Why we shouldn't have nuclear power plants and other queries
What is a weekend without blogging like? Well, lemme tell ya. First, your hits drop because you don't update the thing and people see the same thing from Friday on Saturday and don't bother to visit on Sunday. Although, that theory could be busted because it seems like folks visit the sites on weekdays more than weekends. Anyway, not posting allows for time to actually get some life things done. I was able to do some cleaning at the house and even got in a beach day with the family. So, balance it out ... hours in front of a computer or hours roasting in the sun at the beach .... computer, beach ... computer, beach ... Well, you know which one I was enjoying.
And how about those thunder boomers on Sunday. Zowie, for sure. I would swear that some of them were really, really close, like down the street or around the corner. At least three or four of them had that firecracking sound that you hear when you're burning dry wood ... cackle, cackle ... and then, BOOM! That means they are very, very close.
And then, downpours of rain, like you are in the jungle ... or South Miami, where right around 5 p.m. every night, it pours buckets on your head for about 10 minutes and then, the storm moves on. Tropical, for sure. But, you know, the flip side is that everything is green and clean this morning.

But how about waking up to this out your window this morning: ["Strong Quake Rocks Japan, Nuclear Plant"]. Again, like I said in the previous climate change post, nuclear power plants are not the answer to global warming despite all the "concerned scientists" who are pimping them, while at the same time, complaining that people who challenge global warming are whores for Exxon. Nuclear just isn't the answer. So, let's scrap that one and find something else. Not unlike the desalination plant idea, I don't understand why someone hasn't started building thousands of solar panels across the entire Mojave Desert. That power could easily be piped around the region. That would surely reduce some of the emissions with little harm or danger to the environment, especially when compared to nuclear.

Is the Daily Kos founder a plant for the CIA? This guy claims that and more: ["The Truth About Kos"]. This looks like "crazy" Lyndon LaRouche-speak stuff but who knows these days. I mean, the site came out of nowhere and is now one of the biggest Web sites in the world. And what about banning people for questioning 9-11? I mean, come on. There are slews of legit people questioning the official story but not on DailyKos. I must admit how hilarious it would be to see this guy and Kos on a panel, broadcast on C-SPAN, debating whether Kos is a plant or not.

Speaking of DailyKos, I missed this one: ["My Initial Response to Being Banned by Markos Moulitas from Daily Kos"]. As I've said in previous posts, I really like MaryScott. And, actually, she is one of the reasons I was banned back in 2004 from the site. I was critical of John Kerry and I challenged one of her diaries. In it, she talked about all the great things we could expect from a John Kerry administration and how hopeful she was. I countered that with a stinging rebuke and got pummeled for it. Actually, I was a bit rude in my post and MaryScott and others uprated my post so it wouldn't be lost, just to show everyone how cruel I was. But, I stood [and stand] by my points. Kerry wouldn't have done jack for us regular folks and she was naive to think he would have. She clearly has come around to my way of thinking and, despite her popularity, was banished from the site. Thankfully, she had already created her cool counter site, My Left Wing, where people aren't banned from publishing whatever they feel like. Which, is kinda what the entire point of political discourse is, anyway, right?

Political short cuts
The 2008 campaign claims another victim: ["Gilmore pulls out of presidential race"]. I actually met Gilmore earlier this year and while he seemed like a smart guy, he didn't seem to have the fire in the belly for a national campaign. As well, his debate performance, if you will, didn't stand out enough to get into the middle tier of candidates running. Here is an editorial from one of his local newspapers, giving us a bit more to think about: ["Gilmore bid ends aptly"]. I like this line:

In his home state, he was never a favorite son as much as a retired uncle whose half-fulfilled “No Car Tax” campaign promise had left mixed political results and a party that has not fully recovered from its resulting fiscal fallout and infighting. As governor, his inability to get along with many in his own party, not to mention Democrats, left a legacy of a fighter but not necessarily of a winner.

Some speculate he may wait out his time and run for Senate next year in Virginia.

While some think John McCain may be the next one to go, think again. Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has drawn a line in the sand for his exploratory campaign for August: ["Huckabee Says a Strong Iowa Straw Poll Showing A Must"]. I can't imagine, finally getting the guts up enough to run for the highest office in the land, putting yourself out there, and then deciding that some lame poll of activists - which is totally rigged for Mitt Romney at this point - is the determining factor of a candidate continuing his race. What does that say about our political process? Huckabee would be smart to go back into the New Testament and get some inspiration about how this world is really supposed to be. He might have a revelation, if you will.

