the star of this segment, Herman Cain.  If at all possible, this must have been the most outrageous topic within this part of the debate.  Candidates debated whether or not they could have a Muslim in their cabinet, and honestly declared that they would not unless that Muslim proved his or herself to be loyal to the US and not a terrorist threat.  Surprising?  Sadly, no.  What was astounding, however, was the validation of this topic by CNN and its host, Jon King.  After Herman Cain was given a chance to justify comments he had made earlier on this topic (before the debate), King continued the conversation with other candidates as though it were a legitimate question and not a gaffe from a bombastic candidate.

This entire portion of the debate was saddening, though not terribly surprising.  When Republican friends and colleagues tell me that not all Republicans are racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, homophobic, etc, I have to agree.  Yes, you, as an individual, are not.  However, last night's debate should be an eye-opener to self-identifying moderate Republicans.  The debate was not only allowed to carry on in this manner by CNN, but  candidates and the audience were all too pleased to take swings at the overturning of DADT, immigrants, etc.  Candidates' comments that would have been met with shock in many other quarters were greeted with thunderous applause in New Hampshire last night.  The question then remains for moderate Republicans: do you want to be associated with such a crowd?  Last night, there was no 2007 John McCain to take a moral stand - every candidate joined in this hateful speech.

As a party, Republicans must grow, expand their base, and change their stance on social issues.  Last night's crowd was overwhelmingly White, and was noticeably graying.  If the GOP wants to remain a legitimate party and a bone fide challenger to Democrats in the future, they must back off the homophobia and xenophobia, etc and embrace a more diverse America.  This is not for the next four years, but the forty to follow.

Maryland on the International Stage

This morning I received an interesting message in my email inbox.  Martin O'Malley, Governor of Maryland, is currently on an East Asian tour promoting stronger ties between the state and China and South Korea.  The email provided a few new updates about investments in Maryland by emergent Asian companies, as well as this new video.

What is most remarkable in this is not the media output.  Rather, it is the Governor actively promoting his state by encouraging foreign direct investment within its borders.  Governors often promote their states domestically - everyone probably remembers Fmr. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's media blitz of "California: Find yourself here" commercials.  This, however, is different in that O'Malley is crossing international boundaries to find the potential investors and business partners which his state needs. This essentially means that when companies are looking for a new building site, or a research institution is looking for an American university with which to form a partnership, O'Malley has already put a face on Maryland and has already formed alliances for the state above and beyond the official ties between Washington and a foreign capital.

The other interesting point is that the Governor is being proactive in pursuing the industries and technologies which he regularly promotes in his speeches and press releases.  Rather than simply talking about investments in universities, developing solar and wind power, and increasing biotech research within the state, O'Malley has gone across the globe to see that such progress actually happens.  It would be far simpler to stick to the status quo, give a few million more to research centers, and build a token wind turbine or two. Instead, the Governor is taking real steps toward developing a green economy in Maryland, rich in research and biotech development.  With a veritable statewide network of hi-tech workplaces, research universities, and renewable energy plants, a prosperous and forward moving Maryland could serve as a microcosm and example for a country whose economy and fragmented energy policy both desperately need to be overhauled.

Governor Martin O'Malley's press release:
http://www.governor.maryland.gov/pressreleases/110602b.asp

An Educational Use for Cooking Oil

Check out this link for a great bit from Governing. Dallas, TX is using recycled cooking grease to fuel 1,000 buses and save $100,000 in fuel costs. It truly is the greatest example of a win-win situation: waste is kept out of landfills and drains and is converted into fuel, while fuel needs are met far below normal cost. Forget recycling cereal boxes - this is real recycling: making renewable energy out of clean burning waste.

An Educational Use for Cooking Oil

What everyone must keep in mind though is that only old, heavy diesel engines can heat and burn cooking oil as fuel. Buses, trucks, old Mercedes diesels, etc. can do this. A 2009 Golf TDI cannot, and a gasoline engine certainly cannot. Companies around the country can actually convert older diesel vehicles to run on cooking oil full time. In the DC area/Mid-Atlantic, there is Feed My Wheels, and in New England there is Greasecar.

This story may not seem in keeping with this blog's political feel, but in fact it is. Grease (or cooking oil) conversion for diesels is a great way to use and promote the use of renewable energy. It is cheaper than diesel from a gas station, and in some cases may even be free from a restaurant that wants to get rid of it. It also means using older cars (keeping them out of landfills and curbing need to produce new cars), and using a substance which would otherwise go to waste. From a progressive standpoint, this is a very environmentally friendly idea, and from a more conservative stance, grease conversion means curbing spending on foreign petroleum products. Either way, it is a highly effective method of improving air quality and saving money.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel Arrives at White House

Today President and Mrs. Obama welcomed German Chancellor Angela Merkel to the United States on the south lawn of the White House.   After a great deal of pomp and circumstance, the two leaders spoke of the great importance of the German-American relationship, and shared hopeful messages about the future of the two economic giants.

President Obama underlined the strategic nature of diplomatic ties with Germany as the country at the geographic and economic heart of Europe.  He also spoke of the dynamism of the two countries' economies, and of the importance of investing first and foremost in human capital.

Sadly, Chancellor Merkel's remarks were largely muffled over the PA system, as was the English translation.  That said, it was clear that Dr. Merkel aimed to reinforce her country's alliance with the United States, which she announced was as strong today as it was when the Berlin Wall came down in 1989.

It is likely that the recent uprisings in North Africa will dominate discussions between the two leaders.  Merkel did make it a point in her opening remarks that Germany stood by peoples struggling for democracy in North Africa, though her country has been noticeably absent from NATO involvement in the Libyan conflict.  At this time France, the UK, and the US have been leading airborne and naval bombardments against Gaddafi's forces.

The need for a new head of the IMF to replace Dominique Strauss-Kahn will likely be at the top of the agenda as well.  Traditionally reserved for a European, the IMF chairmanship is now up for grabs as many argue that it is time the organization be led by some one from outside the Continent.   At the same time, President Sarkozy's Minister of Finance Christine Lagarde has also become a contender for the position.  Though European herself, Lagarde is viewed by many to be the perfect public relations cure for the IMF: a competent, experienced woman who can change the image of an organization now marred by a sexual assault scandal.

Though it is yet unclear which issues the two leaders can resolve together, it is evident that the discussions will circle around two abundantly important matters: economic policy and military involvement.

Great Piece on the Anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts

Here is a great piece from the Baltimore Sun opinion section, highlighting the sad legacy of the Bush Tax Cuts on their 10th anniversary today.

Tax cuts for the rich have made us poorer

Also, there is a press conference on this same topic being held right now in front of the Social Security Administration building in Baltimore.  Hopefully there has been some good turnout from progressives from across the state.