A Rock Star Speaks Up for Kerry
I should probably talk about the swing state shows because a number of you have commented on that. The truth is we were asked to headline a set of the shows ourselves and I turned it down. This was a really tough decision for me because I happen to think this is an important moment in American history. I just couldn't do it though. I can't take another day out on the road right now....
I will tell you how I feel however. I know a lot of you get all incensed at the thought of some musician spewing out his political opinions at you. I don't care anymore.
People who don't listen to what other intelligent people have to say are simply ignorant people.
I am going to be voting for Senator Kerry. I feel that he is a serious intelligent man who will deal with the problems we are facing in a thoughtful manner. These are complex problems. They demand complex solutions. I am not one of those people who believes President Bush is an evil man. I think that's silly. I just think he views the world in terms too simplistic to combat the actual problems we are facing. And I think he puts his trust in men who view politics as a means of retaining power rather than actually solving problems.
I don't think we need people who "act tough" and project themselves as "leadership types". Leadership is not about aping John Wayne. When did it become a presidential quality to be a "regular guy"? When did intellectualism become a dirty word? I want a president who's smarter than me.
It's not enough for him to seem like a great guy to have at a BBQ.
The media would have you believe these men are good or evil or cool or uncool. They want to paint these men as trying to pull the wool over your eyes. They want you to think the people who don't agree with you are hicks or elitists or soft or tough or a million other bullshit generalizations that miss the point that these are all Americans just like you and me. We are a vast nation of many different types of people.
The other guy may not agree with everything you believe but you will never understand him if you write him off the way the media does.
I am voting for John Kerry for president. I hope you will too. If you want to convince someone to change their mind, you have to first try to understand why they believe the things they do. Reduce them to a generalization and you will never accomplish anything. That said, Rush Limbaugh is still a f**king moron.
--Adam Duritz/Counting Crows
Internet muse.
Daring, bold, never sold.
My daily weblog of politics, humor, philosophy...and a constant and nagging reminder of the existence of universal love....
Tuesday, August 17, 2004
Convention Protesters Gear Up-NYC Prepares
Convention Protesters Gear Up-NYC Prepares
Read about the Republican Convention sideshow here at WP.
Did you know that a group of labor activists plan to stage the world's longest unemployment line, from Wall Street to 31st Street and Madison Square Garden, on Sept. 1? The line will form at 8:13 a.m. and dissolve at 8:31 a.m.
Read about the Republican Convention sideshow here at WP.
Did you know that a group of labor activists plan to stage the world's longest unemployment line, from Wall Street to 31st Street and Madison Square Garden, on Sept. 1? The line will form at 8:13 a.m. and dissolve at 8:31 a.m.
Looking forward-Looking back
Looking forward-Looking back
As the GOP Convention draws near, I wanted to bring a six-month posting of mine back to light. Time has a way of ripening a pundit's thoughts, proving him/her a sage or a fool. Retrospection gives us all a new perspective and creates a straighter path to the future. Please read this dead-of-winter blogpost and give me any thoughts you have on the subject. Don't be shy.
As the GOP Convention draws near, I wanted to bring a six-month posting of mine back to light. Time has a way of ripening a pundit's thoughts, proving him/her a sage or a fool. Retrospection gives us all a new perspective and creates a straighter path to the future. Please read this dead-of-winter blogpost and give me any thoughts you have on the subject. Don't be shy.
Oil up to 47 bucks a barrel
Oil up to 47 bucks a barrel
Yukos took a turn for the worse Tuesday and oil prices are up to a record $47 bucks a barrel. The fighting between U.S. troops and Shiite militants intensified in Iraq. Saudi Arabians have said said they could immediately pump an additional 1.3 million barrels per day, but that doesn't seem to be calming nervous investors. At least the Venezuelan situation has not added fire to the fuel...I mean..fuel to the fire.
Yukos took a turn for the worse Tuesday and oil prices are up to a record $47 bucks a barrel. The fighting between U.S. troops and Shiite militants intensified in Iraq. Saudi Arabians have said said they could immediately pump an additional 1.3 million barrels per day, but that doesn't seem to be calming nervous investors. At least the Venezuelan situation has not added fire to the fuel...I mean..fuel to the fire.
Kerry:Troop withdrawal may undercut alliances
Kerry: Troop withdrawal may undercut alliances
John Kerry is expected to claim that the withdrawal of troops from Europe and Asia threatens to undercut alliances and weakens America's ability to project its power overseas.
Wesley Clark sees the withdrawl plan as a 'strategic mistake' while we're at a stand-off with a dangerous foe in North Korea and since European bases serve as “anchor points” for dealing with potential security threats in Africa, the Middle East and the Caucasus.
A message about bringing troops home is always a positive-sounding idea, but what will we use them for once they come back? Will they be shipped off to Iraq in 2006? Will they be on tap for more unnecessary unilateral strikes on nations that pose no imminent threat to us?
John Kerry is expected to claim that the withdrawal of troops from Europe and Asia threatens to undercut alliances and weakens America's ability to project its power overseas.