I'm not going to pile onto McCain because, ya know, why kick a man when he is so far down at this point? It's so sad. I know what I would do to kick-start his campaign but, let him figure it out.
I never bought into the McCain thing in the first place although I know many who did. I thought the StraightTalkExpress of 1999 and 2000 was refreshing. My brother-in-law worked on his campaign and although Howard Dean gets all the credit for using the Internet as a campaign tool, it was actually McCain's campaign which used the Internet first [In 1997, a Boston Globe reporter credited me for being the first and then only Boston City Council candidate to use email to communicate or have a Web site]. His work on McCain-Feingold was commendable and might make up a bit for his role in the Keating 5 scandal. Despite what conservatives say, Money is not Speech. The bill wasn't perfect but it was better than nothing.
But for all the straight talk, McCain didn't change much on the issues. He has always been too conservative for much of the country. And some who know him and have worked with him in Washington, think he is completely bats.

More fallout from the GOP debate

Exclusively, the Rep. Ron Paul edition. Check out some of these links:
["Watch the Do-nut, not the hole"]
["Paul victor-apparent of second straight GOP debate ..."]
["Thoughts on tonights Foxnews debate"] [sic]
["Who Won the GOP Debate?"]
Over at Daily Kos, they offered another post-debate poll: "Who did the best job of winning Republican primary votes (remembering that you, in all probability, do not think like a Republican primary voter)." Sure, it's a trick question.
Here are the results, with 4,260 voting: Paul, listed twice, 35 combined percent, Rudy 14, "Newt, Thompson (Fred div.), misc." 11, Mitt 11, Huckabee 7, Gilmore "(the Girl who didn't make the series finale tonight)" 6, McCain 5, Tancredo 3, Hunter 1, Thompson "Tommy division" 1.

First debate will be here
Well, unless something changes in the next few weeks, the first presidential debates of the 2008 cycle will be held in New Hampshire after all: ["President hopefuls to debate in NH 1st"]. I wonder if that headline should have been "Presidential hopefuls ..." not President. It sounds odd to me. Another strange headline in the UL this morning is this one: "NH Guardsmen on duty along U.S.-Mexican border to curtain illegal crossings" ... I wonder if that should have been "curtail" or "contain." I've never heard anyone call it "curtain illegal crossings" before.

There are a couple of folks on the Web who are keeping track of those people who've been banned from the Daily Kos. The latest is Alan Smithee here: ["Blogroll of the Banned"]. I find it strange that there is this whole anti-Kos cult building on the Web. At least once a day, someone visits Politizine after Googling "Banned from Daily Kos ..."

Bisson Barcelona, a Seacoast PR firm, is holding a monthly author seminar series for those people interested in writing books or getting past the stage of thinking about writing books. The details are here: ["Author Seminar Series"]. The BB folks are good people, as the saying goes. This program should be an exciting one for all involved.

2008 quickies
John Edwards will be in Harlem today to celebrate MLK Day early: ["The Riverside Church"]. There is supposed to be a Webcast from the church too. Yet in this very early poll, 61 percent of his home state voters would pick another Democratic candidate: ["N.C. Dems prefer Edwards to Clinton, Obama"]. Did you catch that spin? The headline reads that Edwards beats Clinton and Obama. But add the numbers the opposite way: 40 percent would pick another Dem other than those three. Edwards only gets 29 points which means that 61 would go another way. The glass is half full OR half empty.

Rep. Tom Tancredo is still looking at running in 2008: ["Tancredo for President?"]. When I interviewed him in 2005, he stated that if no one would pick up the border security issue and run with it, he would jump in. I countered with, 'Sen. Hillary Clinton is raising the issue. Would you support her if a wall along the border was a major plank of her candidacy?' Not surprisingly, he said No. Frankly, politics needs to stay interesting and relevant and not wussy and wimpy. So the more firebrands the better.

Obama is reportedly lining up support: ["Obama, Running"]. Since this is 'just a blog entry,' it probably shouldn't be taken that seriously. However, Novak also has it: ["EXPLORER OBAMA"]. Since Novak is just a blogger with more cred because he was a columnist before becoming a blogger and columnists are essentially glorified bloggers anyway, it is probably a legit post.

Speaking of firebrands, here is one to keep a watchful eye on, no pun intended: ["TX 14: The First Open '08 House Seat?"]. On issues of liberty and freedom, Rep. Ron Paul is one of the strongest protectors of the Constitution. I don't agree with everything, but given the choice between him and some of the other Republicans, I would take him in a heartbeat. He knows in his core what freedom means.

