Michelle Malkin shares a wonderful tale of self-reliance and growth in her Thanksgiving Blog Entry, and I would commend it to one and all as a tale of hope in adverse circumstances.
This has, in the GC Household, been a year of losses and growth, with much for which to be thankful.
A decades long pain in the neck is largely removed from my life, and that I had the courage to finally say "enough" and recognize that at some point, discovering that someone (regardless of their goodness or badness as persons) is bad *for me*, is something of a gift for which I am grateful though it is not a cost-free situation.
That two weeks after my fathers funeral in January I lost my job, and have been job-hunting since as I burn through my resources is more challenging to be thankful for, but on the flip side I was unhappy in that job and had I not been let go, would likely have stubbornly clung to an unhappy position rather than risk the job market. If naught else, being let go opens the door for me to find a happier place to labor in search of my daily dollar.
Further, I am thankful that the job situation (however dismaying I find it) left me available to serve as nurse and chauffeur after my mom's back surgery and her impending knee surgery.
That despite the turmoil, I have a roof over my head (and probably too much) food to keep me nourished is something for which I am thankful.
I am grateful for the opportunity to mentor a newcomer in the firearms activism community, and give back to that community some of the guidance that was graciously provided to me when I showed up as a cranky (Well, what do you expect, I'm a cynic!) over-energetic newbie out to solve the problem of anti-gun moonbats in fifteen minutes or less. Newbies to activism need that "sitting upon till they calm down", and I'm thankful for the opportunity to give back.
Much as I regret the necessity, I am thankful for the opportunity to participate in the process to stop or repeal the Nickels gun ban - both as a pro2A sort, and as a believer in "we elect mayors, not kings".
I am thankful for this forum that allows me to vent, perhaps hone my writing skills, and to occasionally exercise my muse.
I am thankful that thus far that Obama has only nominated one absolutely dreadful potential cabinet member, Attorney General Nominee Eric Holder, thus far. It could be far worse.
I am grateful for our troops abroad, and the difficult and dangerous work they do.
There is the much to be thankful for - may you have a wonderful Thanksgiving, and dine on turkey and stuffing with gravy to satiation.
On balance, there is much for which to be thankful ...
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Yes, those ARE our Marines...
FARAH PROVINCE, Afghanistan — In the city of Shewan, approximately 250 insurgents ambushed 30 Marines and paid a heavy price for it.
By way of Random Nuclear Strikes, by way of Ace, by way of Confederate Yankee, by way of the USMC.
The few, the proud, the...U.S. Marines...
By way of Random Nuclear Strikes, by way of Ace, by way of Confederate Yankee, by way of the USMC.
The few, the proud, the...U.S. Marines...
Gay Marriage
After a bit of nudging from LGBT friends, and some kind words from over at American Mercenary, I'll cave in and answer "Well, what do you think should be done?" regarding the same sex marriage debate rather than "How not to achieve it?"
To do the issue justice, over the centuries, marriage and marriage-like relationships have performed a veritable legal drag show, appearing in different and evolving guises over the years. We need only look at the anti-miscegenation laws (inter-racial marriage/relationships) passed and repealed in our own country, the rise and fall of Mormon polygamy (still a subject for occasional debate and police raids), arranged marriages (and the more familiar corollary in this country, the requirement of the brides fathers or eldest living male relatives consent) to realize that even this tiny subset of changes hints at the vaster changes in the institution in North America, Europe, and beyond.
Things have, for instance, changed since the days when excessive affection between spouses (in private, even) was considered poor form, and protestant preachers railed against affectionate "pet" names and familiarity between spouses, lest it undermine the husbands authority.
I will leave it for another time, but ample evidence exists that in at various times and places over history that, indeed, same sex marriage (or things so oddly similar as to beggar other explanation) has existed without the world ending, or societies dissolving in response.
That said, however, where do we go from here?
Ever hear of that old phrase, "Everything old is new again?"
I suggest that marriage as we know it today has three separate functional pieces or jobs -
1) A religious ceremony.
2) An established relationship structure with specific and broad rights and responsibilities and organized default entry and exit strategies.
3) A familial element, the notion of caring for minors (pre-existing or appearing on scene after the marriage commences) and in the longer term, the partners caring for each other in their old age and thus reducing the burden of the aging upon the taxpayer even as the aging partners independence and experience are preserved and enhanced (ideally).
Again, the wild-eyed libertarian that I am, I favor a minimum of state intrusion. If only for the sake of keeping the bloodshed from spontaneous techniques to a minimum, I favor at an absolute minimum some kind of "this is how you break up without emulating Henry VIII or variations thereupon" kind of mechanism - the whole "judge as mediator/arbitrator" thing has a whole bunch of good things going for it, not least among them the aforementioned faint vague hope of keeping the bloodshed to a minimum.
I favor the notion of divorcing the civil and societal elements (i.e., all the legal privileges, obligations, benefits, etc.) from the religious element. In other words, under this scheme any church (and no, you don't get to draw me into the red herring of defining who's a church and who isn't) can perform - or refuse to perform - any little old wedding ceremony between competent and consenting adults that thrills their little hearts...such ceremony will simply be wholly irrelevant (not unlike a funeral) to the legal system.
The flip side of this is that suddenly the *civil* variety of marriage is the only one recognized by the courts and is available to all competent and consenting adults outside of a reasonable degree of consanguinity and, perhaps, a pre-marital requirement of "full disclosure" of any pre-existing health conditions between the parties to the grand event.
Anyway, that approach probably makes far too much sense for it to ever to occur.
