Sunday, May 11, 2008

Will Migden survive the spring?

She's fighting for her political life after a punishing year. And yeah, we agree this rhetoric after the last post rings especially hollow, but too late, we're on that track.

In August, she pleaded no contest to misdemeanor reckless driving after a wild, 30-mile ride down Interstate 80, weaving through traffic, bouncing off the center divider and finally rear-ending a car. In March, she agreed to pay a record $350,000 fine to the state for campaign finance violations that included personal use of campaign funds.

Migden argued that many of the violations were the result of sloppy bookkeeping and that her campaign had reported many of the violations to the Fair Political Practices Commission. She also won a legal battle against the political watchdog agency that allowed her to use more than $600,000 from previous campaigns.

"I regret that chapter of my career, but I've done what's responsible ... paying my fine and taking responsibility," she said.

That chapter? Like it was longer than a few weeks ago?

One thing this race could highlight, but never seems to in articles (it's touched on here) are the various factions within the LGBT community - otherwise painted with a broad brush by the mainstream media. Hey, gay is gay, right? Men, women, whatever - if you're interested in your own gender you must think the same, across genders, right? Ish.

Mostly, though, this race highlights the little covered political axiom: Don't Be An Ass Because If You End Up Needing Friends You May Be Surprised To Find You Have None. Kevin Shelley found this out. Migden may find out in June.

The day-after analysis on this race will be awesome.

Please, can't we talk about this?

Our servicemen and women who make it to Iraq and back are facing challenges when they return home that we just aren't paying attention to.

They are killing themselves.

You almost have to laugh at the headline "Vets' growing suicide worries officials." Does it? Worry? Is that the most they can muster?

There are a few hopeful signs of change in our attitude and awareness:

The suicide figures among veterans have caught congressional attention. Two senators have demanded the resignation of Ira Katz, the VA official who wrote "Shh" at the top of the e-mail dealing with suicide attempts and disputed the statistics in public testimony while confirming them in internal documents. A House committee has scheduled a hearing on veterans' suicides this week.

Resignation is an awful nice thing to offer someone who thinks and does that.

Also, and I'm no mental health professional, but, we can't figure out what is bothering veterans?

The causes for this increase in veterans' suicide rates aren't well understood, but mental-health professionals say the biggest problem is post-traumatic stress disorder. The ailment, better-known as PTSD, is thought to afflict up to 30 percent of the troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

War is hell. Is that a good reason? Works for me. And it's probably as close as the non-serving among us can come to getting it.

The time for allowing ourselves to pay lip service and nothing more to those who have served us so willingly has passed.

Help them heal.

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Can we get science back yet?

How about sometime in late January next year?

White House blocked EPA studies, GAO reports:

A congressional watchdog agency has found that White House officials repeatedly intervened in the government's scientific process for assessing the health risks of toxic chemicals, prompting Sen. Barbara Boxer to threaten giving Congress control of the program.

The Government Accountability Office reported Tuesday that the White House's budget office, the Pentagon and other agencies had delayed or blocked efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency to list chemicals as carcinogens by requesting more research or more time to review the risks.


I don't think I'll ever understand how Clinton was impeached for having an affair with an intern while Bush has invaded a country, disrupted the economy, and demonstrated an undying love of interfering with the advancement of our country and humanity in general by blocking science at every turn.

What gives?

And the cutest part:

GAO officials also faulted the administration for setting new rules that keep secret any involvement by the White House or a federal agency in a decision about the risks of a chemical.


Oh come on! Are you kidding? How do we reserve our outrage for people's failure to wear flag pins while we allow our government to act like characters out of the latest Grisham novel?

Monday, April 28, 2008

Everything old is new again

This Rev. Wright story just won't die - it's become a bit of an albatross for Obama, it seems. That's bad news coming on the heels of Clinton's most recent primary victory.

But is it possible we've lost sight of the forest for the trees?

No one is really calling this a racist issue, but if we don't call it out, are we lying to ourselves? The scary black churches that the majority don't understand, don't attend, and don't know about, are being confirmed as something Other, something we can't understand.

We've been so busy patting ourselves on the back for this momentous feat of having a black man and a woman as candidates, we haven't noticed we're slipping backward.

Once in a Governor Blue-Moonbeam

Tortured title, sorry. But have you heard? Jerry Brown is sounding an awful lot like he'll be taking another run for the governorship. He's been there once already. Kind of a crazy idea.

Saturday, April 26, 2008

I'm sure she'll win

Or not: Anti-war Cindy Sheehan files to take on Pelosi

I wish the anti-war movement had more traction, but it doesn't. I don't know what that says about us.

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

Keep changing the game and you'll find one you can win

That seems to be the pundit's take on tonight's results - highlighting the Clinton campaign's desire to turn the discussion from delegates to the popular vote.

But can you blame them? Obama would do the same. Wouldn't any savvy candidate? Would you want a non-savvy candidate in office? I wouldn't. If they aren't smart enough to win, they aren't smart enough to be president.

Of course, you can be smart enough to win but still too dumb to be president. This isn't a reciprocal equation. President Bush, I'm talking to you!