Palin: I’m an idiot, but I won’t admit it

Posted on June 5, 2011 by Michael

Sarah Palin is yet another in the long line of Republicans who isn’t familiar or interested in American history:

Sarah Palin insisted Sunday that history was on her side when she claimed that Paul Revere’s famous ride was intended to warn both British soldiers and his fellow colonists.

“You realize that you messed up about Paul Revere, don’t you?” “Fox News Sunday” anchor Chris Wallace asked the potential 2012 presidential candidate.

“I didn’t mess up about Paul Revere,” replied Palin, a paid contributor to the network.

She didn’t, did she? Let’s take a peak:

“He who warned the British that they weren’t gonna be takin’ away our arms by ringing those bells, and makin’ sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed.”

Here is the reality of the situation:

The colonists at the time of Revere’s ride were British subjects, with American independence still in the future. But Revere’s own writing and other historical accounts leave little doubt that secrecy was vital to his mission.

The Paul Revere House’s website says that on April 18, 1775, Dr. Joseph Warren, a patriot leader in the Boston area, instructed Revere to ride to Lexington, Mass., to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that British troops were marching to arrest them.

In an undated letter posted by the Massachusetts Historical Society, Revere later wrote of the need to keep his activities secret and his suspicion that a member of his tight circle of planners had become a British informant. According to the letter, believed to have been written around 1798, Revere did provide some details of the plan to the soldiers that night, but after he had notified other colonists and under questioning by the Redcoats.

Intercepted and surrounded by British soldiers on his way from Lexington to Concord, Revere revealed “there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time, for I had alarmed the country all the way up,” he wrote.

Revere was probably bluffing the soldiers about the size of any advancing militia, since he had no way of knowing, according to Joel J. Miller, author of “The Revolutionary Paul Revere.” And while he made bells, Revere would never have rung any on that famous night because the Redcoats were under orders to round up people just like him.

“He was riding off as quickly and as quietly as possible,” Miller said. “Paul Revere did not want the Redcoats to know of his mission at all.”

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

Stop gerrymandering

Posted on June 5, 2011 by Michael

As I’ve said several times in the past, gerrymandering hurts the nation:

Take Georgia, where jockeying has begun in advance of a state General Assembly session to redraw boundaries for seats in Congress and the state legislature. Some observers expect that U.S. Rep. Sanford Bishop — a black Democrat serving a constituency that’s half white — will end up with a heavily black base after black voters are redrawn out of the district won last year by Republican U.S. Rep. Austin Scott. That way, Scott can concentrate on solidifying his support among overwhelmingly white tea partiers.

“In political terms, it’s resegregating the South,” Harpootlian said. “Without those majority-minority districts in the South, Republicans would not have come to the dominance they have come to.”

This article happens to be about racial gerrymandering, but this sort of redistricting is bad in all its forms. Whatever party gets the opportunity to redraw lines will do so in its own favor. This is a big part of the reason we get such polarization in our politics.

It will probably never happen, but there needs to be a constitutional amendment regulating how federal districts are drawn. There ought to be an objective formula that draws lines in box or near-box shapes based upon population. The only deviations should be relatively minor ones, much in the way time zones deviate for practical reasons.

We could get a few wingnuts from both sides of the aisle out of Congress if we were smart about this.

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: , | 4 Comments »

Jack Kevorkian is dead

Posted on June 3, 2011 by Michael

It’s the end of a tremendously ethical man:

Jack Kevorkian built his suicide machine using parts gathered from flea markets and stashed it in a rusty Volkswagen van.

But it was Kevorkian’s audacious attitude that set him apart in the debate over whether gravely ill people could seek help ending their lives. The retired pathologist who said he oversaw the deaths of 130 people burned state orders against him, showed up at court in costume and dared authorities to stop him or make his actions legal. He didn’t give up until he was sent to prison.

Kevorkian, who died Friday at a Michigan hospital at 83, insisted suicide with the help of a medical professional was a civil right.

The justifications for assisted suicide hold up – and they’re consistent. The justification for harvesting the organs of the brain dead, or for allowing those in comas to die with dignity, or even for administering morphine, is fundamentally the same across the board. It is not quantity of life that matters, but rather quality. Kevorkian recognized that where so many were so stubbornly blind and ignorant. He will be missed.

“You’ll hear people say, `Well, [physician assisted suicide] in the news again, it’s time for discussing this further.’ No, it isn’t. It’s been discussed to death,” he told The Associated Press. “There’s nothing new to say about it. It’s a legitimate, ethical medical practice as it was in ancient Rome and Greece.”

Filed under: News, Philosophy, Politics and Social | Tagged: | 15 Comments »

Romney fact check

Posted on June 3, 2011 by Michael

It’s sad that this is probably the best the Republicans can actually do:

ROMNEY: “Instead of encouraging entrepreneurs and employers, [Obama] raises their taxes, piles on record-breaking mounds of regulation and bureaucracy and gives more power to union bosses.”