Sen. Dodd stumps in Iowa, dismissing the 'long-shot' factor: ["Dodd Presses Presidential Bid in Iowa"] while Giuliani goes to Delaware: ["Giuliani test Del. primary waters"].

Lastly, here is an overview from a Michigan business paper about Right-to-Work laws: ["Presidential candidates and right-to-work laws"].

Off the subject of presidential politics for a moment, here in New Hampshire, Sen. John Sununu gets his first challenger: ["Marchand says he'll run for Senate"]. While it is early, there is nothing in the article which talks about why Marchand is running or what he plans on elevating for issues in a race against Sununu.

Update: The Monitor's Capital Beat column has more on other candidates potentially facing off against Sununu: ["Race to take on Sununu getting off to a fast start"].

Sunday night thoughts
Alright, I'm done working for the night and I figured I would put together a post. Thanks to all the new people who have been visiting the site lately. Here are some of the things I've been thinking about lately, in no particular order.

Good band names
I mentioned recently that I thought Tina Fey's Scar would be a cool band name. Well, I found another one from this band who is on Fenway Recordings: Cold War Kids. That kinda tells you what the band is thinking about when they came up with the name. Another one? Bullet For My Valentine. I think they are a metal band. Don't know a thing about 'em but you can see something dark and violent in that name. There are others, I'm sure, but those are just a couple I've seen recently.

Gloating Dems
The Mark Foley scandal has unleashed a bit of over-confidence over at DailyKos, IMHO. The Dems are just giddy about their prospects in the mid-terms and that almost always leads to disaster. The Kool-Aid drinking crowd are so obsessed on their computers, they could miss the big one again. Can anyone say President Howard Dean?
But why shouldn't they gloat a little? It's been a rough couple of years. And maybe it is time for a major shift after watching what the Republican-led Congress has done to the nation. But, as Jesse Jackson once said, "Now is not the time to gloat!"
The biggest fear I have from watching all these folks is that they are so caught up in polls and noodling on their computers that they are probably aren't investing the time they need to in the field organizations of their candidates. It is the lifeblood of politics - not blogs, not ads, not goofing around in chat rooms - but ground assault field organizations.

Speaking of Dean
If the Dems take back the House, it won't be because of Rep. Nancy Pelosi and it won't be because of Rep. John Murtha and it won't be because of Bob Woodward's book or the admissions in it and it won't be because of the GOP stumbling all over the place. It will be, however, because of DNC Chairman Howard Dean's insistence that the Dems run a 50-state strategy. This strategy laid the groundwork for people to have at least a second choice in most Congressional districts [they should have four or five choices but that's a discussion for another time ... or probably another decade at the rate we are going]. It effectively put the Dems in play in many places which they would have normally not run a candidate. As part of the 50-state strategy, Dean also put all available monies into hiring campaign staff in red states to build field organizations in places where Dems haven't been competitive. If the House shifts to the Dems, and they only need 15 seats, Dean will be the one that Democrats can thank for thinking ahead and planning the assault.

'Beam me up, Scotty!'
I don't know if anyone else saw this but it is pretty cool: ["Scientists teleport two different objects"]. Science is so cool.

FCC Roundtables
One of the things which was brought up at the NAB Radio Show by the two FCC members in attendance was the fact that they were going to be meeting with a number of people around the country who are concerned about media consolidation. It seems as though the first one of these meetings has happened: ["Consolidation in Media Is Called Stifling"]. And this one, on becoming the media: ["Pirate radio challenges U.S. officials as it proliferates"].

Frist: Give it back to the Taliban
Just in case you were wondering what we were fighting for in Afghanistan, Majority Leader Sen. Bill Frist believes we should let the Taliban have a role in the Afghani government: ["U.S. Senate majority leader calls for efforts to bring Taliban into Afghan government"]. Of course, this is the same Taliban who gave comfort to Usama bin Ladin and the same people who are killing our troops as we try to stabilize their government and economy ... and get the UNOCAL pipeline built. Unbelievable ... but actually not that unbelievable if you really think about it.

Is all lost?
Interesting headline yesterday morning: ["Field commanders tell Pentagon Iraq war 'is lost'"].

An apology: I also forgot to post this a couple of weeks ago: ["AN APOLOGY FROM A BUSH VOTER"]. I especially like this quote:

"With a belated tip of the cap to Ralph Nader, the system is broken, so broken, it’s almost inevitable it pukes up the Al Gores and George W. Bushes. Where are the Trumans and the Eisenhowers? Where are the men and women of vision and accomplishment? Why do we have to settle for recycled hacks and malleable ciphers? Greatness is always rare, but is basic competence and simple honesty too much to ask?"

