John Edwards: Rises to the occasion.
Barack Obama: Fails to live up to expectations. Again.
Hillary Clinton: Stumbles.
Questions:
Why are Dennis Kucinich and Joe Biden entitled to participate in this argument, but Mike Gravel is not? Are they any more likely to win than he is? Have they had any more impact on the campaign than he has? Are their comments any more material than his? If we're going to start getting serious about these matches, shouldn't the arena be closed to all but Clinton, Edwards and Obama?*
Why was Tim Russert pimping for the Bush/Cheney policy on Iran? And kudos to the Dems for not falling for it.
Lighting Round?** No wonder the networks are losing ground; who can take them seriously? And why does someone aspiring to be the leader of the world submit to this kind of humiliation?
* Maybe we should keep Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson on the program, so we can get to know our vice president.
** If we are going to use the game show as the model for attracting ADD-hobbled viewers, why not go all the way? At the end of each episode, you phone a 900 number (at $.99 a call, the election could end up turning a profit) in the name of the contestant you least want to see again. No voting for candidates, because then the outcome would pretty much reflect the polls, with the more financially endowed campaigns paying organizers to turn out the vote. Debate 1: Biden - gone. Debate 2: Gravel - gone. Debate 3: Kucinich - gone. Debate 4: Dodd - gone. Debate 5- Richardson - gone. Now it gets interesting. Debate 6: Where will the fans of the palookas already eliminated land? Do you try to motivate your supporters to call in against your stronger rival? How do you do that without attracting negative calls yourself? And who really is your strongest competitor, anyway? Finally, Debate 7: One contestant goes home in tears with a bouquet of roses; the other moves on to the next round, bound to be a highlight of the fall 2008 tv viewing season. It would be better than Big Brother.
2008: John Kerry was "inevitable," too
"I want to see if John Edwards will say to Hillary Clinton in front of everyone: 'You're not electable, and you know it, and you're going to hurt people down the ballot.' It's time to stop whispering. It's getting to be midnight." -- Democratic strategist Donna Brazille.
The rest of the story: The Philadelphia Inquirer.
The rest of the story: The Philadelphia Inquirer.
Red Cross volunteer information
The American Red Cross of Santa Monica has responded to the brush fires in Malibu and other Southern California communities by making training available for new disaster workers, among other activities. It has already placed staff and volunteers in fire-struck areas, but more help is needed throughout Los Angeles, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Volunteers who have had no formal American Red Cross disaster training must take two 3-hour classes, in Mass Care and Shelter Operations, before they can take part in a relief operation. Classes will be held Thursday, October 25; Tuesday, Saturday, October 27; Tuesday, October 30 and Thursday, Nov 1st at the Santa Monica chapter at 1450 11th Street in Santa Monica. Call 310-394-6571 for the class schedules, times, registration and other information.
Persons who have taken these classes previously, such as after Hurricane Katrina, are still eligible for "disaster duty." Those wishing to go out to a brush fire location and volunteer should call the Santa Monica chapter at 310-394-3773 and ask to sign up.
The Santa Monica chapter is located at 1450 11th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; 310-394-3773.
Persons who have taken these classes previously, such as after Hurricane Katrina, are still eligible for "disaster duty." Those wishing to go out to a brush fire location and volunteer should call the Santa Monica chapter at 310-394-3773 and ask to sign up.
The Santa Monica chapter is located at 1450 11th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; 310-394-3773.
Why isn't John Edwards standing higher in the polls?
As I travel about the country, I ask nearly everyone I meet whom they support for president. Nearly universally, the answer is John Edwards. Admittedly, though it includes cab drivers and baggage handlers and bank tellers and real estate agents and baristas and people in queues of every kind, this sample is small and unscientific. Still, as you look at the polls, you have to wonder why the former U.S. Senator and vice-presidential candidate isn't the favorite. I think there are at least eight reasons.
