Log in

No account? Create an account
About this Journal
Current Month
Dec. 6th, 2013 @ 08:18 am Snow!
Requisite snow post, before I try to drive to work. ;)

Who's staying home today?
About this Entry
Jan. 25th, 2009 @ 07:35 pm My Take On Election 2008.
Current Location: Tucson, AZ
Current Mood: calmcalm
Now that I am back, it is time for my take on Election 2008.

To recap, my support went like this: Fmr. Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR) -->US Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) -->Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK). I did not support US Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) at all.

I felt the US Pres. Barack Obama (D-IL) should have picked HC for his VP. Picking SP was the only thing JM did right.

Why Did BHO Win?: The economic downturn took the nation's focus off of Iraq and that was JM's only real issue to campaign on. When JM tried to lead on the economy, he looked lost in the woods while BHO looked ready to lead.

Historical Election: No matter how well or poorly BHO is as POTUS, he will be remembered mostly for being the first Biracial/African-American POTUS.

Predictions For 2012.

1. BHO will ask HC to be his VP.
2. BHO will win again and by bigger numbers.
3. The GOP will not run (or allow to run) Palin.
4. The GOP will run Fmr. Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Mass.) and Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA).
About this Entry
Jan. 23rd, 2009 @ 05:28 pm Ralph Nader's open letter to President Obama
In the Public Interest
by Ralph Nader

Dear President Obama:

Underneath many of our country’s economic problems is the thirty-year collapse of consumer protection—both of the regulatory kind and of the self-help kind known as proper access to justice.

Last month major consumer groups sent you a letter proposing action to rein in exploitation of consumers as debtors, as buyers of oil, gas and electricity, as patients needing health insurance and as eaters wanting safe goods.

Under the Bush regime, the words “consumer protection” were rarely uttered and the Bush administration almost never initiated any pro-consumer efforts, even with massive evidence before it, such as predatory lending and credit card abuses.

You need to recognize and elevate the GDP significance of fair consumer policies along with their moral and just attributes at a time of worsening recession.

I suggest you focus on the state of the poorest consumers in the urban and rural ghettos. As you know from your days with the New York Public Interest Group (NYPIRG) and as a community organizer in Chicago, the consumers in these areas are the most gouged and least protected. That the “poor pay more” has been extensively documented by civic, official and academic studies, and numerous local newspaper and television news reports.

Unfortunately, neither Congress nor the Executive branch have paid adequate attention to the tens of millions of people who lose at least 25 percent of their consumer dollars to multiple frauds and shoddy merchandise. You should establish special task forces in the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission on their plight and on the many proven but unused remedies to assure a fair marketplace with effective enforcement and grievance procedures.

Working with and galvanizing local and state agencies to enlarge their capacity and staff—with stimulus monies—can produce a triple-header—making the federal effort more effective, providing valuable jobs and freeing up billions of consumer dollars from the financial sink-hole of commercial crimes.

It requires the visibility and eloquence of your personal leadership to launch this long-overdue defense of poor people.

A second area of action is simply to update major areas of regulatory health and safety that have been frozen for thirty years. These include modernizing standards for auto and tire safety, food safety, aviation and railroad safety and occupational health and trauma protection.

New knowledge, new marketing forays, and new technologies have accumulated during this period without application. It is the obsolescence of so many safety standards hailing from the fifties, sixties and seventies that permits the tricky, corporate advertising claims that products “exceed federal safety standards.”

Note for example that the SEC has never come close to regulating the recent explosion of myriad collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). The massive speculation in this area is destabilizing the national and world economies.

Third, you need to articulate and provide a high profile to what western Europeans have long called “social consumerism.” Citizens are consumers of government services for which they pay as taxpayers. In return they are entitled to prompt, accurate and courteous responses to their inquiries and to their perceived needs as embraced by the authorizing statutes.

To begin with, Americans need to be able to get through to their government agencies and departments. Being put on hold interminably with automated messages to nowhere, not receiving replies of any kind to their letters, and generally getting the brush-off even with the deadlines explicated in the Freedom of Information Act have been a bi-partisan failure.

However, under the Bush regime, not answering serious letters from dedicated individuals and groups on time-sensitive matters of policy and action—as with the Iraq war and occupation—became standard operating procedure—starting with President Bush himself.

This stonewalling has turned people off so much that they do not even bother to “ask their government” for assistance and that includes an astonishingly unresponsive Congress (other than for ministerial requests such as locating lost VA or social security checks.)

As you shape the Obama White House, bear in mind that the “change you can believe in” is one of kind, not just degree.

Sincerely yours,

Ralph Nader
About this Entry
Jan. 19th, 2009 @ 01:18 pm Did Obama Team Play us On Bishop Robinson?
During the inauguration kick off party at the Lincoln Memorial, openly gay Bishop Gene Robinson of the Diocese of NH gave the opening prayer.

The problem is it was not televised by HBO or NPR and there were 'technical difficulties' making it nearly impossible for the crowd of 500,000 to hear a word.

Demand to know why Bishop Robinson was part of the "pre-show" and therefore not taped.

More info and contact info at http://queersunited.blogspot.com/2009/01/did-obama-team-play-us-over-bishop.html
About this Entry
Jan. 13th, 2009 @ 10:25 pm He was who I thought he was
Seems like Obama is following through on his promise to listen to people, particularly if they disagree with him. Obama had a meeting of the minds with Conservative pundits/columnists this evening.