The perfect Father's Day gift: ["Special forces to use strap-on 'Batwings'"]. Well, so long as you actually aren't in battle with those wings on getting shot at!

Political roundup: GOP straw polls are yielding some unusual results: ["Tancredo wins straw poll in Michigan"] and ["Gingrich is delegates favorite of 2008 presidential race"]. Thinking about Tancredo, this might be something to ponder: ["Fake ID Sellers Dismiss Tamperproof Push"]. I can't believe reporters are floating this one: ["OBAMA IN '08?"]. The guy has barely been a senator. Please. But do check out this interview with former Sen. Mike Gravel: ["Long-form interview with Sen. Mike Gravel"]. And leave Al Gore alone already!: ["Lights, Camera, Al Gore!"]. And the over-rated "netroots" which can't take the place of a good field organization in any election: ["A New Open-Source Politics"].
Speaking of the "netroots," here is a lot of croaking about some of the recent primaries, including the Bilbray-Busby CA-50 race which was held last night. Kos, the most popular mouth piece of this "movement," and his buddy Matt Stoller, go off on it here: ["CA-50: Post-mortem"] and here: ["Progressive Messaging Wins: Tester, Angelides, Winograd, and Bilbray? "].
They are dead-on correct about how a pol crafts a message, what the person stands for, and the insidious beltway mentality [they are a little late to this boat. Some of us have been talking about this for years and years and years ...].
But the problem with much of these post-mortem comments is that these are the same people who were this woman's cheerleaders for months and months and months - writing pieces on her, begging people to give money and lend time to the effort, etc. Kos had her up on his "Netroots Endorsed" list [like somehow he and his fans can stake claim to the name Netroots or something, or can be the only ones who can endorse someone from the netroots ... Ugh, another insiders club?]. And every time Kos talked about the race, he put up a beg link to Busby.
In other words, even though the consultants were blowing through millions and possibly weren't advising this woman properly, they didn't say jack. They kept cheerleading and now they are kicking the woman while she is down and out. It is pretty pathetic if you think about it and goes to the heart of why we should wonder about these folks just a bit before you buy the book or fall into lockstep with them.
Of course, the woman had problems - like this, right before Election Day, blasted all over the Drudge Report - where she is telling illegal aliens that they didn't need papers to vote: ["Busby on defense, says she misspoke"]. But still, there is no reason to be kicking this woman around so much even though she lost in a Republican district by a sliver.
Is the Netroots a "movement"? I don't know. Are a bunch of people in front of their computers anything more than a bunch of people in front of their computers? People in front of computers can write interesting things, create campaigns, talk about strategy, but they won't - and can't - replace a field organization or a real campaign and I don't really think they are a movement per se.

RFK going off on election results: ["Was the 2004 Election Stolen?"]. Call me stupid but I just don't believe the election was "stolen." Were there things done which shouldn't have been done? Absolutely. You can chalk it up to a whole lotta other folks - including Democrats - who have "stolen" elections over the years.

One of my favorite new bands: [The Glass Set]. I love this new band fronted by bandaphrenic Leah Callahan and a former bandmate of mine, Allen Esser, a great drummer. I've been listening to their demo for weeks now. It is pretty good - with strong songs, decent vocals, nice guitar work, and a new band feel not like a lot out there right now. Although, I think the production leaves a tad to be desired. It sounds too much like spackle on the wall - like the band put each piece of the music together track by track. I wonder what they would sound like live - or what they would sound like if they recorded sections of each track live.