1) His narrative doesn't suit the needs of the media: "John Edwards To Be 44th White Male President" can't match the "Hillary Clinton To Be First Woman President" and "Barack Obama To Be First Black President" story lines.
2) Barack Obama's presence has altered the dynamics of the campaign in Clinton's favor. His vaporous politics has offered Clinton cloud cover. If the Illinois senator weren't in the race, the contrasting visions of America's future being offered -- New Deal populism vs corporations über Alles -- would stand in clearer contrast; the media narrative would be "can idealism and bold ideas beat money;" the romantics in the party would have to make some hard choices, instead of patting themselves on the back for backing the black guy; and Clinton would be unable to position herself above the fray -- she must feel as lucky as Mary Chapin Carpenter: "Hey, Lyle. Hey, Dwight. C'mon, boys, you don't have to fight" -- and would be subjected to tougher scrutiny.
3) And partly as a corollary to 2), Edwards has a fraction of the money available to his two rivals, reducing his ability to present his case and making it harder to compete everywhere.
4) The front-loading of the primaries has given the moneyed candidates an even bigger edge than they already had (a similar dynamic on the GOP side hurts Mike Huckabee's dark-horse strategy).
5) As the only liberal with a chance of being president, when Edwards does get attention from the corporate media, he is frequently treated negatively.
6) Edwards has run a solid, issues-oriented campaign, but he hasn't played sufficiently to his strengths, especially "the only real Democrat" and "the Happy Warrior." Also, and this is ironic, with enough money, he could have made his "log cabin" narrative as compelling as the "first woman" and "first black" fairy tales.
7) Hillary Clinton has run a disciplined campaign, so far, undistracted by boldness or originality.
8) Most important: the fix is in. In 1992, the corporations wanted Bill Clinton. The big money poured into his campaign, and the media helped him ignore or mitigate a series of scandals and embarrassments, while they diminished his Democratic opponents in the primaries and ridiculed and belittled George the First in the general election. The same is happening now: it is clear from the pattern of contributions that the corporate interests see Hillary Clinton as the most reliable aspirant for the job, and from her speeches and policy proposals it is evident that she is happy to be their champion.
The odds are pretty long on an Edwards victory today, but politics is a volatile game. There is a lot of good will towards him in the party; party activists vote in the primaries out of all proportion to their numbers; Clinton could stumble; the peace movement could wake up to the fact that the New York senator is another run-of-the-mill politician in service to the empire; the unions could decide that another Democratic retainer on the payroll of capital might not be the best advocate for the interests of labor; and the demand for change could overwhelm the battlements of the status quo, at last.
It ain't over 'til the fat lady votes.
[For comments on this post, visit John Edwards Blog.]
1) His narrative doesn't suit the needs of the media: "John Edwards To Be 44th White Male President" can't match the "Hillary Clinton To Be First Woman President" and "Barack Obama To Be First Black President" story lines.
2) Barack Obama's presence has altered the dynamics of the campaign in Clinton's favor. His vaporous politics has offered Clinton cloud cover. If the Illinois senator weren't in the race, the contrasting visions of America's future being offered -- New Deal populism vs corporations über Alles -- would stand in clearer contrast; the media narrative would be "can idealism and bold ideas beat money;" the romantics in the party would have to make some hard choices, instead of patting themselves on the back for backing the black guy; and Clinton would be unable to position herself above the fray -- she must feel as lucky as Mary Chapin Carpenter: "Hey, Lyle. Hey, Dwight. C'mon, boys, you don't have to fight" -- and would be subjected to tougher scrutiny.
3) And partly as a corollary to 2), Edwards has a fraction of the money available to his two rivals, reducing his ability to present his case and making it harder to compete everywhere.
4) The front-loading of the primaries has given the moneyed candidates an even bigger edge than they already had (a similar dynamic on the GOP side hurts Mike Huckabee's dark-horse strategy).