To do the issue justice, over the centuries, marriage and marriage-like relationships have performed a veritable legal drag show, appearing in different and evolving guises over the years. We need only look at the anti-miscegenation laws (inter-racial marriage/relationships) passed and repealed in our own country, the rise and fall of Mormon polygamy (still a subject for occasional debate and police raids), arranged marriages (and the more familiar corollary in this country, the requirement of the brides fathers or eldest living male relatives consent) to realize that even this tiny subset of changes hints at the vaster changes in the institution in North America, Europe, and beyond.
Things have, for instance, changed since the days when excessive affection between spouses (in private, even) was considered poor form, and protestant preachers railed against affectionate "pet" names and familiarity between spouses, lest it undermine the husbands authority.
I will leave it for another time, but ample evidence exists that in at various times and places over history that, indeed, same sex marriage (or things so oddly similar as to beggar other explanation) has existed without the world ending, or societies dissolving in response.
That said, however, where do we go from here?
Ever hear of that old phrase, "Everything old is new again?"
I suggest that marriage as we know it today has three separate functional pieces or jobs -
1) A religious ceremony.
2) An established relationship structure with specific and broad rights and responsibilities and organized default entry and exit strategies.
3) A familial element, the notion of caring for minors (pre-existing or appearing on scene after the marriage commences) and in the longer term, the partners caring for each other in their old age and thus reducing the burden of the aging upon the taxpayer even as the aging partners independence and experience are preserved and enhanced (ideally).
Again, the wild-eyed libertarian that I am, I favor a minimum of state intrusion. If only for the sake of keeping the bloodshed from spontaneous techniques to a minimum, I favor at an absolute minimum some kind of "this is how you break up without emulating Henry VIII or variations thereupon" kind of mechanism - the whole "judge as mediator/arbitrator" thing has a whole bunch of good things going for it, not least among them the aforementioned faint vague hope of keeping the bloodshed to a minimum.
I favor the notion of divorcing the civil and societal elements (i.e., all the legal privileges, obligations, benefits, etc.) from the religious element. In other words, under this scheme any church (and no, you don't get to draw me into the red herring of defining who's a church and who isn't) can perform - or refuse to perform - any little old wedding ceremony between competent and consenting adults that thrills their little hearts...such ceremony will simply be wholly irrelevant (not unlike a funeral) to the legal system.
The flip side of this is that suddenly the *civil* variety of marriage is the only one recognized by the courts and is available to all competent and consenting adults outside of a reasonable degree of consanguinity and, perhaps, a pre-marital requirement of "full disclosure" of any pre-existing health conditions between the parties to the grand event.
Anyway, that approach probably makes far too much sense for it to ever to occur.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Courtesy of the CCRCKBA
The folks at CCRKBA say it better than I can, however, to sum up, our the Seattle Mayor has gone astray - planning to ban guns by fiat and executive tantrum, rather than following a legislative process - claiming that despite a state preemption law, that by ruling that any person carrying (lawful or otherwise, CPL or no) is inherently trespassing and subject to ejection or arrest. State Attorney General Rob McKenna disagrees, formally. The below is from the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms...read it, write, call, fax - and if you're able, show up to testify.
___________________________________________________
SEATTLE MAYOR SAYS HE WILL BAN GUNS YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS NEEDED
Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels has launched an attack on law-abiding gun owners who either live in the city, or visit there, by forging ahead with a plan to ban all firearms, including those legally carried by law-abiding citizens. He is doing this in defiance of an opinion from Attorney General Rob McKenna that such a ban would be illegal under Washington State’s model preemption statute.
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms encourages Washington State residents, and citizens from across the country who regularly visit Seattle, to submit comments to the city via its website:
www.seattle.gov/firearmsrule
On December 15, 2008, a public hearing will be held in the Bertha Knight Landes room at Seattle City Hall, 600 Fourth Avenue, with sign-in beginning at 5:30 p.m.
Mayor Nickels’ proposed plan would impair the rights of citizens to bear arms, as affirmed by Article 1, Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution. He would prevent citizens licensed to carry firearms in public places from exercising that right on city-owned property, including city parks and the Seattle Center.
Citizens may also e-mail Mayor Nickels directly: seattle.gov/mayor/citizen_response.htm
You may also call the Mayor's office: (206) 684-4000.
___________________________________________________
SEATTLE MAYOR SAYS HE WILL BAN GUNS YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS NEEDED
Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels has launched an attack on law-abiding gun owners who either live in the city, or visit there, by forging ahead with a plan to ban all firearms, including those legally carried by law-abiding citizens. He is doing this in defiance of an opinion from Attorney General Rob McKenna that such a ban would be illegal under Washington State’s model preemption statute.
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms encourages Washington State residents, and citizens from across the country who regularly visit Seattle, to submit comments to the city via its website:
www.seattle.gov/firearmsrule
On December 15, 2008, a public hearing will be held in the Bertha Knight Landes room at Seattle City Hall, 600 Fourth Avenue, with sign-in beginning at 5:30 p.m.
Mayor Nickels’ proposed plan would impair the rights of citizens to bear arms, as affirmed by Article 1, Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution. He would prevent citizens licensed to carry firearms in public places from exercising that right on city-owned property, including city parks and the Seattle Center.
Citizens may also e-mail Mayor Nickels directly: seattle.gov/mayor/citizen_response.htm
You may also call the Mayor's office: (206) 684-4000.
Friday, November 21, 2008
The Ad CBS thinks you're too dumb to see
A group, Americans for Job Security, decided to create a video ad bashing the Democrats for their support of a bill that would deprive workers of a secret ballot in elections that decide whether or not a given group of workers wants a given union to represent them.
The secret ballot issue rotates around the ease with which voter intimidation can be accomplished - if the ballot is open for all to review "who voted for what" it is both dreadfully easy to meet out punishment upon those who oppose union representation - but also to point out well in advance that such punishment will be doled out.
