Politics Schmolitics

SCOTUS Strikes Down DC Gun Ban

2008-06-26T11:24:00.002-04:00

More here.

[...]

The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history. The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

[...]

Uhh, wow. Wow. I guess I should get a handgun now.

To Publicly Finance, Or Not To...

2008-06-20T08:24:00.003-04:00

Hmm. I support Obama but I'm not sure how I feel about this. I mean, he pretty plainly has said all along that he believes in, and will use, public campaign financing. Until... yesterday. When he announces that no, in fact, the quarter of a billion dollars he's raised is a HELLUVA lot more compelling than the paltry $85M that he'd get from the public coffers.

On the one hand, I totally get it. Why not fight the fight with the best and most generous resources you can muster? On the other hand, as a citizen, I'm disgusted. I mean didn't he say one thing for months (nay, years) and then totally reverse himself when it was politically expedient (or financially expedient as the case may be) to do so?

Anybody wanna weigh in on this thing? Frankly, I already know where you'll stand if your a McCain supporter, so save me the piling-on... I'm more curious what the Dems have to say about this thing...

You tell 'em Warren!

2007-11-14T21:24:00.001-05:00

Think all business geniuses and billionaires are money-grubbing, heartless, public spiritless bastards intent on avoiding as much of the public responsibility their wealth brings as possible?

Not Warren Buffett. He testified today against repeal of the Anti-Oligarchy Tax. Over 2,000 others (all part of the less than 1% of American households even affected by the AOT), including Bill Gates and George Soros, have joined him in opposing the proposed repeal.

Editor's Note: this is not to say that provisions cannot be made to account for true instances where small businesses and family farms are severely negatively affected as an unintended by-product of the AOT. These problems can - and should - be dealt with both for the sakes of those affected and to remove that "fig leaf" from those using it to mask more sinister motives.

If only the kids lived in Orange Co. and were rich (or on fire)!

2007-10-26T13:01:00.000-04:00

But then, I guess that's the whole point.

Throwing away all pretense, President Bush says poor children are a waste of time. For shame.

W to the rescue!

2007-10-24T10:57:00.000-04:00

President Bush to SoCal: "I'm coming to save you!"

SoCal to nobody in particular: "Thank God we're white and well off!"

New Orleans to the World: "Are you f*cking kidding me?"

So you veto health insurance for kids? Really??

2007-10-03T10:54:00.000-04:00

THIS is one of President Bush's 4 total vetos? Are you kidding? How do you veto health insurance for children? I guess the White House's new motto is "Billions for offense, not one penny for poor children!" Doesn't exactly have the same ring as its Adam-era predecessor (by Rep. Robert Goodloe Harper).

And what is their excuse, you might ask? Congress asked for $35 billion to cover an additional 7 million kids whose families make too much money to qualify for Medicare, but not enough to actually afford health insurance coverage on their own. The Bushies view this as moving beyond "helping poor children", so they want to only minimally fund $5 billion so that only the poorest of the poor get help. That's fantastic rationale: "We only agreed to help the really poor (so we wouldn't look like heartless bastards with a presidential election coming up), but we're not going to start helping the only kinda poor kids too! Socialized medicine! Socialized medicine!"

Come on! Is this really going to put the health insurance companies out of business? Really? THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO BUY INSURANCE NOW, WE'RE NOT STEALING CUSTOMERS!!

I cannot stomach an administration who would rather see 7 million children go without health insurance than risk harming health insurance companies. Where is the common decency? The only way this gets worse is when the health insurance companies issue their 2007 10-Ks and we learn that its been a record-setting profits year. I hope the tears of poor children have medicinal properties, because that's all the Bush Administration is going to allow them to have.

Its a day for Hallelujahs!!!

2007-08-27T12:31:00.000-04:00

This one is a bit more personal.

I can never remember how to spell Hallelujah...

2007-08-27T10:40:00.000-04:00

Thank the good Lord above, the liar is no longer running the Justice Department. Let the healing begin!

Sensible Thinking about Aviation Security

2007-08-25T20:06:00.000-04:00

"A Pilot on Airline Security" is the best reading on commercial aviation security that I have seen since Patrick Smith's excellent "Ask the Pilot" column on Salon.com. The pilot in question is none other than David Mackett, president of the Airline Pilots Security Alliance, an "all-volunteer, non-profit, non-partisan organization that provides expert information and guidance to the public and policymakers to implement sensible and effective aviation security measures that provide REAL enhancements to the safety of airline passengers and crew, and REAL deterrents to terrorism directed at the commercial aviation sector."