5) As the only liberal with a chance of being president, when Edwards does get attention from the corporate media, he is frequently treated negatively.
6) Edwards has run a solid, issues-oriented campaign, but he hasn't played sufficiently to his strengths, especially "the only real Democrat" and "the Happy Warrior." Also, and this is ironic, with enough money, he could have made his "log cabin" narrative as compelling as the "first woman" and "first black" fairy tales.
7) Hillary Clinton has run a disciplined campaign, so far, undistracted by boldness or originality.
8) Most important: the fix is in. In 1992, the corporations wanted Bill Clinton. The big money poured into his campaign, and the media helped him ignore or mitigate a series of scandals and embarrassments, while they diminished his Democratic opponents in the primaries and ridiculed and belittled George the First in the general election. The same is happening now: it is clear from the pattern of contributions that the corporate interests see Hillary Clinton as the most reliable aspirant for the job, and from her speeches and policy proposals it is evident that she is happy to be their champion.
The odds are pretty long on an Edwards victory today, but politics is a volatile game. There is a lot of good will towards him in the party; party activists vote in the primaries out of all proportion to their numbers; Clinton could stumble; the peace movement could wake up to the fact that the New York senator is another run-of-the-mill politician in service to the empire; the unions could decide that another Democratic retainer on the payroll of capital might not be the best advocate for the interests of labor; and the demand for change could overwhelm the battlements of the status quo, at last.
It ain't over 'til the fat lady votes.
[For comments on this post, visit John Edwards Blog.]
2008: Giuliani -- Cynical...Or Nuts?
Not being able to tell where pandering leaves off and self-parody begins, Rudy Giuliani, who only days ago promised to keep us safe from space invaders, has now advocated that blind people be allowed to carry guns. What's next, drivers' licenses? Found on Gun Guys ("Where everybody's a straight shooter"): Giuliani: Blind should be able to carry guns
Links: Southern California Wildfire Resources
Senator Barbara Boxer has put together links to Southern California Wildfire Resources:
<http://boxer.senate.gov/calfire.cfm>
<http://boxer.senate.gov/calfire.cfm>
2008: Déjà vu all over again?
This agonizingly protracted and criminally costly nominating process might have been worth enduring if 
it came down at last to a contest between John Edwards-Bill Richardson and Mike Huckabee-Chuck Hagel. Such a competition would be issues-oriented and civil out of all proportion to our custom, with the American voter getting to decide between clear and contrasting visions of the nation's future. 
Instead, we appear to be headed for another race between Tweedledum and Tweedledee, played this political season by Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, and we can expect the campaign to be muddled and brutish in the manner to which we are so painfully habituated, with an outcome unlikely to disturb the rest of even the lightest sleeper in the luxuriant bed of the status quo.
it came down at last to a contest between John Edwards-Bill Richardson and Mike Huckabee-Chuck Hagel. Such a competition would be issues-oriented and civil out of all proportion to our custom, with the American voter getting to decide between clear and contrasting visions of the nation's future. Instead, we appear to be headed for another race between Tweedledum and Tweedledee, played this political season by Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, and we can expect the campaign to be muddled and brutish in the manner to which we are so painfully habituated, with an outcome unlikely to disturb the rest of even the lightest sleeper in the luxuriant bed of the status quo.
Social Contract: Income-Inequality Gap Widens; Highest Since 1920's
Greg Ip of The Wall Street Journal reports, "The richest Americans' share of national income has hit a postwar record, surpassing the highs reached in the 1990s bull market, and underlining the divergence of economic fortunes blamed for fueling anxiety among American workers."
