Display by Label: Politics

Dear Jon Stewart,

I love your show, but what's with that McCain interview? (Watch: Part 1 | Part 2). You sounded a little like Bill O'Reilly there, Jon. Remember him? He's the man you love to make fun of for doing . . . exactly what you just did. I was a tad embarrassed. You seem to be forgetting your own mantra: that The Daily Show is a comedy show. You are on Comedy Central, Jon. Not Fox. The Stewart Factor, featuring Jon the political pundit - who talks over his guests - is a different show, a slightly disturbing one, and one I don't care to watch, regardless of whether or not I agree with you.

link to this | comments (3) | File:  Media  Politics 

Man. This election is going to be ugly. I'd link to the ad, but I think the tactic is a little cowardly. You can find it pretty easily, though.

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Politics 

Saturday morning, a small group of war protesters marched down Mass Ave right outside our building, yelling and making noise. It wasn't a very large group, but they had police escorts nonetheless, and it piqued our curiosity. Was there something larger going on? We felt a little out of it to learn that there was a indeed a larger war protest rally going on at the Mall. So we decided to go down and take a look. Here are the pics.

There's nothing much I can tell you about the rally that you can't read in the WaPo, but here are a few observations:

I have to say, it was a pretty impressive showing. Not as large as the March for Women's Lives back in 2004, but still pretty darn big. I thought I had pics from the 2004 women's march online, but I just realized they were part of my 'old' gallery system and I removed them a while back. I'm slowly moving those old photos over to the new system. The pivotal word being 'slowly.'

This weekend's rally didn't have any catchy slogan or banner associated with it, and this was good. It was refreshing. It was just a gathering of people protesting the war. Different people from all different backgrounds. The result was a diverse range of voices and unique messages on signs. Not everybody was carrying the same sign. This was nice. It felt a little more like the 70s, or at least what I've seen of it on TV. I mean, even Jane Fonda was there.

Although the day before the rally was freezing cold, and the day after was dreary and wet, the day of was a beautiful, sun-shiny, light-coat-wearing type of day. I'm not an expert in these matters, but if we wanted to talk about a 'higher power,' which, after all, this president is keen on doing, we might go so far as to say there was tacit consent, if not outright approval, of the protest. Either that, or he just wanted a good view.

link to this | comments (3) | File:  DC  Politics 

Colbert had a great riff on the State of the Union address last night. This clip is about 3 minutes long total, and worth a watch, but I direct your attention to the part at about 1:07 left. The blink war. Hilarious.

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Video  Politics  Colbert 

The central irony to living in the District of Columbia is that, while its residents are generally politically-minded and live in the epicenter of the federal government, they have very little voice in national politics. For this reason, I found myself a little jealous of people in Maryland and Virginia as they went to the polls this week to help contribute to the change taking place in Washington which - again, glaring irony right here! - is the city where I live.

Of course, DC residents know what their new voting status is going in, and nobody's forcing us to live here, so we can't exactly cry foul. But since the population of the District hovers just above that of Wyoming's and continues to grow, I really can see no reason why it shouldn't be considered the same as a state, with a voting member in the House and two voting members in the Senate. Right now, DC gets one non-voting representative in Congress, a seat currently occupied by Eleanor Holmes Norton. And while DC has a mayor and some semblance of a city government, Congress ultimately has control of the city, and has the right to intervene in that government when it sees fit, as it did recently when it decided to repeal DC's gun laws. Thanks, guys!

Thanks to a constitutional amendment passed in 1961, DC has the right to vote for President and Vice-President, but its electoral votes in that election are limited to that of the least populated state, which is currently Wyoming. So, even if the population of DC increased to that of Nevada's, giving it the theoretical right to five electoral votes, they'd still be limited by the lovely state of Wyoming, which for all its majestic land, seems to be plagued by a real lack of sexual drive among its residents. But even if Wyoming went through a sudden baby-making craze, DC would be electorally confined by the next least populated state. Vermont, maybe. Or Alaska.

A new amendment was offered in the late seventies which would have given DC the same voting rights as other states, but it was not ratified within the seven-year time limit that was set for it. But there is still hope for DC in the form of the current DC Voting Rights Act (HR 5388) (text). The bill is kind of weak, in my opinion, because it only tackles the issue of having a voting member in the House, not the Senate. But it is a realistic and palatable first step in the larger question of statehood. Also, the bill gives another voting House Rep to Utah. It has been argued that Utah was slighted in the last census review and that they deserve another Representative in Congress. But there's no doubt this is also something of a political bone to the Republicans since DC's rep would certainly be a Democrat, and an additional rep in Utah would restore balance.

Some good news on this issue came out this morning, that Rep. Nancy Pelosi, who is on her way to becoming the next Speaker of the House, will change the 'House rules' to allow Norton to vote on proposed changes to legislation on the House floor. Apparently this was the way the floor operated from 1993 to 1995, before Republicans took over and quickly abolished that little act of goodwill. According to the WaPo, although Pelosi supports full voting rights for DC, she doesn't support HR 5388 because of the Utah concession.