The key point that Mackett makes is one that will be quite familiar to readers of Schneier on Security: spend money only on security that works regardless of the threat. Security measures that rely on predicting the type of attack (e.g. banning liquids on planes) are a waste of money, and worse yet, amount to crying wolf. If you've ever rolled your eyes at airport security, the terrorists have already won.

Here's a money quote from the blog post:

In the end, we should be starting with defending the smallest spaces — the cockpits and cargo compartments, and working outward to the limits of our resources; instead of starting with the airport perimeter and working inward, ignoring the actual defense of those spaces that are actually the terrorist targets. And we should be using the resources already in place to the greatest extent possible, instead of trying to bring new, untried methods into play, then waiting to find out they don’t work nearly as well in reality as they do on paper.

And before I go, let me leave you with this jewel: even mechanics walk around with their tool.

Hmmm, NAACP Singing Different Tune?

2007-07-30T14:08:00.000-04:00

Here's what the NAACP had to say to the American public about Michael Vick's recent indictment for dog fighting, etc.

Here's a page on the NC NAACP website from August 9, 2006, concerning the Duke lacrosse case.

Hmmm...

On the flip side, a blog post from the San Jose, CA chapter of the NAACP.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

But I thought it was snow melt dripped directly into the bottle from the leaves of the newest plants of Spring!!

2007-07-27T14:44:00.000-04:00

Looks like Coke and Pepsi aren't exactly finding secret natural springs hidden somewhere deep in the Canadian Rockies from which to bring us Aquafina and Desani. So what exactly are we paying for? Anyone want to lend me start-up money for a new bottled water company? I can do THAT, for crying out loud...

Mueller's Pink Slip is in the Mail!

2007-07-26T17:06:00.000-04:00

Looks like the head of the FBI is not a loyal Bushie! Where's Monica Goodling when you need her? She'd have Mueller out on his ear by COB Friday.

News Hounds: We watch FOX so you don't have to

2007-07-14T19:27:00.000-04:00

Pretty cool news aggregator blog: http://www.newshounds.us/. They also have a nice YouTube videos page.

I found it through YouTube while watching the two Wolf Blitzer interviews with Michael Moore:

Oh shit, there's more:

Sanjay Gupta says a lot of good stuff here, but the thing I like the most is his point about how we need to spend more on preventative care so we will not have to spend so much on care after people get sick, which is harder and thus, more expensive.

On to Larry King Live (which I just misspelled as "Larry Kink Live", much to my amusement):

Gupta points out that "free health care" is not "free", says France is "drowning in taxes" and running a 15 billion dollar deficit. From a US Department of the Treasury press release, entitled "U.S. Fiscal Outlook Improves Significantly in December Fiscal Year to Date Deficit Down; Monthly Surplus Up More than 300 Percent":

The Fiscal Year to Date deficit ($80 billion) is down 33 percent ($39 billion) compared to the same period last year. The President's tax relief has stimulated strong economic growth. This strong growth has contributed to record-level receipts and the creation of more than 7.2 million jobs since August 2003. October to December receipts for FY 07 are at $574 billion, running 8 percent ($43 billion) higher compared to the same period for FY 06.

So even though we are not "drowning in taxes", we are running an 80 billion dollar deficit (five times that of France, which is pretty much the same per capita; France's population of 63,713,926[1] is 21.16% of our own population of 301,139,947[2]), and that is a "significant improvement". Hrm... what would be one way to pay for universal healthcare without raising taxes to the "drowning" point? Maybe reducing the 4.06%[3] of GDP we spend on the military (and that was in 2005, estimated, let's see what the GAO thinks about this year... this just in: the GAO's search functionality fucking sucks! To wit: my search for keywords "military spending" for this year returns a bunch of hits, all of which are to PDFs with almost worthless abstracts. Let's see if Google can do better: my search for keyword "military spending" on site:gao.gov turns up this (Warning: PDF; click here for Google's HTML version) as the ninth result. Ugh. In the 21st century, transparency means findability, and while PDFs are great for reading and printing, they are not ideal for searching, quoting, and sourcing. Note to the GAO: please provide HTML versions of all of your documents!)...