Wesley Clark sees the withdrawl plan as a 'strategic mistake' while we're at a stand-off with a dangerous foe in North Korea and since European bases serve as “anchor points” for dealing with potential security threats in Africa, the Middle East and the Caucasus.
A message about bringing troops home is always a positive-sounding idea, but what will we use them for once they come back? Will they be shipped off to Iraq in 2006? Will they be on tap for more unnecessary unilateral strikes on nations that pose no imminent threat to us?
WSJ wants to talk about Cambodia '68
WSJ wants to talk about Cambodia '68
Robert Pollock wishes to discuss John Kerry's assertion that he was in Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968.
Pollock says:
If it is, then bring it on. (Note: No one will die as a result of my making this macho-sounding dare).
If we're going to talk about fabrications that were material to the blood and treasure of the United Staes of America, let's talk turkey.
GW Bush never faced enemy fire a day in his life.
Dick Cheney carefully avoided Viet Nam.
Both Bush and Cheney misled Americans about the war on terror, no matter how you try to slice and dice it.
We aren't stupid and we're not blind.
After over 900 deaths in a war of sheer option, we certainly will not forget.
Americans have had a battle with our short attention spans and the media sometimes has success with politically cashing in on our societal disability.
But not this time.
Not this time.
Robert Pollock wishes to discuss John Kerry's assertion that he was in Cambodia on Christmas Eve, 1968.
Pollock says:
Does this matter? Well, if President Bush was found to be using tall tales from his National Guard days to justify his policies in the war on terror it would certainly attract some attention. So the would-be commander in chief can hardly complain of being subject to scrutiny, especially since he's joined in criticism of Mr. Bush's war record and made his own a campaign centerpiece. Never mind the anti-Kerry swiftees. So far the veteran whose testimony is doing John Kerry the most damage is . . . John Kerry.Is this the Wall Street Journal's obligatory ethical and moral equivocation for Bush's past?
If it is, then bring it on. (Note: No one will die as a result of my making this macho-sounding dare).
If we're going to talk about fabrications that were material to the blood and treasure of the United Staes of America, let's talk turkey.
GW Bush never faced enemy fire a day in his life.
Dick Cheney carefully avoided Viet Nam.
Both Bush and Cheney misled Americans about the war on terror, no matter how you try to slice and dice it.
We aren't stupid and we're not blind.
After over 900 deaths in a war of sheer option, we certainly will not forget.
Americans have had a battle with our short attention spans and the media sometimes has success with politically cashing in on our societal disability.
But not this time.
Not this time.
Silly photo
A sign invites those tortured souls in mullet-recovery, no questions asked, somewhere in the Mid-West
from: The Will to Blog
NY Times: FBI, stop intimidating free speech
NY Times:
FBI, stop intimidating free speech and go catch some real criminals
In today's N.Y. Times editorial, I was glad to see someone defending the First Amendment. Our top leadership in Washington, D.C. seems to wish to only suppress free speech. The Justice Department's use of FBI to intimidate American citizens is an abhorrent slap to the face of American freedom.
Ashcroft leads a McCarthyite witch-hunt against protesters---why am I surprised?
The FBI should go and catch some real criminals, Heaven knows there are some real bogeymen out there (especially if you heed the terror alerts that pop up every time Kerry's poll numbers go up).
I ask you: Have people like you and me--people who would express their views against many of their perverted policies-- become nothing but criminals to the Bush administration? Worthy of sucking resources away from the hunt for terrorists? Is the FBI abusing its power at the direction or with the approval of the Justice Department?
Wake up! What's going on, people?
FBI, stop intimidating free speech and go catch some real criminals
In today's N.Y. Times editorial, I was glad to see someone defending the First Amendment. Our top leadership in Washington, D.C. seems to wish to only suppress free speech. The Justice Department's use of FBI to intimidate American citizens is an abhorrent slap to the face of American freedom.
Ashcroft leads a McCarthyite witch-hunt against protesters---why am I surprised?
The FBI should go and catch some real criminals, Heaven knows there are some real bogeymen out there (especially if you heed the terror alerts that pop up every time Kerry's poll numbers go up).
I ask you: Have people like you and me--people who would express their views against many of their perverted policies-- become nothing but criminals to the Bush administration? Worthy of sucking resources away from the hunt for terrorists? Is the FBI abusing its power at the direction or with the approval of the Justice Department?
Wake up! What's going on, people?
Harkin: Chicken Cheney tough if it's others' blood
Harkin: Chicken Cheney tough if it's someone else's blood
OOOO! Iowa Senator Tom Harkin was very insensitive to have made the comment that Dick Cheney is a coward.
"When I hear this coming from Dick Cheney, who was a coward, who would not serve during the Vietnam War, it makes my blood boil. Those of us who served and those of us who went in the military don't like it when someone like a Dick Cheney comes out and he wants to be tough. Yeah, he'll be tough. He'll be tough with somebody else's blood, somebody else's kids. But not when it was his turn to go."
-Sen. Tom Harkin
OOOO! Iowa Senator Tom Harkin was very insensitive to have made the comment that Dick Cheney is a coward.