A secret ballot tends to make that process of intimidation and punishment much more challenging for the naughty.
But back to that advertisement. CBS wouldn't air it (the other MSM networks did not seem to have a problem) because the advertisement showed unvoiced video of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi...because they were afraid it would "confuse" viewers...
View below, and decide if you're too ditzy to comprehend what's going on...
The secret ballot issue rotates around the ease with which voter intimidation can be accomplished - if the ballot is open for all to review "who voted for what" it is both dreadfully easy to meet out punishment upon those who oppose union representation - but also to point out well in advance that such punishment will be doled out.
A secret ballot tends to make that process of intimidation and punishment much more challenging for the naughty.
But back to that advertisement. CBS wouldn't air it (the other MSM networks did not seem to have a problem) because the advertisement showed unvoiced video of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi...because they were afraid it would "confuse" viewers...
View below, and decide if you're too ditzy to comprehend what's going on...
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Prop 8
I've held off commenting mainly because I've been busy with other adventures, but as it seems to this wild-eyed libertarian....
The various folks who contributed to Prop 8 had every right to do so, and to participate in the political process. I may disagree with them, some of them I may specifically dislike, but that really doesn't have anything to do with their rights.
Similarly, the various folks who donated to the No On 8 campaign had every right to donate to the campaign *they* believed in.
HOWEVER, just because an election is over, doesn't mean there is some divine commandment to "shut up now and take your medicine". Neither is there such a commandment along the lines of "those who donated to victorious campaigns against you and yours are immune from law-abiding acts of retribution". Finally, there seems to be a distinct lack of divine instructions about "thou shalt not go to court over initatives victorious at the polls that thou findeth obnoxious".
So, guess what? For good or ill, LGBT folks and their friends have *every right* to take to the streets, wave signs, engage in creative protest and litigation, and refuse to hire or do business with those they perceive as having done us serious harm.
Just as would the "Pro-8" forces would have every right to do so should a constitutional amendment be passed to deny them the right to marry and to invalidate their existing marriages.
The *most compelling* argument I've heard against massive LGBT protests, blacklists, and boycotts is not "the voters have spoken, shut up". It is "backlash sucks, lets fight this in a year or two, we have Conneticut after all, let's not piss off the fence-sitters and those who barring our pissing them off, just don't give a damn about LGBT folks one way or another." And that argument I don't find especially compelling.
What I would suggest, however, is that there is a *line* in protesting that the wise activist DOES NOT CROSS. It's pretty basic, really - the swiftest way for any activist group or individual to completely undermine their own cause is to injure folks (or scare the crap out of them with envelopes of white powder, in this day and age...) or damage property (arson is tacky, don't ya know).
There are exceptions, including ones where armed insurrection is wholly justified. But they are, thankfully, damned rare and almost always involve someone on the other side getting somebody in our community dead or injured. Most other things can be fixed with time and litigation.
That still leaves an AWFUL lot of room to express dismay with vast and mighty creativity...without setting ourselves up to face former allies and potential allies turned at best substantially less friendly towards us.
In short, even without Gay Marriage (a laudable goal I believe we'll see in the next few years), when we look at the 50's, the 70's, or even the 90's - we've really got a pretty good thing going as a community, and while progress is desireable and good - so is not screwing up the relatively decent situation we've got.
That's my take...
The various folks who contributed to Prop 8 had every right to do so, and to participate in the political process. I may disagree with them, some of them I may specifically dislike, but that really doesn't have anything to do with their rights.
Similarly, the various folks who donated to the No On 8 campaign had every right to donate to the campaign *they* believed in.
HOWEVER, just because an election is over, doesn't mean there is some divine commandment to "shut up now and take your medicine". Neither is there such a commandment along the lines of "those who donated to victorious campaigns against you and yours are immune from law-abiding acts of retribution". Finally, there seems to be a distinct lack of divine instructions about "thou shalt not go to court over initatives victorious at the polls that thou findeth obnoxious".
So, guess what? For good or ill, LGBT folks and their friends have *every right* to take to the streets, wave signs, engage in creative protest and litigation, and refuse to hire or do business with those they perceive as having done us serious harm.
Just as would the "Pro-8" forces would have every right to do so should a constitutional amendment be passed to deny them the right to marry and to invalidate their existing marriages.
The *most compelling* argument I've heard against massive LGBT protests, blacklists, and boycotts is not "the voters have spoken, shut up". It is "backlash sucks, lets fight this in a year or two, we have Conneticut after all, let's not piss off the fence-sitters and those who barring our pissing them off, just don't give a damn about LGBT folks one way or another." And that argument I don't find especially compelling.
What I would suggest, however, is that there is a *line* in protesting that the wise activist DOES NOT CROSS. It's pretty basic, really - the swiftest way for any activist group or individual to completely undermine their own cause is to injure folks (or scare the crap out of them with envelopes of white powder, in this day and age...) or damage property (arson is tacky, don't ya know).
There are exceptions, including ones where armed insurrection is wholly justified. But they are, thankfully, damned rare and almost always involve someone on the other side getting somebody in our community dead or injured. Most other things can be fixed with time and litigation.
That still leaves an AWFUL lot of room to express dismay with vast and mighty creativity...without setting ourselves up to face former allies and potential allies turned at best substantially less friendly towards us.
In short, even without Gay Marriage (a laudable goal I believe we'll see in the next few years), when we look at the 50's, the 70's, or even the 90's - we've really got a pretty good thing going as a community, and while progress is desireable and good - so is not screwing up the relatively decent situation we've got.
That's my take...