The rest of the story: The Wall Street Journal
See also, "As Logging Fades, Rich Carve Up Open Land in West": The New York Times
See also, "new gilded age": Google
The rest of the story: The Wall Street Journal
See also, "As Logging Fades, Rich Carve Up Open Land in West": The New York Times
See also, "new gilded age": Google
quote unquote: Aristotle on the last refuge of scoundrels
A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider God-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move against him, wrongly believing that he has the Gods on his side. -- Aristotle: Politica
2008: Romney, Clinton health care plans similar, say the experts
Those of us who argue that the Hillary Clinton administration, should it come to be, will be a continuation of the Reagan-Bush I-Clinton I policies -- militarist, corporatist, anti-middle class -- have new evidence in Hillary's vaunted "universal" health insurance plan, like the proposal she backed during Bill Clinton's term, essentially health care for insurance companies.
Mitt Romney loves to take swipes at Democratic front-runner Clinton, Reuters says, calling her plan, which would require every American to have health insurance, "European-style socialized medicine" inspired by "European bureaucracies."
But experts say Clinton's plan borrows heavily from one Romney signed into law when he was governor of Massachusetts, making the state the first in the nation with near-universal health insurance.
"Hillary's plan is just like the Massachusetts plan. There's not a whole lot of difference," says Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics professor who was an adviser to Romney on the state's health care reform law.
And, what do you know, as it did with the Bill Clinton campaign, corporate money is flooding Senator Clinton's coffers. Perhaps it won't come as a complete surprise to the Hillary-the-inevitable crowd, then, when progressives, labor activists and the peace movement start shopping around for a third party alternative a year from now.
The rest of the story: Reuters
See, also: Are Clinton, Obama, Edwards All The Same?: Despite What Fans Say, Differences Between Top Three Dems Aren't Clear by Katha Pollitt
Mitt Romney loves to take swipes at Democratic front-runner Clinton, Reuters says, calling her plan, which would require every American to have health insurance, "European-style socialized medicine" inspired by "European bureaucracies."
But experts say Clinton's plan borrows heavily from one Romney signed into law when he was governor of Massachusetts, making the state the first in the nation with near-universal health insurance.
"Hillary's plan is just like the Massachusetts plan. There's not a whole lot of difference," says Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics professor who was an adviser to Romney on the state's health care reform law.
And, what do you know, as it did with the Bill Clinton campaign, corporate money is flooding Senator Clinton's coffers. Perhaps it won't come as a complete surprise to the Hillary-the-inevitable crowd, then, when progressives, labor activists and the peace movement start shopping around for a third party alternative a year from now.
The rest of the story: Reuters
See, also: Are Clinton, Obama, Edwards All The Same?: Despite What Fans Say, Differences Between Top Three Dems Aren't Clear by Katha Pollitt
2008: Another Bullet Dodged -- Gingrich Won’t Run
Plus, Clinton votes for another war
The Speaker has chickened out after all. Good for the republic if not for the Republicans. With the GOP bench so shallow and his ego so wide, it must be breaking his heart not to be in the race. Probably thinks he can afford to wait four years, then run as the antiwar candidate against President Clinton.
So is that it?: Fred Thompson vs Hillary Clinton? Oy.
At least the Mike Huckabee-Bill Richardson vice presidential debate will be fun.
Although she has run an obsessively controlled campaign so far, there is still plenty of time for Sen. Clinton to stumble, especially if she is as close to lunacy as she appears in the clips The Daily Show pieced together last Tuesday of her wildly inappropriate cackling during her talk show marathon the weekend before. Apparently, her handlers think a laugh track will make her appear more human. Maybe it would have gone better if they hadn't given her that Chucky doll to practice with.
Ever the advocate of executive power, the junior senator from New York voted this week for the mischievous Lieberman-Kyle amendment -- the dybbuk from Connecticut must be feeling especially clever right now -- that Sen. Jim Webb characterized as "Cheney’s fondest pipe dream" and "a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action" against Iran (see, Debunking the Neocons' Iran War Measure by Gareth Porter, Huffington Post 2007-09-27).