THE FACTS: Romney ignores ambitious tax-cutting pushed by Obama. The stimulus plan early in his presidency cut taxes broadly for the middle class and business. He more recently won a one-year tax cut for 2011 that reduced most workers’ Social Security payroll taxes by nearly a third. He also campaigned in support of extending the Bush-era tax cuts for all except the wealthy, whose taxes he wanted to raise. In office, he accepted a deal from Republicans extending the tax cuts for all. As for tax increases, Obama won congressional approval to raise them on tobacco and tanning salons. The penalty for those who don’t buy health insurance, once coverage is mandatory, is a form of taxation. Several large tax increases in the health care law have not yet taken effect.

Romney, of all people, ought to recognize that the only form of tax anyone has seen from President Obama is in the form of health insurance penalties in the years to come. And that’s even going to save money across the board. The fact is, taxes under President Obama are lower than they ever were under that average president Ronald Reagan. I know this upsets Republicans, but the facts are the facts.

ROMNEY: “The expectation was that we’d have to raise taxes but I refused. I ordered a review of all state spending, made tough choices and balanced the budget without raising taxes.”

THE FACTS: Romney largely held the line on tax increases when he was Massachusetts governor but that’s only part of the revenue story. The state raised business taxes by $140 million in one year with measures branded “loophole closings,” the vast majority recommended by Romney. Moreover, the Republican governor and Democratic lawmakers raised hundreds of millions of dollars from higher fees and fines, taxation by another name. Romney himself proposed creating 33 new fees and increasing 57 others — enough to raise $59 million. Anti-tax groups were split on his performance. The Club for Growth called the fee increases and business taxes troubling. Citizens for Limited Taxation praised him for being steadfast in supporting an income tax rollback.

I know Romney will never get the Republican nomination if he sticks by his record, but he would be more likely to get my vote.

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: | 3 Comments »

Rand Paul used to understand libertarianism

Posted on June 2, 2011 by Michael

Last year Rand Paul made some politically stupid, but perfectly libertarian comments:

INTERVIEWER: Would you have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

PAUL: I like the Civil Rights Act in the sense that it ended discrimination in all public domains, and I’m all in favor of that.

INTERVIEWER: But?

PAUL: You had to ask me the “but.” I don’t like the idea of telling private business owners—I abhor racism. I think it’s a bad business decision to exclude anybody from your restaurant—but, at the same time, I do believe in private ownership. But I absolutely think there should be no discrimination in anything that gets any public funding, and that’s most of what I think the Civil Rights Act was about in my mind.

Shortly after that comment, however, Teabaggers and other like-minded individuals (i.e., the Republican party…because, come on, they’re the same thing) distanced themselves from Paul. Unbeknownst to all the pseudo-libertarians out there, Paul was perfectly in line with their (espoused) ideology. He didn’t say he favored racism. He said he favored allowing it. One can maintain a position within the ethics of libertarianism whilst at the same time believing the follow-through to that position to be immoral. Not that I think allowing for racism in that context is acceptable, but I want to present a pretty straight-forward analysis of what libertarianism entails; Paul was being consistent.

Unfortunately, that consistency appears to have worn off:

I’m not for profiling people on the color of their skin, or on their religion, but I would take into account where they’ve been traveling and perhaps, you might have to indirectly take into account whether or not they’ve been going to radical political speeches by religious leaders. It wouldn’t be that they are Islamic. But if someone is attending speeches from someone who is promoting the violent overthrow of our government, that’s really an offense that we should be going after — they should be deported or put in prison.

This has zero connection with libertarianism. Free speech composes a cornerstone of not only the U.S. constitution, but also much of libertarianism (especially as the ethical theory pertains to politics). That Paul would go and say something so stupidly inconsistent makes it quite clear that he really could only ever be elected in the South.

Now just wait and see how many of his pseudo-libertarian brethren don’t distance themselves from him.

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: , | 6 Comments »

Weiner’s picture

Posted on June 2, 2011 by Michael

Making a pun on his name is too easy.

Unless Rep. Anthony Weiner starts preaching about so-called “family values” or how we need to curb the use of making bad decisions with cameras, I do not care that he sent a picture of his junk to some girl. I also didn’t care that Clinton got a blowjob from some intern. Nor did I care when Tiger Woods slutted things up. Or when Brett Favre, misspelled last name and all, sent his limp noodle to that TV host? Nope, didn’t care about that either.

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: | 5 Comments »

“Justice” Thomas: Free speech undermines the law

Posted on May 18, 2011 by Michael

I can’t stand these dolts we have on the Supreme Court:

Thomas, who was born in nearby Pin Point, told the Augusta Bar Association that the downward spiral of public discourse from people who are “drunk on their own opinions” must come to an end.

“You don’t just keep nagging and nagging and nagging. At some point it’s got to stop. Sometimes, too much is too much,” he said. “I think we are reaching the point where we are beginning to undermine the integrity of the law we’re going to need.”

This utter incoherency is likely why Thomas hasn’t said a damn thing in the court for the past 5 years.