Sunday, November 16, 2008
All-nighter
Church down south I useta do the newsletter for called me Thursday, offered me a couple of hundred dollars to knock it out again - seems the volunteers had flaked, vanished, or stormed off in a huff (I'm not sure which) and they were 2 weeks behind pushing out the Nov-Dec edition.
Yeargh. Just finished pulling an all-nighter, and got the email this morning that they would be sending a whole bunch of photo's north via e-mail ...to arrive this afternoon or evening. Suspect I'll have to chat with them when I'm a tad more rational about "reasonable expectations" and "how much you get for a couple of hundred dollars."
Note: If you don't want a pissy layout guy, don't surprise him with the need to generate articles from whole cloth or do a whole bunch of last minute photo work (photo's, especially ones that require extensive photo-shopping to be presentable, are very labor intensive). Grrr.
If you want a rush job WITH a lot of photo's...have them READY.
1) 150dpi+, 300dpi photo resolution is better for any kind of print edition you're not cooking out on a bottom end inkjet (the second most expensive way per page).
2) If you know how, have the photo or graphics in .tiff format. Yes it's big...but it's SOOOO much more flexible.
3) Go ahead and if you know how, convert your color palette on all graphic and photo images to CMYK, not RGB. CMYK makes print shops happy. RGB makes them REALLY cranky.
Yeargh. Just finished pulling an all-nighter, and got the email this morning that they would be sending a whole bunch of photo's north via e-mail ...to arrive this afternoon or evening. Suspect I'll have to chat with them when I'm a tad more rational about "reasonable expectations" and "how much you get for a couple of hundred dollars."
Note: If you don't want a pissy layout guy, don't surprise him with the need to generate articles from whole cloth or do a whole bunch of last minute photo work (photo's, especially ones that require extensive photo-shopping to be presentable, are very labor intensive). Grrr.
If you want a rush job WITH a lot of photo's...have them READY.
1) 150dpi+, 300dpi photo resolution is better for any kind of print edition you're not cooking out on a bottom end inkjet (the second most expensive way per page).
2) If you know how, have the photo or graphics in .tiff format. Yes it's big...but it's SOOOO much more flexible.
3) Go ahead and if you know how, convert your color palette on all graphic and photo images to CMYK, not RGB. CMYK makes print shops happy. RGB makes them REALLY cranky.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Hrmm...If I were President Bush
"Democrats prepare to move forward with investigations of the Bush administration... Developing..." Drudge Report 18:49 11/12/08
I think, just about now, if I were Bush....I'd be gathering a list of everyone that the Democrats might conceivably be thinking of investigating (and a few they weren't), then issue each of them general pardons for charged and uncharged past mis-steps...and at the same time issue identical pardons to Bill and Hillary Clinton, and to the DNC (as per the suggestion of a fellow blogger), promptly resign, and let Dick Cheney pardon *ME*.
And in giving the announcement speach, I'd open with "In the fine tradition of Bill Clinton, and what I fully expect to be the vastly expanded upon tradition of Barack Obama..."
Followed shortly by running like hell for Texas...
I think, just about now, if I were Bush....I'd be gathering a list of everyone that the Democrats might conceivably be thinking of investigating (and a few they weren't), then issue each of them general pardons for charged and uncharged past mis-steps...and at the same time issue identical pardons to Bill and Hillary Clinton, and to the DNC (as per the suggestion of a fellow blogger), promptly resign, and let Dick Cheney pardon *ME*.
And in giving the announcement speach, I'd open with "In the fine tradition of Bill Clinton, and what I fully expect to be the vastly expanded upon tradition of Barack Obama..."
Followed shortly by running like hell for Texas...
Where do we go from here, a beginning
Fred Thompson would make a great GOP chair, and would ensure that Sarah Palin remains free for other little tasks. Thompson is an amazing speaker, an experienced politico, and might just be able to administer the assorted crotch-kickings necessary to keep the GOP from melting down or spinning off into centrifugally driven high velocity fragments - with either option guaranteeing a second four years to Obama.
The GOP has three major problems (aside from George Bush) that alienate critical voter demographics.
The Theocratic Right scares the bejabbers out of the average voter, and with their social-interventionist want list (Anti-abortion, Anti-gay, maximized suffering, and Christian Nationalism) will continue to scare the bejabbers out of that average moderate or libertarian voter that, while increasingly common, simply wants to be let alone to seek perdition in his or her own way with a minimum of taxes. The GOP needs those voters to survive as a viable party.
Simply coming off as an especially scary "because God(dess) told me so" variant on control freak isn't exactly going to win friends and deliver votes amongst the crowd the GOP has lost.
Demonizing and baiting the gay community must end, as it serves only as red meat to the Theocratic right while alienating younger and more centrist voters in spades.
Abortion, as a matter of law, is similarly a long lost battle (if ever it was worth winning) - like many other issues, abortion seems to be a morally challenging decision best decided between the patient, their medical advisor, and such divine influence as they acknowledge and accept for themselves - and, with a few small exceptions, all parties are ill-served by all but the most minimal government intervention in the operation and maintenance of individuals own bodies.
Modern medicine offers many miracles, not least among them amazingly improved survival rates from once-dire situations. However, the greatest fear of many is to be rescued from one medical adventure or another to live a long, miserable, pain-filled, semi-vegetative existence wired to so much life support gear that death's precious escape is denied well beyond the time when it is but a simple mercy.
The blind opposition of the Theocratic Right to DNR orders, let alone Death with Dignity options for the terminally ill, not surprisingly is less than enchanting to anyone who has ever accompanied a loved one on that long miserable medically-lengthened journey towards that final goal, and terrifying to those old or infirm enough to have realized they are not immortal or immune from mishap.