Just for the record, Lieberman-Kyle passed by a disheartening 76-22 (go here for the roll call of dysfunction). Barack Obama conveniently was MIA on this tally, so he'll be off the hook no matter how it all turns out: he can criticize Clinton if things go badly in Iran; or knock Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, who voted no -- along with Richardson and John Edwards, who came out strongly against the resolution -- in the unlikely event that the contretemps somehow ends well for the United States. The very junior senator from Illinois has advocated missile attacks on Iran and Pakistan in the past, but since the idea of another preemptive war can't be sitting too well with his Hollywood funders, he's showing good sense in not dwelling on the issue now (he did release a post-facto statement saying he would have voted against the amendment had he troubled himself to be there).
Also, while we're on the subject, Sen. Diane Feinstein voted aye, too. Probably hopes another war will be good for topping off hubby's already bulging coffers. Those people who decry earmarks should reconsider: they are far less costly -- in lives, capital and national reputation -- than military action at privatizing tax dollars. (If you're in the mood, call Feinstein and Clinton and let them know how you feel about their enabling another war: Feinstein 202-224-3841 and Clinton 202-224-4451.)
The "movement" is particularly smug about the vote, thinking it's responsible for softening the language in the amendment, but textual subtleties won't stop Bush or his successor from using the legislation as authorization for another Mideast war.
But I digress.
About the Speaker, I am pleased to have been wrong:
The rest of the story: The New York Times
The Speaker has chickened out after all. Good for the republic if not for the Republicans. With the GOP bench so shallow and his ego so wide, it must be breaking his heart not to be in the race. Probably thinks he can afford to wait four years, then run as the antiwar candidate against President Clinton.
So is that it?: Fred Thompson vs Hillary Clinton? Oy.
At least the Mike Huckabee-Bill Richardson vice presidential debate will be fun.
Although she has run an obsessively controlled campaign so far, there is still plenty of time for Sen. Clinton to stumble, especially if she is as close to lunacy as she appears in the clips The Daily Show pieced together last Tuesday of her wildly inappropriate cackling during her talk show marathon the weekend before. Apparently, her handlers think a laugh track will make her appear more human. Maybe it would have gone better if they hadn't given her that Chucky doll to practice with.
Ever the advocate of executive power, the junior senator from New York voted this week for the mischievous Lieberman-Kyle amendment -- the dybbuk from Connecticut must be feeling especially clever right now -- that Sen. Jim Webb characterized as "Cheney’s fondest pipe dream" and "a backdoor method of gaining Congressional validation for military action" against Iran (see, Debunking the Neocons' Iran War Measure by Gareth Porter, Huffington Post 2007-09-27).
Just for the record, Lieberman-Kyle passed by a disheartening 76-22 (go here for the roll call of dysfunction). Barack Obama conveniently was MIA on this tally, so he'll be off the hook no matter how it all turns out: he can criticize Clinton if things go badly in Iran; or knock Chris Dodd and Joe Biden, who voted no -- along with Richardson and John Edwards, who came out strongly against the resolution -- in the unlikely event that the contretemps somehow ends well for the United States. The very junior senator from Illinois has advocated missile attacks on Iran and Pakistan in the past, but since the idea of another preemptive war can't be sitting too well with his Hollywood funders, he's showing good sense in not dwelling on the issue now (he did release a post-facto statement saying he would have voted against the amendment had he troubled himself to be there).
Also, while we're on the subject, Sen. Diane Feinstein voted aye, too. Probably hopes another war will be good for topping off hubby's already bulging coffers. Those people who decry earmarks should reconsider: they are far less costly -- in lives, capital and national reputation -- than military action at privatizing tax dollars. (If you're in the mood, call Feinstein and Clinton and let them know how you feel about their enabling another war: Feinstein 202-224-3841 and Clinton 202-224-4451.)
The "movement" is particularly smug about the vote, thinking it's responsible for softening the language in the amendment, but textual subtleties won't stop Bush or his successor from using the legislation as authorization for another Mideast war.
But I digress.