"When I hear this coming from Dick Cheney, who was a coward, who would not serve during the Vietnam War, it makes my blood boil. Those of us who served and those of us who went in the military don't like it when someone like a Dick Cheney comes out and he wants to be tough. Yeah, he'll be tough. He'll be tough with somebody else's blood, somebody else's kids. But not when it was his turn to go."
-Sen. Tom Harkin
What about McGreevey's Wife?
What about McGreevey's Wife?
As you watched N.J. Governor Jim McGreevey explain that he was a gay American last week, did you feel extremely uncomfortable for his wife? Boy, I surely did. Which leads to me this no-nonsense plea from Dan Savage in the Guardian today:
If it does nothing else, the McGreevey marriage highlights the chief absurdity of the arguments of those opposed to gay marriage: gay men can, in point of fact, get married - provided we marry women, duped or otherwise. The porousness of the sacred institution is remarkable: gay people are a threat to marriage, but gay people are encouraged to marry - indeed, we have married, under duress, for centuries, and the religious right would like us to continue to do so today - as long as our marriages are a sham. As long as we're willing to lie to ourselves, our wives, our communities, our children, and, for someone like McGreevey, our constituents. A closeted gay man like McGreevey can even marry twice and have both his marriages regarded as legitimate....If an openly gay man can get married as long as his marriage makes a mockery of what is the defining characteristic of modern marriage - romantic love - or if he marries simply because he despairs of finding a same-sex partner, what harm could possibly be done by opening marriage to the gay men who don't want to make a mockery of marriage or who can find a same-sex partner?...if the idea of a gay man married to a woman makes America uncomfortable, well, perhaps they should let us marry each other.
[LINK]
This brings me to the Log Cabin Republicans. When are these people going to wake up and smell the disgust the GOP has for them? I think they must be living in a fantasy world.
In an LA Times article, this is what one particular Log Cabin dreamer stated:
Here is the reality, from the same article:
UPDATE: McGreevey's own words
NY Times: I Still Have Work to Do
By JAMES E. McGREEVEY
Published: August 22, 2004
As you watched N.J. Governor Jim McGreevey explain that he was a gay American last week, did you feel extremely uncomfortable for his wife? Boy, I surely did. Which leads to me this no-nonsense plea from Dan Savage in the Guardian today:
If it does nothing else, the McGreevey marriage highlights the chief absurdity of the arguments of those opposed to gay marriage: gay men can, in point of fact, get married - provided we marry women, duped or otherwise. The porousness of the sacred institution is remarkable: gay people are a threat to marriage, but gay people are encouraged to marry - indeed, we have married, under duress, for centuries, and the religious right would like us to continue to do so today - as long as our marriages are a sham. As long as we're willing to lie to ourselves, our wives, our communities, our children, and, for someone like McGreevey, our constituents. A closeted gay man like McGreevey can even marry twice and have both his marriages regarded as legitimate....If an openly gay man can get married as long as his marriage makes a mockery of what is the defining characteristic of modern marriage - romantic love - or if he marries simply because he despairs of finding a same-sex partner, what harm could possibly be done by opening marriage to the gay men who don't want to make a mockery of marriage or who can find a same-sex partner?...if the idea of a gay man married to a woman makes America uncomfortable, well, perhaps they should let us marry each other.
[LINK]
This brings me to the Log Cabin Republicans. When are these people going to wake up and smell the disgust the GOP has for them? I think they must be living in a fantasy world.
In an LA Times article, this is what one particular Log Cabin dreamer stated:
"We are giving President Bush an opportunity for a Sister Souljah moment," said Christopher Barron, political director of the Log Cabin Republicans. "This is an opportunity for the president to make clear that the GOP is a big tent. If there's room in the party for free-traders and protectionists, they've got to make room for us."Sister Souljah with a simultaneous push for a constitutional amendment to "protect" marriage from those filthy gay beasts? What's wrong with that picture?
Here is the reality, from the same article:
Political observers say Bush is unlikely to accept the overture from gay Republicans for a unity plank...By advocating a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage, they say Bush has calculated that he would rather risk the votes of the estimated 1 million gays and lesbians who voted for him in 2000 than anger evangelicals who feel passionately about the issue.*A tip o'the hat to Angry Liberal
UPDATE: McGreevey's own words
NY Times: I Still Have Work to Do
By JAMES E. McGREEVEY
Published: August 22, 2004
What did Iraq Resolution really say?
What did the Iraq Resolution really say?
The Angry Liberal has some news for you...and some hard questions for president Bush.
The Angry Liberal has some news for you...and some hard questions for president Bush.
Quote: Walter Cronkite
Quote: Walter Cronkite
"I am dumbfounded that there hasn't been a crackdown with the libel and slander laws on some of these would-be writers and reporters on the Internet. I expect that to develop in the fairly near future."
--Walter Cronkite
"I am dumbfounded that there hasn't been a crackdown with the libel and slander laws on some of these would-be writers and reporters on the Internet. I expect that to develop in the fairly near future."
--Walter Cronkite
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)