Banned from Kos ... again!
On Tuesday, Jan. 31, I was troll-rated into oblivion at the Daily Kos political chat site and lost access to participating at the site.
This has occurred twice before: Once during the famous primary wars of 2003, for defending Ralph Nader repeatedly and criticizing Gen. Wesley Clark and former Gov. Howard Dean, who I ended up voting for; and then again, in late 2004, when I stated early one Sunday morning that an "SNL" skit showing John Kerry to be a flip-flopper was funny and factual correct.
After the second banning, I took a break from the site for almost a year, although I did continue to glance at it now and again for news stories and other political nuggets.
But after talking to some folks via email who had participated in the site and missed some of my interaction, I decided to participate again. I also made it a personal policy that I wouldn't get into too much controversy, as to not anger those true believers which would get me troll-rated again into oblivion and start the whole process over again.
Well, I failed.
For the most part, it was a safe strategy and it seemed to work. My contributions were part of what I thought was a healthy discussion about politics in general, strategy, and other things that would empower people to be more involved in the process. The thought was that if you can get people to shut off their computers and learn how to run field campaigns, for example, they would be able to create more change than bitching at a blog site. Bitching on a blog site doesn't create change; it is just bitching.
Of course, anyone involved in campaigns in the past knows this to be true; field is everything. Information is everything. But anyone involved in campaigns in the past also knows that progressives and liberals, generalizing, have an adversarial relationship with the hard work that goes into producing winning electoral campaigns. They do a lot of pontificating about "movement building," but they rarely follow through with the work that needs to get accomplished.
It was hilarious when I was involved in the early days of the Massachusetts Green Party - after volunteering for Ralph Nader's presidential campaign in 1996 - and would talk about purging voter's lists to find the good voting residents. "Activists" would look at me and say, "What's a voter's list?" They were too busy Marching for Mumia to realize that the only way to influence voters was to actually find out who they were and talk to them. It was only until activist Iowa Karen Kubby put the process into a cartoon format and passed it around on the Web that folks inside the MGP and other places took the process of purging seriously. Later, in some of the smaller campaigns, Greens were able to take this process onto near wins - like Jesse Perrier's Selectman's campaign in Winthrop, Mass., in which he got 40-plus percent of the vote. Another candidate, Paul Lachelier, challenged long-time state Rep. Tim Toomey, a double-dipping Democrat layabout, and received 37 percent of the vote, in Cambridge and Somerville. Other Greens in super liberal areas of Western Massachusetts were able to garner similar numbers by actually going out and talking to voters. Statewide candidates - not really using the purging process but still significant - were able to garner decent vote returns too. James O'Keefe, who ran for Treasurer in Massachusetts as a Green, won more than 9 percent of the vote in 2002 in a climate where the state Dems were pounding Green gubernatorial candidate, Dr. Jill Stein. President Bill Clinton even visited the state telling voters not to be "Nadered" by Stein who was clearly more qualified to be governor than Mitt Romney or Shannon O'Brien. O'Keefe managed to skirt most of the damage from Democrats which was squarely aimed at Stein. But he didn't get much help from the mainstream media. Despite having a Masters degree in Economics and a background in computer software engineering, they didn't feel he was qualified. The major daily newspapers ignored his campaign, with the Boston Globe even editing O'Keefe out of a three candidate picture. The picture had all three candidates extending their hands jointly together in a sports metaphor with the Globe editing O'Keefe completely out of the picture ... except, of course, his hands! Some television stations were kinder; allowing O'Keefe to participate in some of the debates, probably because the Republican Dan Grabauskus had no chance of beating eventual winner "Tim for Treasurer" Cahill.
My discussions on Kos weren't about anything more than empowering people and chatting up political gossip, something I don't do at work very much and prefer to do online, during downtime.
But then, the blogosphere started to really let loose after the Alito nomination follies. Some of the more popular posters on Daily Kos started to openly talk about rebellion within the Democrat Party and even leaving the party to punish Senators who were supporting Alito. They'd had enough, especially after some Senate Dems smartly abandoned John Kerry's seemingly clueless filibuster attempt against Alito. In fact, some of the more popular posters, like MaryScott O'Connor, a former actress in California who also runs the My Left Wing site, called for a re-registration to "Independent" in an effort to influence the party [O'Connor is a super liberal poster who I happen to respect because of her thoughtfulness and deep convictions even if I may disagree with her rage]. She was particularly infuriated by southern and western Dems ignoring the dangers Alito might bring to Roe v. Wade. Kos himself seemed to stay out of this fray and allowed people to argue back and forth about it, although he did sympathize with the rebellious poster's anger at the lack of action against Alito. Kos even went so far as to brag that the netroots were organized in this fight. He mightily roared that now, Senate Democrats would take them seriously, even if they had little to no effect on the process.
While Kos has openly stated that he has little tolerance for indie voters or indie liberal parties, he has openly called on his followers to target Sen. Joe Lieberman - advocating and encouraging anyone, independent or otherwise - to run against him! This, historically, as anyone involved in the party knows, is a no-no. You don't eat your own, no matter what.
But with Kos and his posters, there is a bit of hypocrisy on this. Lieberman is a Republican with a big-D label by his name, they say, so it is different than a guy like Nader trying to bring truth and honesty to the political arena. Kossacks correctly think the same of Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, labeling him: "Sen. Joe Biden, D-MBNA," after the big financial company from his state which he seems to serve so well - much to the detriment of credit card holders everywhere.
A lot of excuses were posted for this strange change in philosophy between no tolerance for indies and tolerance for them when they are against someone we dislike or someone who Kos targets. But, whatever.
Having worked in both Dem and indie arenas and have voted for Republicans against Democrat candidates I couldn't stand, I commended O'Connor and others, and encouraged them to think about the idea of abandoning the Dems. I didn't advocate for the idea; I just said folks should think about it. I shared some of my own experiences trying to reform the Democrat Party in the late 1980s when I was an active member of Ward Committee meetings in Boston, as well as my experiences with the Greens during the mid- to late-1990s. I stated that it was nearly impossible to reform the Dems and I did openly advocate not joining the Greens because of their unrealistic illusions and propensity to be totally disorganized [Sorry my Green buds still out there reading my stuff, this is the reality of the situation].