About the Speaker, I am pleased to have been wrong:
by Sarah Wheaton (NYTimes, 2007- 09-29)Citizen activist. Love it.
Newt Gingrich has sent so many hints pointing in so many different directions that we’re dizzy trying to follow them all. But now, it appears, he’s made up his mind.
Rick Tyler, Mr. Gingrich’s spokesman, confirmed today that the former Republican House speaker has decided against a presidential run in 2008.
Mr. Gingrich was “presented with legal advice this morning,” said Mr. Tyler in a quick phone interview. “There was a choice presented.”
The choice was to remain chairman of his political action committee, American Solutions, or to allow advisers to move forward with an exploratory committee. But he could not, legally, do both, Mr. Tyler explained.
“So Mr. Gingrich made a choice to remain a citizen activist,” he said.
The rest of the story: The New York Times
Politics: One legislator, one vote?
Here's a fun video of the Texas ledge in action. The issue of proxy voting is more complex and probably less sinister than this breathless local CBS "expose" makes it sound, of course, but it's fun to watch nonetheless.
Although, it does raise a question: how many representatives would need to be present to hold a vote of the full body?
One?
Although, it does raise a question: how many representatives would need to be present to hold a vote of the full body?
One?
The Coast: In Beach Enclave, Affluent Are Split Over Effluent
By Regan Morris (New York Times, 2007-09-25)
RINCON POINT, Calif. — Septic tanks or sewers? The question of how to treat wastewater in this exclusive beachfront community is pitting neighbors, surfers and environmentalists against one another.
Sewers would cost residents like Brook Harvey-Taylor and her husband, Billy, who oppose them, about $80,000 per home.
Surfers have long complained about getting sick at the world-class surf break here that straddles Ventura and Santa Barbara Counties. And blame for the pollution has long been laid on the septic tanks of the multimillion-dollar homes in the gated enclave of Rincon Point.
After nine years of debate and several lawsuits, homeowners are to vote next month on whether to convert from the tanks to a sewer system. While most residents appear to back the conversion, a vocal group of residents is questioning its wisdom, with several saying they feel bullied into paying for an expensive system that would only encourage more development and more pollution.
“There is no evidence that our septic tanks are polluting anything,” said a homeowner, Billy Taylor, who with his wife, Brook Harvey-Taylor, is a surfer and an outspoken opponent. “Are we cleaning up the ocean? Or are we just moving our waste into another part of the ocean?”
The rest of the story: The New York Times.
RINCON POINT, Calif. — Septic tanks or sewers? The question of how to treat wastewater in this exclusive beachfront community is pitting neighbors, surfers and environmentalists against one another.
Sewers would cost residents like Brook Harvey-Taylor and her husband, Billy, who oppose them, about $80,000 per home.
Surfers have long complained about getting sick at the world-class surf break here that straddles Ventura and Santa Barbara Counties. And blame for the pollution has long been laid on the septic tanks of the multimillion-dollar homes in the gated enclave of Rincon Point.
After nine years of debate and several lawsuits, homeowners are to vote next month on whether to convert from the tanks to a sewer system. While most residents appear to back the conversion, a vocal group of residents is questioning its wisdom, with several saying they feel bullied into paying for an expensive system that would only encourage more development and more pollution.
“There is no evidence that our septic tanks are polluting anything,” said a homeowner, Billy Taylor, who with his wife, Brook Harvey-Taylor, is a surfer and an outspoken opponent. “Are we cleaning up the ocean? Or are we just moving our waste into another part of the ocean?”
The rest of the story: The New York Times.
Will the Democrats Betray Us?
"...no confidence.