Finally, the United States is not and was never intended to be a "Christian Nation" - rather, we are and have (more or less reluctantly) been a refuge and champion of freedom of faith, with neither malice nor favor towards any faith our goal. Advocating to the contrary alienates those of non-mainstream faiths, and further, to the extent church and government intertwine, they are both diminished - a rare instance of the sum being substantially less than the parts.
With their current dogma, the Theocratic Right is largely an occasionally politically useful dead stinking pelican hanging about the neck of the GOP - driving off potential allies with its' stench and inspiring ridicule in the populace.
Someone once said that those who must declare their faith in the market place are inherently unfaithful - that the truly faithful are content to lead by example. Perhaps a hint was being given.
Immigration is fundamentally fouled up. Yet, the GOP (barring this issue) is fundamentally the favored party of immigrants, as the vast majority are fleeing flawed and failed nations. More than a few are fleeing tyrannies, socialist and otherwise, petty and grand mal, murderous and benevolent - but consistently fled from for the hope that is the United States, wanting absolutely no part of bringing the old nightmares of the homeland to fruition in their new homes.
We do not have secure borders, and it will be vastly expensive to achieve them - but worthwhile, as no other actual reform can take place without having a fairly good hold on who is entering and exiting the nation. Without secure borders, throwing some out of the country isn't terribly much more than an exercise in political drama if wandering back in is relatively easy.
Our system of immigration law is fundamentally dysfunctional, layered with surprising little high-stakes pitfalls for the immigrant seeking to be law-abiding and those lawful residents seeking to pursue citizenship. The GOP has an opportunity to dredge out this legalistic swamp in favor of something that is actually on speaking terms with logic, rather than a system based on the legislated bigotries du jour accumulated in one muck-filled bucket after another over a century or more - and score major points with the immigrant demographic in the process.
As part of a process of immigration reform that hopes to succeed, some form of filter must be put in place to separate the proverbial sheep from the goats, followed by exporting the goats to their native lands (or at least anyplace but here). There are vast numbers of immigrants whose presence enriches our communities, foster innovation in business, support our industry, and in general are a clear benefit to the nation.
There are other, less charming, immigrants who regardless of their legal status are swindlers, cheats, smugglers, thieves and generally net losses to whatever society is cursed with their presence (we have a sufficiency of homegrown ones of this sort, after all). A great expulsion of these excessively naughty folks must then take place - best defined as participants in violent crime, not economic rule-breaking.
The great Neo-Con disconnect, i.e., liberalism lite, is simply a soup con of domestic and foreign interventionalism with a slightly different philosophical tinge. Big government from the right, rather than from the left, and damn the torpedoes. After brief popularity, it failed in the popular imagination because of its' own lack of imagination - after all, just as a bad burrito twice-chewed hurled up and refried (even served as a delicacy) is still just a bad burrito...now-defiled by prior treatment, no matter how you dress it up. Again, we observe a dead stinking albatross hanging about the neck of the GOP, driving off the libertarian and centrist voters by the mere stench of the thing.
Some suggest that letting the GOP implode into a thousand fractious factions to coalesce again, rising as a phoenix from the ashes, a cleaner and purer bird is the best solution - claiming that the conflagration would take out the DNC as well, from a sheer lack of countervailing pressure to keep the equally mutually hateful and conflicted cliques of the DNC from spontaneous and massive fratricide.
It may be that is the eventual path our nation must take, and perhaps it might even bless us with a true multi-party system rather than the practical duopoly we currently endure.
However, it's also a high-risk path to blow up the opposition in the face of a messianic rhetorician of uncommon skill - for who will counterbalance the Obamessiah's claptrap in the event of GOP fragmentation?
The GOP has three major problems (aside from George Bush) that alienate critical voter demographics.
The Theocratic Right scares the bejabbers out of the average voter, and with their social-interventionist want list (Anti-abortion, Anti-gay, maximized suffering, and Christian Nationalism) will continue to scare the bejabbers out of that average moderate or libertarian voter that, while increasingly common, simply wants to be let alone to seek perdition in his or her own way with a minimum of taxes. The GOP needs those voters to survive as a viable party.
Simply coming off as an especially scary "because God(dess) told me so" variant on control freak isn't exactly going to win friends and deliver votes amongst the crowd the GOP has lost.
Demonizing and baiting the gay community must end, as it serves only as red meat to the Theocratic right while alienating younger and more centrist voters in spades.
Abortion, as a matter of law, is similarly a long lost battle (if ever it was worth winning) - like many other issues, abortion seems to be a morally challenging decision best decided between the patient, their medical advisor, and such divine influence as they acknowledge and accept for themselves - and, with a few small exceptions, all parties are ill-served by all but the most minimal government intervention in the operation and maintenance of individuals own bodies.
Modern medicine offers many miracles, not least among them amazingly improved survival rates from once-dire situations. However, the greatest fear of many is to be rescued from one medical adventure or another to live a long, miserable, pain-filled, semi-vegetative existence wired to so much life support gear that death's precious escape is denied well beyond the time when it is but a simple mercy.
The blind opposition of the Theocratic Right to DNR orders, let alone Death with Dignity options for the terminally ill, not surprisingly is less than enchanting to anyone who has ever accompanied a loved one on that long miserable medically-lengthened journey towards that final goal, and terrifying to those old or infirm enough to have realized they are not immortal or immune from mishap.
Finally, the United States is not and was never intended to be a "Christian Nation" - rather, we are and have (more or less reluctantly) been a refuge and champion of freedom of faith, with neither malice nor favor towards any faith our goal. Advocating to the contrary alienates those of non-mainstream faiths, and further, to the extent church and government intertwine, they are both diminished - a rare instance of the sum being substantially less than the parts.