Where was I? Oh yes, military spending. The CIA World Factbook says that we spent 4.06%[3] of GDP--or 536.33 billion dollars (based on a GDP (official exchange rate) of $13.21 trillion[6]), or $1786.40 per person per year (based on a GDP - per capita (PPP) of $44,000[6]). The 2007 military budget (Warning: PDF; click here for Google's HTML version) says $439.3 billion, but that is just what is budgeted, not what is being spent. I had hoped that the GAO would give me a good number on what is being spent, but I could not find it in finite time. :(

Anyway, even if we take the DoD's numbers at face value, that would still be 3.3%[6] of GDP, or $1463.22 per capita. I don't know about you, but that is a sizeable chunk of my total tax bill. Assuming the mean US tax rate of 17.5%[7] and the mean household income of $58,208[8] (as of the 2001 census), the average household pays $10,186.40 in taxes per annum. Assuming the average household contains 2.0 people (I could only find census data for Hispanic households, which was 2.58[9], so I'm fudging the number, but in a way that actually weakens my case), that is $5093.20 per capita, making our military spending an astounding 35% of each person in America's tax dollars!

As an aside, if you want to read something amusing, try the rosy picture painted by the CIA World Factbook of the US economy on for size.

And now, the exciting conclusion of the Michael Moore vs. Sanjay Gupta fight, refereed by the ~~disgusting hack~~ excellent journalist, ~~Harry Thing~~ Larry King.

[1] SOURCE: CIA World Factbook
[2] SOURCE: CIA World Factbook
[3] SOURCE: CIA World Factbook
[4] DIRECT SOURCE: Wikipedia
[5] INDIRECT SOURCE: FY 2007 Department of Defense Budget, page 19. I verified that Wikipedia was, as of 2007/07/15 01:20 GMT, correctly representing this data
[6] SOURCE: CIA World Factbook
[7] SOURCE: WWW.WORLDWIDE-TAX.COM (please do not view me using this source as claiming it is reputable; I used it only because I could not find hard numbers from the US government--I tried both the IRS and the CIA World Factbook--and it came up quickly in a Google search)
[8] SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau
[9] SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (not a very good source, but the best I could find; see the above points about the relationship between transparency and findability)

Officially the weirdest opening sentence ever!

2007-07-12T10:56:00.000-04:00

The following is the opening sentence from an article about a new twist in the recent Senator Vitter prostitute scandal. Its a "grabber", but geez:

"Jeanette Maier, the madam known for operating a high-end brothel with her mother and daughter, said Tuesday that U.S. Sen. David Vitter made occasional visits to her business beginning in the mid-1990s after the two met at a fishing rodeo where she and her prostitutes were hired to entertain local politicians."

WTF is a fishing rodeo? Who hires openly practicing prostitutes to "entertain" politicians at an apparently public event? What's her daughter's telephone number?

NOTE: this article is from a New Orleans-focused website and the madam at issue is NOT the "DC Madam", but apparently a local New Orleans madam (lest there be confusion).

The Security vs. Liberty "Trade-Off"

2007-07-10T22:13:00.000-04:00

We are all familiar with the old Ben Franklin quotation:

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

But in the context of terrorism, it seems that this is a false dichotomy; "trading" liberties for security might result in a reduction of both!

I know I quote Schneier too much, but he is just so sensible about security issues!

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/07/good_commentari.html

I wanna party with Rudy!

2007-07-10T14:06:00.001-04:00

Check out his friends! One of them passes out coke as a party favor, and another bangs hookers left and right. Can you imagine the victory party Rudy would have??

Current Justice Department Vet Speaks Out

2007-07-10T11:55:00.000-04:00

Wow! Powerful statement from a guy who joined the Justice Department at the beginning of the Reagan Administration. He's still there (well, at least until Karl Rove reads this Op-Ed). I hope he brought a large cardboard box to work on Monday, I think he might need it.

Well done, Mr. Koppel.

The Case Against Air Conditioning

2007-07-08T15:59:00.000-04:00

"Air head" by Oliver Broudy

Time to go?

2007-07-04T10:51:00.000-04:00

Keith Olbermann called for Bush/Cheney to resign on his MSNBC program. Here's a transcript of his comments, courtesy of Salon.

Libby's sentence commuted

2007-07-02T23:45:00.000-04:00

WHAT THE FUCK?!

I knew they were crooks, but I didn't appreciate how far above the law this administration was until this. Please, please, please America - it's time for outrage! Get off your obese, indifferent, ignorant asses and start screaming.

You're goddamn right I'm angry,
-Mike

WTF, Dick?

2007-06-24T09:20:00.000-04:00

The WashPo has a story on the secretive doings of VP Cheney on today's front page. Here are five highlights (as selected by Slate's Roger McShane in his 'Today's Paper' column):

5. "In the usual business of interagency consultation, proposals and information flow into the vice president's office from around the government, but high-ranking White House officials said in interviews that almost nothing flows out."
4. "Man-size Mosler safes, used elsewhere in government for classified secrets, store the workaday business of the office of the vice president."
3. "Even talking points for reporters are sometimes stamped 'Treated As: Top Secret/SCI.' "
2. "Cheney declines to disclose the names or even the size of his staff, generally releases no public calendar and ordered the Secret Service to destroy his visitor logs."
1. "His general counsel has asserted that 'the vice presidency is a unique office that is neither a part of the executive branch nor a part of the legislative branch,' and is therefore exempt from rules governing either."