"Last week Democrats often earned that rating, especially those running for president. It is true that they do not have the votes to overcome a Bush veto of any war legislation. But that doesn't mean the Democrats have to go on holiday. Few used their time to cross-examine General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker on their disingenuous talking points, choosing instead to regurgitate stump sentiments or ask uncoordinated, redundant questions. It's telling that the one question that drew blood - are we safer? - was asked by a Republican, John Warner, who is retiring from the Senate." -- Frank Rich, Will the Democrats Betray Us? (New York Times, 2007-09-16)
"Last week Democrats often earned that rating, especially those running for president. It is true that they do not have the votes to overcome a Bush veto of any war legislation. But that doesn't mean the Democrats have to go on holiday. Few used their time to cross-examine General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker on their disingenuous talking points, choosing instead to regurgitate stump sentiments or ask uncoordinated, redundant questions. It's telling that the one question that drew blood - are we safer? - was asked by a Republican, John Warner, who is retiring from the Senate." -- Frank Rich, Will the Democrats Betray Us? (New York Times, 2007-09-16)
Republican and Democratic Political Machines: undemocratic and unfair
The romance of the Obama campaign has muddied the waters somewhat, but finally the primaries come down to this: the cult of personality vs issues politics, "winning" vs governing, business as usual vs progressive policy, the corporatist "centrism" of the DNC vs Democratic (and democratic) values, the status quo vs a "new deal" for the American people: Hillary Clinton vs John Edwards. -- JG
John Edwards, Standing up to corruption, cronyism and modern day money changers.
by Karita Hummer
Among the most inspiring elements in the John Edwards campaign is his insistence on the reigning in of Lobbyist influence and putting the brakes on corruption, cronyism and insider influence and unfair bottom line practices by some corporations to the detriment of the common good (such as outsourcing, tax shelters, unfair loans. bankruptcy, pollution, etc.)
When I heard him speak last December in Santa Clara, before he declared his candidacy, John Edwards rightly said that it wouldn't due to trade unfair Republican election practices with Democratic election practices that kept the status quo. In other words, in all things, be as principled in our own matters as we expect of the Republicans in theirs.
The corruption, cronyism and rampant favoritism to certain corporations in the Bush Administration is almost without parallel in the history of our national politics. The Bush/Cheney/Rovian political machine has been incomparably efficient in only two areas, putting cronies in place and keeping Republican criticism and nay defection to a bare minimum, and they have been mean-spirited and ruthless. It's as if the ghost of old Tammany Hall (New York City) descended in the White House and took hold throughout government on a national level.
But, if we really want reform, if we really want the common good to be the new bottom line for America, like John Edwards says, we can not trade their corrupt machine for ours. We must rid the Democratic Party of its own tendencies toward machine politics, corruption, cronyism, and the money changers in our government - including no nights in the Lincoln Bedroom for high rollers orchestrated by Republican or Democratic machines.
Enough is enough - of the lobbyists and campaign finance high rollers/money changers in our government. Squeaky clean, fair and transparent is the way to go.
This is how Wikipedia describes a political machine:
"A political machine is an unofficial system of a political organization based on patronage, the spoils system, "behind-the-scenes" control, and longstanding political ties within the structure of a representative democracy. Machines sometimes have a boss, and always have a long-term corps of dedicated workers who depend on the patronage generated by government contracts and jobs. Machine politics has existed in many United States cities, especially between about 1875 and 1950, but continuing in some cases down to the present day. It is also common (under the name clientelism or political clientelism) in Latin America, especially in rural areas, and also in some African states and other emerging democracies, like postcommunist Eastern European countries. Japan's Liberal Democratic Party is often cited as another political machine, maintaining power in suburban and rural areas through its control of farm bureaus and road construction agencies. (American Journey, 2005)
The key to a political machine is patronage: holding public office implies the ability to do favors (and also the ability to profit from graft). Political machines generally steer away from issue-based politics, favoring a quid pro quo (something for something) with certain aspects of a barter economy or gift economy: the patron or "boss" does favors for the constituents, who then vote as they are told to. Sometimes this system of favors is supplemented by threats of violence or harassment toward those who attempt to step outside of it." <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_m achine>
While political machine approaches do have their admirers (it gets work done efficiently, so some say), by and large, the systems are stifling, reduce creativity and increase a sense of dis-empowerment in the governed. Such systems are usually antithetical to participatory democracy.