With their current dogma, the Theocratic Right is largely an occasionally politically useful dead stinking pelican hanging about the neck of the GOP - driving off potential allies with its' stench and inspiring ridicule in the populace.
Someone once said that those who must declare their faith in the market place are inherently unfaithful - that the truly faithful are content to lead by example. Perhaps a hint was being given.
Immigration is fundamentally fouled up. Yet, the GOP (barring this issue) is fundamentally the favored party of immigrants, as the vast majority are fleeing flawed and failed nations. More than a few are fleeing tyrannies, socialist and otherwise, petty and grand mal, murderous and benevolent - but consistently fled from for the hope that is the United States, wanting absolutely no part of bringing the old nightmares of the homeland to fruition in their new homes.
We do not have secure borders, and it will be vastly expensive to achieve them - but worthwhile, as no other actual reform can take place without having a fairly good hold on who is entering and exiting the nation. Without secure borders, throwing some out of the country isn't terribly much more than an exercise in political drama if wandering back in is relatively easy.
Our system of immigration law is fundamentally dysfunctional, layered with surprising little high-stakes pitfalls for the immigrant seeking to be law-abiding and those lawful residents seeking to pursue citizenship. The GOP has an opportunity to dredge out this legalistic swamp in favor of something that is actually on speaking terms with logic, rather than a system based on the legislated bigotries du jour accumulated in one muck-filled bucket after another over a century or more - and score major points with the immigrant demographic in the process.
As part of a process of immigration reform that hopes to succeed, some form of filter must be put in place to separate the proverbial sheep from the goats, followed by exporting the goats to their native lands (or at least anyplace but here). There are vast numbers of immigrants whose presence enriches our communities, foster innovation in business, support our industry, and in general are a clear benefit to the nation.
There are other, less charming, immigrants who regardless of their legal status are swindlers, cheats, smugglers, thieves and generally net losses to whatever society is cursed with their presence (we have a sufficiency of homegrown ones of this sort, after all). A great expulsion of these excessively naughty folks must then take place - best defined as participants in violent crime, not economic rule-breaking.
The great Neo-Con disconnect, i.e., liberalism lite, is simply a soup con of domestic and foreign interventionalism with a slightly different philosophical tinge. Big government from the right, rather than from the left, and damn the torpedoes. After brief popularity, it failed in the popular imagination because of its' own lack of imagination - after all, just as a bad burrito twice-chewed hurled up and refried (even served as a delicacy) is still just a bad burrito...now-defiled by prior treatment, no matter how you dress it up. Again, we observe a dead stinking albatross hanging about the neck of the GOP, driving off the libertarian and centrist voters by the mere stench of the thing.
Some suggest that letting the GOP implode into a thousand fractious factions to coalesce again, rising as a phoenix from the ashes, a cleaner and purer bird is the best solution - claiming that the conflagration would take out the DNC as well, from a sheer lack of countervailing pressure to keep the equally mutually hateful and conflicted cliques of the DNC from spontaneous and massive fratricide.
It may be that is the eventual path our nation must take, and perhaps it might even bless us with a true multi-party system rather than the practical duopoly we currently endure.
However, it's also a high-risk path to blow up the opposition in the face of a messianic rhetorician of uncommon skill - for who will counterbalance the Obamessiah's claptrap in the event of GOP fragmentation?
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
A response to "Fear/Opposition to Obama is Racist"
I do not. I have no issue with a black/asian/latino/male/female/transgender/gay/bi/het/lesbian person sitting in the Oval Office, per se. To me those are simply not relevant considerations (though I will confess the small sin of wanting a black lesbian libertarian republican elected president, merely so I can expire from excessive giggling as the heads of a delightfully high number of "true believers" on the left and right spontaneously explode from sheer cognitive dissonance).
I do not object to Obama as a person - he seems like he'd be a joy to sit around a fireplace with, sipping beverage of choice, arguing the problems of the world late into the night.I vehemently object to Obama as President, and anticipate a national nightmare on the order of the Wilson administration. Coming up through hardball Chicago politics, tutored by Fr Pflaeger and Reverend Wright, compatriot of Bill Ayres, and with previously stated policy aspirations including a national ban on concealed carry and a permanent Evil Black Gun ban combined with intimidation of non-sycophantic media and the Missouri "Truth Enforcement Squads" - there is plenty of reason to be worried for our country, our freedoms, and our continued happiness as individuals.And then there's the economy...where apparently we'll see a re-invention of the New Deal and all the damage it did, but writ large.I don't need to theorize when I can look at past actions during and prior to the campaign.
Appointing Rahm Emanuel, a wildly partisan champion of a pitbull in the best ward boss grudge-holding vindictive SOB tradition of Chicago as Obama's Chief of Staff - well, that only confirms for me the "take no prisoners, piss on the remains" nature of the coming administration.
May God, or whatever deity you like, help us....
Gay or straight, we're going to need it.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Nickels & his Ban - Heads Up
As noted in Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Seattle Ninny-in-Chief Mayor Greg Nickels has decided to go ahead with his misguided and wrong-headed attempt to ban all guns from all city facilities and properties by mayoral fiat in defiance of WA Attorney General Rob McKenna's rather terse opinion that such action was both unlawful and likely in violation of the Washington State Constitution (which addresses firearms and self-defense issues rather more enthusiastically than the U.S Constitutions Second Amendment, and makes Heller look positively mellow). McKenna specifically holds that RCW 9.41.290 preempts (bars) such actions by counties, municipalities, and similar subordinate governmental bodies.