Sidebar: This dynamic of rebellion in the wake of the Alito nomination from within the ranks of this ragtag collection of people talking amongst themselves online has virtually received no attention from the press - despite the popular sentiment online. O'Connor did manage to get on John Gibson's Fox radio program after she posted a rant entitled "We are fucked." The audio is posted somewhere but I have yet to listen to it. There was little else in the way of press about this very interesting dynamic in the country right now. In fact, it is a testament to the lack of a political press interested in covering anything deeper within the party structures, something they always used to do in the 1960s and 1970s. Whole sections of books have been written about the intra-party struggles, like the move to diversify the Dems in the 1970s after U.S. Rep. Shirley Chisholm’s populist campaign for the presidency found itself completely shut out of the political process [Check out "Marathon: The pursuit of the Presidency, 1972-1976," by Jules Witcover, a fascinating read about this era of Democratic politics].

Unfortunately, during this very enlightening phrase of interaction at Daily Kos, I got into a side argument about Al Gore Sr., a southern Democrat who had a pretty bad civil rights record. Everyone knows this and it has been covered by editorialists from the left and right. Everyone knows that southern Democrats attempted to kill the Civil Rights Act and Gore Sr. was one of the leaders in that movement. Everyone knows that it wasn't until after years and years of fighting integrating that Gore Sr. finally came around, not unlike Alabama Gov. George Wallace and others later on. Everyone knows that when Vice President Al Gore in 2000 was talking about his father's legacy of civil rights advocacy that he was rewriting the history about his father [While the Bible does say, Respect thy mother and father, it doesn't say Fib about thy mother and father to rewrite history and cover your political ass]. Everyone knows that if it weren't for northeastern Republicans, blacks still wouldn't have civil rights today. All this information is in the Congressional Record. There are voting records and comments by other Democrats, like then-President Lyndon Johnson, who openly thanked Senate Republicans for their assistance in passing the Civil Rights Act. Going back a bit further, everyone knows that if it weren't for Republicans in the late 1800s, blacks would still be slaves today. It is fact. There is no argument about it ... unless you currently hate Republicans and are a part of the "liberal blogosphere" in 2006. You're drinking the Kool-Aid, like Jim Jones' followers did, as the saying goes. A cryptic metaphor but accurate nonetheless. The Dems can do no wrong, even after you are targeting Lieberman and others from your desktop.
Well, my comments didn't sit right with some folks and wham, troll-rated into oblivion again. This is what happens when you don't know your history - you are condemned to repeat it, as the saying goes. This is what happens when you hate so much that you can't look at the bright side of anything.
Personally, I'm not happy with the Republicans in Washington. I think the current bunch are corrupt as the day is long. They are a disgrace to their forefathers and Republicanism. It is nothing more than a political label now. But I'm not happy with the Democrats either. I see no difference in the hiding of Vice President Dick Cheney's energy plan and the crap that went on when Hilary Clinton - not an elected official, but the wife of the president - was meeting in secret to scheme up a supposed insurance policy for Americans. I won't even get into the alleged pharm market manipulation or other things from that era.
But this is what happens when you are so worried about political labels and less about political integrity that you are scarfing down that Kool-Aid. Any mindless following of political labels is a train ride to fascism and tyranny. Needless to say, I am going to probably give up on the educational dialogue of the blogosphere and will instead, spend time doing more fruitful endeavors. I will probably still cross-post at MyDD and have also been invited to cross-post at My Left Wing, despite my online debates with O'Connor, a class act in the blogosphere [She rages sometimes, it's OK though. She has come around].
But at some point, you have to give up and stop wasting your time trying to help people empower themselves. You can't make people see the truth. No matter how important speaking truth to power and "teaching" people the tools to change their lives, you can't force people to do it. You can't teach people common sense. It can be a lost cause.
I have always believed that lost causes are the only ones worth fighting for. But for now, more important writing deserves to be written.
I just thought my regular readers, many who were Kossacks and starting coming back to Politizine after I started posting again, should know why I'm no longer there.