My favorite is No. 1--what does that mean anyway? His office is "exempt from rules governing" the executive and legislative branch? So, in effect, there are no rules for him (because he sure as hell doesn't fall under the judiciary)?! Even if everything he's doing is above board (which I doubt), just by conducting business in this way, he's drawn a tremendous amount of suspicion down on himself. Why? Because, he just doesn't give a fuck! I'm sure in his mind he can do whatever he wants because he alone knows what our country needs--fuck the common voter. We're all stupid and don't know what's good for us. We need him to make that decision for us. And, we certainly don't need to know about what's going on in our government. That would just make us more confused. Good thing we have Dick up there, watching out for us... and covering his ass in secrecy should he turn out to be wrong. (Ooops, he already has?)

A Lost Cause?

2007-06-23T09:46:00.000-04:00

Here is a very interesting conversation between two, award-winning Guardian reporters regarding their experiences in Iraq, views on the current situation, roots of the civil war, and where they see things going.

One of the most interesting insights is the role of Paul Bremer in creating a Shia/Sunni polarization that previously did not exist before the Americans invaded. The reporters claim that prior to 2003, no one in Iraq identified themselves as Sunni or Shiite. They were Iraqis first. They also say that Iraq had the highest inter-marriage rate between Sunnis and Shia in the Muslim world. Then there was the "American effort at social engineering in Iraq. And there was a simplicity to it. It was almost binary: Sunnis equal bad guys; Shia equal oppressed. We must empower the Shia, we must marginalise the Sunnis." And, now there is a civil war. (That's an oversimplification and it leaves out several aspects of their argument, but you'll just have to read the article.)

Perhaps most disturbing, though, is their thoughts on the possible success of partitioning. They feel that the Sunnis and Shia don't want this because both groups feel they can still defeat the other and take control of the country. Right now, the groups are locked in a land grab in order to seize as much territory as possible before the Americans leave, at which point, according the reporters, the "real" civil war will begin.

Frightening. Disturbing. Is there any hope for Iraq?

For cryin' out loud...

2007-06-20T12:19:00.000-04:00

Here's what I can't stand about the folks who take to the streets about this or Danish cartoons, or whatever. They run around protesting, rioting, threatening to kill people, ACTUALLY killing people, etc. etc. every time someone does something to offend them. Publish a cartoon they don't like? Riots and mayhem. Write a book they don't like? Death sentence, riots and mayhem. Make someone a knight whose book they don't like? Death sentences, riots, and mayhem.

At the same time, they (and this is a very broad "they", perhaps overly broad) elect a president (Iran) that openly talks of the destruction of Israel and denies the Holocaust, elect a terrorist organization (Hamas) that has actually killed many, many people to run a government (Palestinian Authority), burn our flags in the street, chant "Death to America" (or whoever else they're pissed at) like it was as commonplace and inoffensive as "Let's Go Mets," and a myriad of other things infinitely more offensive to the West or Israel than anything they go bonkers about.

Yet we're supposed to let them be. In the meantime, they can pronounce death sentences and ransack places in response to a cartoon or a book. WTF? Its so one-sided its impossible to take seriously. The inability to see another's perspective is reminicent of childhood development, where a kid below a certain age just CAN'T look at things from another's point of view. And yet these are adults.

You want to be treated like adults? Like men? Like sovereign nation-states with legitimate grievances? Then stop acting like whatever you do is A-OK, while taking deadly offense to every little thing someone else does! No wonder nobody takes to you seriously (except as violent threat)! No wonder the world looks at you as unreasonable wackos.

End of rant.

Everyone Loves Tort Reform...

2007-06-07T20:23:00.001-04:00

Until the tort's on you! Illustrious (if evil) conservative jurist Judge Robert Bork just filed a $1 million (plus punitives) slip-and-fall lawsuit against the Yale Club in NYC for a fall he took while he was there to give a speech.

His injuries appear to be a really bad bruise, although I defer to any medical personnel who could correct me on this. He has hired one of the most respected (and expensive) firms in the country to pursue this case. I guess now that Johnny Cochran's passed away...

This is why...

2007-05-29T15:25:00.001-04:00

the rest of America does not take the Religious Right seriously on any day other than Election Day (where they can muck things up through their sheer numbers). I mean, come on!