The effect of Nickels proposal, if somehow passed, would be to bar open or concealed carry by law-abiding citizens (CPL-holders, in the second instance) in City Parks, Woodland Park Zoo, Libraries, City Hall, and any other City property or facility (marked or unmarked, posted or unposted) you'd care to name by the mechanism of a rule requiring any city employee aware of any armed person not an active law enforcement officer in pursuit of their duties to first issue a formal trespass warning to such persons, and then summon officers to write a trespass citation (misdemeanor) against any such notified person still remaining on city property or in a city facility. While we have yet to see it, such a trespass notice could be a permanent bar - wiping out, say, ones ability to go to City Council and offer testimony.
Given that Nickels has yet to do more than bloviate and scheme, a lawsuit is sadly premature. Before one can take Nickels and the City to court for an egregious violation of law and violation of civil rights, Nickels and his cronies must first commit the actual evil deed. One cannot sue pre-emptively in these matters.
However, in December he apparently proposes to hold formal hearings prior to enacting his ban. Right about that time, expect lawsuits to be warming up, and if you're fiscally equipped and have standing (i.e., suffer a plausible injury or deprivation of rights due to City action) you might contact the Second Amendment Foundation about strategy and tactics.
At that December meeting, however, as a community we need every breathing body we can turn out in some kind of business attire (if possible) demonstrating a calm yet determined demeanor and filling the meeting area from wall to wall. As the time grows nearer, I'm sure additional strategy will emanate from our communities leaders. If we're lucky, a massive turnout will discourage Nickels and his Cease Fire loons from an attack on Pre-emption (an assault expected in Olympia, Jan. 09).
That, however, doesn't mean those of us in the 2A and Civil Rights community need to or should sit about waiting for Nickels & Co to engage upon their venture into tyrannical ninnyhood.
Instead, we can start the letter-writing/calling/emailing of our elected representatives and the media to ensure that such ninnyhood meet the most hostile response possible. Be polite, be knowledgeable, and be aware that the media will often choose to use your own quotes in a less than flattering fashion.
Be sure to mention how this policy increases the risk of gay bashing in city parks and facilities, by ensuring that law-abiding gay folk are helpless in the face of the rising number of hate crime based assaults. Mention that this enhances the vulnerability of pedestrians to dangerous dogs and predatory (and sometimes larcenous) two-legged critters.
Remember that threats and rants telegraph punches. That this is presently a matter of STATE statute and constitutional law. And play nicely, for the moment.
Seattle Times: opinion@seattletimes.com
Seattle Post Intelligencer: editpage@seattlepi.com
KIRO TV: http://www.kirotv.com/contact/index.html
KING TV: newstips@king5.com
KOMO TV: tips@komo4news.com
Revised Code of Washington (Pre-emption section re firearms)
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300
Seattle Contacts:
Seattle Mayor
Greg Nickels
http://www.seattle.gov/mayor/citizen_response.htm
(206) 684-4000
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Tim Burgess
tim.burgess@seattle.gov
(206)684-8806
Next up for Election: November 2011
Seattle City Council Member
Sally Clark
sally.clark@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8802
Next up for Election: November 2011
Seattle City Council Member
Richard Conlin
richard.conlin@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8805
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Jan Drago
jan.drago@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8801
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Jean Godden
jean.godden@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8807
Next up for Election: November 2011
Seattle City Council Member
Bruce Harrell
bruce.harrell@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8804
Seattle City Council Member
Nick Licata
nick.licata@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8803
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Richard McIver
richard.mciver@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8800
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Tom Rasmussen
tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8808
Next up for Election: November 2011
Watch the Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Both based in Bellevue, they have promised to initiate legal action if, and when, Mayor Nickels issues his executive order.
Such legal action may also involve the National Rifle Association, with whom they are currently suing the State of Washington over alien firearms licensing. Join and support these organizations because the legal challenge will be expensive.
Meanwhile, we're all going to need to keep a constant eye on Olympia as it's a good bet we'll see a serious assault on state pre-emption by the Seattle contingent (Nickels, Jeanne Kohl-Welles, Adam Kline, etc). Seattle has been bullying the state in Olympia since it was founded, and is in deep need of a really thoroughgoing reality check.
Key to our success is the old truism "Don't be dumb", in combination with "if it makes you giggle, it's probably a bad idea".
The temptation to go head to head with megalomaniacal and wrong-headed sorts may be strong, it's almost certainly a bad and counterproductive notion. Such open defiance could well foul up impending lawsuits and sabotage efforts to preserve pre-emption in Olympia.
The nice thing about demonstrations is that while they may not be the best tool for today, they store really well on the shelf and can always be brought out as an option later - ideally coordinated across the 2A community for maximum impact, with everyone from the Ducks Unlimited folks to the Open Carry crowd joining the party, and driving home the point.
What we can't accomplish as individuals, or even as sub-groups in the community - as a coordinated body we can achieve with verve and charm.
Dave Workman, over at SAF/CCRKBA, asks all interested to contact him with their email address so he can keep them up to date with alerts and such.
The effect of Nickels proposal, if somehow passed, would be to bar open or concealed carry by law-abiding citizens (CPL-holders, in the second instance) in City Parks, Woodland Park Zoo, Libraries, City Hall, and any other City property or facility (marked or unmarked, posted or unposted) you'd care to name by the mechanism of a rule requiring any city employee aware of any armed person not an active law enforcement officer in pursuit of their duties to first issue a formal trespass warning to such persons, and then summon officers to write a trespass citation (misdemeanor) against any such notified person still remaining on city property or in a city facility. While we have yet to see it, such a trespass notice could be a permanent bar - wiping out, say, ones ability to go to City Council and offer testimony.