'08 is lookin' like a lot of fun ...

While the date of the New Hampshire primary and what the DNC plans on doing with it is on every political junkie's mind up here, things seem to be heating up out in the blogosphere. The hilarious Molly Ivins posted this column earlier this week: ["Not. backing. Hillary."]:

"Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges."

Boy, doesn't that say it all? Over at DailyKos, this column was a hot topic, with a slew of posters agreeing with Ivins, a few stating that Ivins voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 so why should anyone listen to her, and a whole bunch more drinking the "I'll vote for any Democrat" Kool-Aid Jim Jones style. Oh, they'll never learn. While she isn't a very powerful pundit, her column is a good wake up call for the Dems. If the Republicans nominate a moderate in 2008 and the Dems some war-monger pain-in-the-ass like Hillary, it could be 2000 all over again.

Down in Massachusetts, there is a bit of trouble for Gov. Mitt "Guy Smiley" Romney ... he's losing his consultant: ["Romney political strategist quits"]. He's breaking ties with Mike Murphy - the star consultant for Sen. John McCain in 2000 and numerous other campaigns. Murphy claims he is going to stay neutral if both Romney and McCain are in the primary:

"The deal is there's no reelect committee to work for, and I've made it clear all along that if there is a presidential primary campaign Mitt Romney and (Senator) John McCain, I'd have to be neutral in it."

Eh, yeah, right. I'll believe that when I see it. It is difficult for these guys to stay out of the fray when they don't have to. He would just have to pick one or the other. Of course, this is assuming that McCain is running and there is no guarantee of that.
As an aside, Murphy will make an interesting chapter in a book I may eventually finish writing some day. I can talk about how he sneaked into the 2002 Democratic convention on a press pass and how I tipped off a press aide for a treasurer's candidate to his presence. He was quickly booted from the auditorium - but not before I got some good information from him. Sorry Mike. I can also talk about his role in getting Romney to run for governor in 2002 after Guy Smiley promised he wouldn't run for governor. And how the town of Belmont used public funds for a Welcome Home i.e. political, rally. Trust me, it will be worth the read when the book gets done. I'm also waiting on a guy I know to do a document dump on Romney. We'll see if he actually ever gets around to doing it.

Then, there is Al Gore, who has truly become his own man: ["'We the People' Must Save Our Constitution"].

"Don't misunderstand me: the threat of additional terror strikes is all too real and their concerted efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction does create a real imperative to exercise the powers of the Executive Branch with swiftness and agility. Moreover, there is in fact an inherent power that is conferred by the Constitution to the President to take unilateral action to protect the nation from a sudden and immediate threat, but it is simply not possible to precisely define in legalistic terms exactly when that power is appropriate and when it is not.
But the existence of that inherent power cannot be used to justify a gross and excessive power grab lasting for years that produces a serious imbalance in the relationship between the executive and the other two branches of government."

Americans who were polled after the speech believe Bush should be impeached: ["Americans Support Impeaching Bush for Wiretapping"]. The problem here is that this is the same Al Gore who was a member of the Clinton Adminstration during the passage of the domestic anti-terrorism bill, the precursor to the Patriot Act. This is the same Gore who stood by Bubba when he bombed the Sudan to get Monica and her stained dress off the front page of the papers. The same Gore who didn't speak up when Sandy Berger, Bill Cohen, and Madeline "Not So" Bright were advocating regime change in Iraq on a pathetic college tour where they were summarily blasted and booed by the crowd. Creek, creek, creek ... that was Gore. No outrage at that time - when he was the vice president and had the power to influence policy. Still, I'm intrigued by Gore and what his motives are beyond getting time on C-Span. Maybe he has changed.

Will there be a Nader "factor" in '08? Probably not. Nader was shellacked in 2004 for no other reason than existing. He is aging; half his face is paralyzed; he still owes money from the 2004 race. But Nader may have a last hurrah, especially if this film, "An Unreasonable Man," picks up steam: ["indieWIRE"] and ["Ralph Nader to Attend Sundance Film Festival"]:

"I was so sick of people (mostly whiny Democrats) yelling at me about Ralph without having all the information. When discussing him, I too was conflicted. But most of all I wanted to tell the story of Ralph Nader's entire life and career so at least when people judged him, they would understand more about this American icon."