It's kind of crazy when you think about it: that over half a million American citizens don't really get a say in congress. I bet this will change soon, particularly with the new House and Senate. It just seems like one of those oversights that continues to exist because it's always been that way. Personally, I think we should all go down to the Potomac and throw something in as a protest. It probably wouldn't have too big an impact on the issue, but it would be a hell of a lot of fun.

link to this | comments (6) | File:  Politics  DC 

With Rumsfeld leaving, I thought now would be a good time to take another look at his widely celebrated poetry. My personal favorites are 'The Unknown' and 'Glass Box.'

link to this | comments (1) | File:  Politics 

I looked out the window a little bit ago and let me tell you: Pigs are flying all over the place. And it's a beautiful thing.

link to this | comments (3) | File:  Politics 

Steven Colbert at the White House Correspondents Dinner this past Saturday, April 29th. If you haven't seen it, prepare to be uncomfortable.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

If the links don't work, try searching on YouTube.

link to this | comments (3) | File:  Politics  News 

I'm not sure how many of you have been following the 'cartoon affair.' It's pretty strange stuff. There's a pretty good article about it here, with a good history of the whole thing and an update on some of the more recent developments.

The other day, I heard on an NPR radio spot that a bestselling newspaper in Iran is now running a contest to find the best cartoon about the holocaust. It's a sort of 'retaliation' to the European newspapers. They say they're running the contest to 'test the boundaries of free speech' which is a similar response given by European papers that had published the offending cartoons.

Um . . . here's the thing: This can not end well. Let's just put aside the whole 'free speech' thing for a minute. It seems this is just a distraction to the larger issue here. And that is this: There is something seriously wrong when people come to throws over cartoons. On the other hand, what could be a more appropriate development in this insane cultural/religious/political tension that has been going on, east vs. west, for years? This pent up anger and frustration. This 'us' vs. 'them' mentality that will not go away.

Personally, I think blaming this on religion, politics, culture, or even 'free speech' - it's all just an excuse. I think some people just want to be angry. It's another symptom of modern isolationism and angst. People feel cut off. People feel 'outside' and disenfranchised. Islamic fundamentalists are mad at Europeans, Americans and 'Western influence' in general. Western nations are angry back. Lob, volley, lob, volley. There's not a whole lot of understanding going on, on either side. It's all about people being angry, and ultimately I think their anger has more to do with themselves than anything else. Only they can't accept that. It's hard to be angry with yourself. It leads to feelings of doubt, which are hard to deal with. So why not look for other people to be angry with? It's much easier that way, more clear-cut. It's definitely easier than questioning yourself.

Sit anywhere near a busy intersection during rush-hour in Washington DC, NYC, Chicago, SF . . . any big city, and count the horns. Road-rage at it's finest. The streets are filled with angry people. Sometimes I'll sit in my apartment and I'll hear somebody lay on their horn for (no kidding) 25 to 30 solid seconds. And I realize that this kind of irrational honking, this futile noise-making in the face of traffic that won't budge, isn't about the traffic at all. It's about being angry, pure and simple. And who better to be angry at then that guy who has his tail-end jutting out into the intersection? I mean, he's probably a fucking liberal, anyway, right? Only fucking liberals are so stupid as to block an intersection like that!

Here's the thing: Ultimately, that horn isn't saying, Get out of my way, you liberal/conservative/(insert favorite person to hate here) idiot! That horn is saying, I just got fired for gambling online at work, you asshole! Now listen to me! That horn is saying, My husband is having an affair with a 23-year old slut! Listen to how angry I am! That horn is saying, My wife will no longer have sex with me and I haven't come in weeks! Can you hear me? That horn is saying, My mother, who was everything to me, died last week, and there was nothing I could do to stop it! The common denominator, the sentiment that pervades, is this: LISTEN TO ME!! I'M A HUMAN BEING ON THIS EARTH AND I FEEL ALONE AND POWERLESS!

But that horn - the kind that lasts 30 seconds - it's not about the traffic. Definitely not. There's something else behind that kind of display.

And this 'cartoon affair' is not about the cartoon. It's about years of frustration and a sense of disempowerment. And it's easy to make things worse by making other angry remarks.

A Washington Post article quotes Condi Rice as saying:

"I have no doubt that Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and have used this for their own purposes . . . The world ought to call them on it."

Maybe what she says is true. Maybe Iran and Syriah are blowing their horns loud for everybody to hear. But does it make sense to honk ours back? Does it really help anything to 'call them' on what amounts to a bunch of angry fist waving? I have no doubt that the United States can puff their chests bigger than anybody. But does that do any good?

There's a great line in this Ani DiFranco song, Your Next Bold Move:

You want to track each trickle back to it's source
Then scream over the faucet 'til your face gets horse
Cuz you're surrounded by a world's worth of things you just can't excuse . . .

So go ahead make your next bold move . . .
tell us, what's the next thing you need to prove to yourself?

Isn't the problem that we all feel helpless to identify and fix the root of the problems we face, whether they're in our personal lives or global in scale. Fixing the core problem just gets too messy. It means turning inward and questioning our beliefs, questioning our values. It's much easier to make these bold shouts at the symptoms and hope they'll go away, hope they'll back down.

But they don't go away and they don't back down. Instead, one person's cause is the next person's excuse. And so on and so forth. Forever and ever. Amen.

link to this | comments (3) | File:  Politics  News  Chewing 

Okay, the first page of this article paints a picture of the latest supreme court nominee as somebody less likely to be a judge than to be the simple wife of a preacher or farmer. Somebody who idolizes the president and will tout his moral philosophy. Kind of scary.

link to this | comments (0) | File:  Politics  News