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: , | 7 Comments »

Two gays students threatened with suspension

Posted on May 18, 2011 by Michael

A principal at a Florida high school has threatened two lesbian students with suspension for the crime of holding hands:

Some are accusing the principal of Blanche Ely High School of discrimination after two students of the same sex were nearly suspended for holding hands.

The two girls, a junior and a senior, were threatened by the school’s principal with a 10-day suspension for their public displays of affection.

The principal, Karlton Johnson, would certainly never do this to two straight students. In fact, other students in various articles have repeatedly said that the holding of hands has never been an issue at the school. But it apparently is now.

Of course, I want to be fair. It is school policy that students not hold hands. I think that aptly shows the immature mindset of the administrators. Despite what I’m sure they teach their students in sex ed courses, people cannot get pregnant via hand-to-hand contact.

But let’s say this is all just a big misunderstanding, all the other students just don’t realize how often the rules are evenly applied to all sexual orientations, and maybe this is a non-story. Except there’s another problem:

[Activists] also are upset because the principal took things one step further after calling the girls into his office.

“He outed her to her parents, and that is something that social workers will tell you and professionals who work with (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning) youth and families, it’s something you just don’t pick up the phone and say, ‘Your daughter’s a lesbian,'” Rajner.

Not only did Johnson needlessly take the two lesbian students into his office, but he called both of their parents. For one girl this was trivial. Her parents are aware of her orientation. But for the other girl, she was still in the closet, at least to her parents. It is wildly inappropriate and wholly ignorant that Johnson would go so far as to mess with her life like that. He has no standing to make such emotionally and socially important decisions for other human beings.

I just wish I could say I was stunned that someone would be such a piece of garbage.

Johnson’s email: karlton.johnson@browardschools.com

Filed under: Politics and Social, Rights | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a comment »

She won’t say yes

Posted on May 15, 2011 by Michael

Michele Bachmann is stupid, but not stupid enough to take up such a sure loss:

Amy Myers, a high school sophomore from Cherry Valley, New Jersey, has thrown down the gauntlet, challenging the Minnesota Representative to a debate and public test on the constitution, U.S. history, and civics.

Myers says Bachmann’s frequent errors, misstatements and distortions aren’t just bad for civic discourse — they’re bad for women.

“Though politically expedient, incorrect comments cast a shadow on your person and by unfortunate proxy, both your supporters and detractors alike often generalize this shadow to women as a whole,” Myers writes.

So to show that Bachmann isn’t a great representative of her gender’s intellectual capacity, Myers proposes a battle of wits.

Bachmann knows she would be wrecked. Aside from the fact that she doesn’t seem to have even the most basic historical facts correct, she has a Teabagger point of view. That means she holds to the false notion that the U.S. is a Christian nation and that it has its founding in Christianity. (A Teabagger who doesn’t know American history? Weird, I know.) This would be more embarrassing than when Christine O’Donnell asked where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state.

I do hope she accepts, though. Now that Donald Trump is fading, the nation really could use another punching bag.

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: , , , , , | 7 Comments »

You aren’t really a moderate

Posted on May 7, 2011 by Michael

I’ve long found it extremely annoying when someone claims to be a political moderate despite, ya know, all the positions he or she holds. Aside from being wrong, it feeds into this idea that simply because something falls into the middle, it must be the best, or at least better than the extremes.

Let’s take something clear like the civil rights movement. It was considered radical and extreme to be of the position that blacks and other minorities deserved equal protection under the law. On the other hand, at least as time moved on, it was also considered extreme to want to curtail too many rights. After all, blacks were people, right? The best position, then, was to be a “moderate” and fall right between those nasty extremes: let’s give blacks some rights, but also keep them in check. MLK lamented these moderates in his Letter from Birmingham Jail. Clearly something is not right simply because it happens to be a middle position.

But at least those people actually were moderates by the standards of the day. In the political sense, they were intellectually honest.They actually did take a road between two extremes and thus deserved the title “moderates”. But today? The so-called “moderates” of today definitely are not straddling the middle ground. How many of us have friends who want so desperately and pathetically to cling to that label, yet there’s virtually no chance they would ever vote for a particular party? I know most people have to know someone like that.

But don’t take my word for it. A recent study confirms it: the nation is more polarized than ever, and true moderates are a dying breed:

Among the increasingly growing segment of Americans who identify with neither party and call themselves independents, there are fewer moderates. Many in the “middle” hold strong, ideological views. The study concluded that three groups in the center of the Pew typology “have very little in common, aside from their avoidance of partisan labels.”

“What we see is a much bigger and increasingly diverse middle,” Pew center president Andrew Kohut said. “What’s striking about it is that they’re not so moderate. People in the middle have some strong, well-defined ideological points of view.”

What the study doesn’t mention is that it’s always these jackasses who are also the first to chime in and question the very foundations of our labels. Say to someone “I’m a liberal” and the very first thing a modern day pseudo-moderate will say is, “But what is a liberal, really?” (And just the same goes for those professing to be conservatives.) It seems to me that the real issue here is that these people just have a problem with labels. They’re the popped-collar assholes of politics.

Damn hipsters.

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: , , , , | 5 Comments »

« Previous Page — Next Page »