Given that Nickels has yet to do more than bloviate and scheme, a lawsuit is sadly premature. Before one can take Nickels and the City to court for an egregious violation of law and violation of civil rights, Nickels and his cronies must first commit the actual evil deed. One cannot sue pre-emptively in these matters.
However, in December he apparently proposes to hold formal hearings prior to enacting his ban. Right about that time, expect lawsuits to be warming up, and if you're fiscally equipped and have standing (i.e., suffer a plausible injury or deprivation of rights due to City action) you might contact the Second Amendment Foundation about strategy and tactics.
At that December meeting, however, as a community we need every breathing body we can turn out in some kind of business attire (if possible) demonstrating a calm yet determined demeanor and filling the meeting area from wall to wall. As the time grows nearer, I'm sure additional strategy will emanate from our communities leaders. If we're lucky, a massive turnout will discourage Nickels and his Cease Fire loons from an attack on Pre-emption (an assault expected in Olympia, Jan. 09).
That, however, doesn't mean those of us in the 2A and Civil Rights community need to or should sit about waiting for Nickels & Co to engage upon their venture into tyrannical ninnyhood.
Instead, we can start the letter-writing/calling/emailing of our elected representatives and the media to ensure that such ninnyhood meet the most hostile response possible. Be polite, be knowledgeable, and be aware that the media will often choose to use your own quotes in a less than flattering fashion.
Be sure to mention how this policy increases the risk of gay bashing in city parks and facilities, by ensuring that law-abiding gay folk are helpless in the face of the rising number of hate crime based assaults. Mention that this enhances the vulnerability of pedestrians to dangerous dogs and predatory (and sometimes larcenous) two-legged critters.
Remember that threats and rants telegraph punches. That this is presently a matter of STATE statute and constitutional law. And play nicely, for the moment.
Seattle Times: opinion@seattletimes.com
Seattle Post Intelligencer: editpage@seattlepi.com
KIRO TV: http://www.kirotv.com/contact/index.html
KING TV: newstips@king5.com
KOMO TV: tips@komo4news.com
Revised Code of Washington (Pre-emption section re firearms)
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.300
Seattle Contacts:
Seattle Mayor
Greg Nickels
http://www.seattle.gov/mayor/citizen_response.htm
(206) 684-4000
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Tim Burgess
tim.burgess@seattle.gov
(206)684-8806
Next up for Election: November 2011
Seattle City Council Member
Sally Clark
sally.clark@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8802
Next up for Election: November 2011
Seattle City Council Member
Richard Conlin
richard.conlin@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8805
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Jan Drago
jan.drago@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8801
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Jean Godden
jean.godden@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8807
Next up for Election: November 2011
Seattle City Council Member
Bruce Harrell
bruce.harrell@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8804
Seattle City Council Member
Nick Licata
nick.licata@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8803
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Richard McIver
richard.mciver@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8800
Next up for Election: November 2009
Seattle City Council Member
Tom Rasmussen
tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov
(206) 684-8808
Next up for Election: November 2011
Watch the Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Both based in Bellevue, they have promised to initiate legal action if, and when, Mayor Nickels issues his executive order.
Such legal action may also involve the National Rifle Association, with whom they are currently suing the State of Washington over alien firearms licensing. Join and support these organizations because the legal challenge will be expensive.
Meanwhile, we're all going to need to keep a constant eye on Olympia as it's a good bet we'll see a serious assault on state pre-emption by the Seattle contingent (Nickels, Jeanne Kohl-Welles, Adam Kline, etc). Seattle has been bullying the state in Olympia since it was founded, and is in deep need of a really thoroughgoing reality check.
Key to our success is the old truism "Don't be dumb", in combination with "if it makes you giggle, it's probably a bad idea".
The temptation to go head to head with megalomaniacal and wrong-headed sorts may be strong, it's almost certainly a bad and counterproductive notion. Such open defiance could well foul up impending lawsuits and sabotage efforts to preserve pre-emption in Olympia.
The nice thing about demonstrations is that while they may not be the best tool for today, they store really well on the shelf and can always be brought out as an option later - ideally coordinated across the 2A community for maximum impact, with everyone from the Ducks Unlimited folks to the Open Carry crowd joining the party, and driving home the point.
What we can't accomplish as individuals, or even as sub-groups in the community - as a coordinated body we can achieve with verve and charm.
Dave Workman, over at SAF/CCRKBA, asks all interested to contact him with their email address so he can keep them up to date with alerts and such.
Good News amidst the Clouds
I don't often promote a product, but...these are seriously yummy stuff and I'd urge folks to either order them over the phone (if you're eager or out of the Costco sales area) ASAP - I just ordered about 6 bags...yummy...
A limited supply of All Natural Multigrain Pancake Mix by Coach's Oats is available for direct sale to the populace. To purchase, call 714-692-6885.
They also report that Costco stores in Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Montana and Idaho in December will resume selling the pancake mix after its successful debut earlier this year.
If you want Costco to continue carrying the mix, call or email them.
A limited supply of All Natural Multigrain Pancake Mix by Coach's Oats is available for direct sale to the populace. To purchase, call 714-692-6885.
They also report that Costco stores in Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Montana and Idaho in December will resume selling the pancake mix after its successful debut earlier this year.
If you want Costco to continue carrying the mix, call or email them.
Friday, November 7, 2008
REMINDER: Blog Munch
Blog Munch on Nov. 9, 1800hrs, La Cabana on Beacon Hill ( http://tinyurl.com/5rclvd )..
Seattle
2532 Beacon Ave S
Seattle, WA 98144
(206) 322-9643
Cya there!
Seattle
2532 Beacon Ave S
Seattle, WA 98144
(206) 322-9643
Cya there!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)