Gasp, shock; the man is the centrist leader he said he would be and one this country needs. Its easy to say he's caving to right-wing interests, particularly if you aren't the first black president elect trying to get a major stimulus bill through. And the comments on Huffpo show that some of his biggest supporters are no better than the conservatives they despise.

But I for one am very encouraged by this. He's going in and fighting battles on their own turf...and, who knows? Maybe he's winning some.

I don't think this means he'll overturn RoeV.Wade or put all gays in stocks. What it does mean is he's determined to change the way this country does business. Thank holy God someone with some intellectual dexterity is in charge. Partisan hackery will further entrench us in this Godawful mess.

As always, just my opinion.
About this Entry
Dec. 30th, 2008 @ 01:45 pm Next Illinois Senator, Attorney General Roland Burris?
Check out his record on LGBT issues.
About this Entry
Dec. 19th, 2008 @ 12:09 pm I know the elections are over but this has been eating at me
By now anyone who follows politics knows the outrage over Obama's choice of pastor Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration. This is seen as a thumb in the eye to lesbians, gays and transgendered Americans who supported Obama, mainly because Warren does not support gay marriage and has other controversial views on the subject.

But Obama has made no secret he is friends with Warren and actually disagrees with his views on these issues. Does that mean he made the wrong choice in picking Warren for this job?

In my view, absolutely not. It goes back to what Obama has said all along. He wants to be an inclusive, centrist leader. That's why he appointed rivals in the democratic primary to top posts, and why he is also filling top posts with Republicans.

In Warren's case, Obama hasn't even gone that far. He hasn't made him Czar of Marriage or given him any role where he'll have any influence over policy. He's just given him a platform which some in the gay community think he will use to bash gays. I really can't imagine Obama would invite someone who would preach bigotry during a presidential inauguration so I'm not holding my breath for the anti-gay rant.

The president is trying to make a point about inclusiveness, that people can work together without agreeing on every issue. I don't suppose it matters much to gays that he's allowing an openly gay and lesbian band to march in his inaugural parade, which is more than Bill Clinton did? Or that he's planning to do away with Don't Ask/Don't Tell, a stupid ill-conceived policy?

Whereas Bush only paid lip-service to being a Uniter and not a Divider (he was more of a Decider really), Obama is actually living up to what he said in his campaign. I find it remarkable that the liberal groups who most often complain about intolerance are themselves intolerant of other people's views.

I'm not saying I agree with what Warren has to say. But I appreciate that he, like Obama, is committed to an open and civil discussion about all the issues, even the ones on which the two men don't agree.

And if people who are angry about this think they'll find a greater friend in the other party, they're sadly mistaken. This will be the most progressive administration ever when it comes to gay rights. Gays and liberals shouldn't get hung up on the symbolism here; they'll appreciate the substance of what Obama does more.

And out.

About this Entry
Dec. 14th, 2008 @ 02:10 pm Health Care
Current Mood: bouncybouncy


To Our Supporters,


Several of us from the Nader for President 2008 campaign had decided to channel our efforts toward one big goal, but we lacked a major focus. Recently, results of a survey done by the campaign came back. Top issue? Adopt single payer health care.

 It's not the only issue people care about, obviously. But, to turn this country around it's clear that we need to address our own pain now. Our big goal for the next Congress will be to drive for national health insurance to cover privately-delivered healthcare for all Americans. We're far from alone in this.

The array and scope of the groups and their allies supporting national health insurance is impressive. But we are not reinventing the wheel, either. As long as you want to build a lasting organization that will get Congress to focus on people's needs -- not those of big business -- November5 can be the place to do it. Here in the United States, we have excellent private health care. So why are nearly 100 million of our citizens uninsured or underinsured?

You already know why: profit-driven private insurance companies. Taken together, they make the Pentagon look streamlined. Not only that, but consider over 18,000 dead and hundreds of thousands getting sicker every year specifically because their health insurance is inadequate -- or non-existent.

The way to fix health care is to cut private insurance companies out of the basic health care picture, while keeping our system of private delivery. This is how Medicare came into being in the 1960s. It now covers all Americans over 65. If we succeed in creating a system of "Medicare for All," we will help businesses and other organizations, independent contractors, veterans, people with pre-existing conditions, students -- all of us.

If we get this done, it will revolutionize all of our lives for the better. We'll be able to focus on everything else that we want to accomplish for our communities, and our nation. Passing national health insurance will be difficult, but it is achievable.

Find out how you can be a part of the movement: www.november5.org

About this Entry
Dec. 12th, 2008 @ 06:23 am Obama's response to Repower America!!!!
Current Mood: accomplished
" Thursday, December 11, 2008

Obama says to Repower America

On Tuesday something great happened. Our Chairman Al Gore met with President-elect Obama to talk about solving the climate crisis. And in his remarks Obama said now is the time to Repower America. You have already had a huge impact.

President-elect Obama said:

"...we have the opportunity now to create jobs all across this country, in all 50 states, to repower America, to redesign how we use energy, to think about how we are increasing efficiency, to make our economy stronger, make us more safe, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and make us competitive for decades to come, even as we're saving the planet."

Read more...Collapse )
About this Entry
Dec. 11th, 2008 @ 11:07 am do you think Obama really can get far to Inaguration?
... or his Illinois Dem. Comrades are going to drown him in the fecezz


About this Entry