It is a wonder what would have happened in 2004 had the Democrats spent the millions of dollars they spent keeping Nader off ballots on their own general election campaign. Sure, Kerry probably would have lost anyway because he was - and is - a soulless yuppie. But Kerry didn't lose by that much when you look at the numbers. Sure, he gained New Hampshire; but he lost Iowa and New Mexico, states Gore won. There was also [silly] speculation that Kerry might win Arizona, Nevada, Virginia, and West Virginia, states where he probably was never going to win. But what if Kerry had spent that last $15 million in his bank account in those states? What if the Democrats had spent the $6 million they spent keeping Nader off the ballot in Pennsylvania in neighboring Iowa?

In a sort of political related note, check out this car: ["A 330 mpg car for everyone"]. The only problem with this is that I doubt it will be safe enough to take on the highway. Can you imagine getting front-ended by a Mac truck in that thing? They'll be lucky to find anything left of you!

Happy New Year
Here's hoping you all have a very Happy New Year. It looks like 2006 is going to be a good one. There are a few things you may have missed of late.

Predictions: This link was posted on DailyKos earlier today: ["Informed Comment"]. If you think about the petroleum profits for a moment, that is quite a bit of money. Not only that, when you think about the $230 Billion spent on the Iraqi invasion, the nation could almost retrofit every building in the country to be more energy efficient with that money. There have also been some news stories floating around the foreign press that the United States is preparing to launch a military strike against Iran: ["US planning strike against Iran"]. Why, I ask, why?

Oddsmakers: What is it about oddsmakers. How do they figure things out? Is it just a hunch or do they have crystal balls? Trade Sport Traders has posted some of the odds for the Democratic nomination in 2008: ["2008DEM.NOM"]. Hillary Clinton is at 2.25 to 1 odds, the favorite. Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner is 4.9 to 1 odds, or a close second. It goes pretty long from there. Former VP Al Gore is getting 20.4 to 1 odds. John Edwards is getting 21.7 to 1 odds. My personal fave at this point, Sen. Russ Feingold, is getting 23.3 to 1 odds for the nomination, ahead of whole lotta other folks who should be getting better odds, like Sen. Evan Bayh and Gov. Bill Richardson.

Spying: I'm glad the whole spying story seems to have legs. It has been fascinating to watch. I guess President Bush and VP Cheney are lucky that the Congress is out of session or else there would be hearings pretty fast, don'tcha think? Even Republican Sen. Richard Lugar believes there should be hearings into what Bush authorized and why: ["Lugar Supports Investigation Of Bush's Spying Program"]. The ACLU is calling for hearings too: ["No President Is Above the Law "]. Then, there is this story about the military shutting down the blogs of troops overseas: ["U.S. military 'shuts down' soldiers' blogs"]. And, what are they fighting for again? How do cave-dwellers manage to get laptops and Internet service - in the middle of nowhere - to look at these blogs? That's ridiculous.

Long-awaited: Worcester's The Curtain Society finally has a new CD out: ["Society raises the curtains on the long-awaited album"]. It's only been like what, nine years or something? And you can't really count the "Volume Tone Tempo" EP. The four songs from that EP are included on "Every Corner of the Room." I ordered a copy of the CD so I'll let you know how it sounds. If it is as good as the EP, it should be a winner.

Monica: I was pretty surprised to see this column on CommonDreams.org forwarded from the National Catholic Reporter: ["Monica, We Need You Now"]. Another Web site, CommonTimes.org has some interesting links too, which are posted by readers. Here is a little story about their success: ["Bush Protest Poster Puts CommonTimes on the Internet Map"].

Celebrity worship: I'm beginning to wonder if maybe those people who allow the process of celebrity worship could be considered terrorists. If they lead to the destruction of the nation, wouldn't they be considered terrorists? I was flipping by one of the stations and saw Britney Spears and her husband on a beach, hanging out. All of a sudden, there was one cameraman, then another, then yet another. Before you knew it, there were 12 guys surrounding them with movie cameras and the couple decided to try and leave. But they couldn't - because they were surrounded by these people with cameras! If that wasn't terror, I don't know what is. And why is it this way? Maybe the lowest common denom: ["2005: Boob tube at its worst"].