I grew up as a child in Pittsburgh,PA. Machine politics was part and parcel of the political fare for the community. It felt oppressive and authoritarian and corrupt. It wasn't until Pete Flaherty was elected Mayor of Pittsburgh, PA, in 1969 did one feel a sense of real citizen empowerment and potential.
And get this, about Pete Flaherty, now deceased, who stood up to the Democratic machine of the city of that era:
"Mr. Flaherty, though outspent by a margin of more than 4 to 1, nonetheless cruised to a landslide victory in the 1969 election, launching an administration that would permanently transform Pittsburgh government." By James O'Toole, "Obituary: Pete Flaherty dies at 80, Former mayor and county commissioner", Tuesday, April 19, 2005 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette <http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05109/490 421.stm>.
So, did you catch that number, outspent by a margin of 4 to 1. (OK, everyone, remember those numbers and take heart!)
So, what am I getting at. I guess it's quite obvious that I am concerned about the seemingly machine like approach to Hillary Clinton's campaign, which would seem to translate in to the type of governance one could expect from her (if she could even get elected which I highly do doubt). The feeling I have about this is based on her attitude toward lobbyist campaign money and other high roller money (even from Murdoch), her seeming inability listen to people and her sense of entitlement to the presidency, based on her insider status.
Altogether, it gives me a feeling of authoritarianism and elitism, that feels antithetical to our best principles in the Party.
We don't need Machine Politics, from either the Republicans or the Democrats. We do need a Democrat who can stand up to the corrupting influences in our government today and say, "No, we aren't going to do business that way anymore. We are going to have a new bottom line, which is the common good - and there is no compromising on that."
That Democrat is John Edwards.
Defense of Lobbyists is old politics and throwing the money changers out is new politics. We need reform for our Country and reform for our Party. The old way doesn't work.
Karita Hummer
San Jose, CA
Reposted from John Edwards Blog:
Republican and Democratic Political Machines: undemocratic and unfair
The Dems and Iraq: Confusing "can't" with "won't"
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting makes the point that, "Following a pattern set when Congress passed supplemental funding for the Iraq War last May, major media outlets continued to 'explain' the politics of the war in incomplete and misleading ways....Congress does not have to pass legislation to bring an end to the war in Iraq - it simply has to block passage of any bill that would continue to fund the war. This requires not 67 or 60 Senate votes, or even 51, but just 41....the Democrats have more than enough votes to end the Iraq War - if they choose to do so."
The rest of the story: Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting
The rest of the story: Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting
2008: Just the Facts
FactCheck.org has done yeoman work in service of the idea of an informed voting public. Now, it will no longer need to soldier on alone. PolitiFact.com has announced that it also will pan for truth in the stream of 2008 presidential rhetoric. The St. Petersburg Times and Congressional Quarterly have teamed to produce the new site, offering among other services a "truth-o-meter" that rates statements by the candidates for president on a scale from "true" through "half true" to "pants on fire." The site is organized well, the writing is crisp and to the point, and sources are hyperlinked where appropriate. Users can browse the commentaries by candidate or ad sponsor, by issue, by truth-o-meter ruling and, in the case of attack ads, by who is attacking whom. Twenty-one researchers, writers and editors from the periodicals have been assigned to the project. Both companies are affiliates of the Times Publishing Company, which is owned by the Poynter Institute, a center for journalism education in St. Pete.
quote unquote: Hume on Patriotism and Tyranny
Mankind are, in all ages, caught by the same baits: 
The same tricks, played over and over again, still trepan them. The heights of popularity and patriotism are still the beaten road to power and tyranny; flattery to treachery; standing armies to arbitrary government; and the glory of God to the temporal interest of the clergy. – David Hume, “Of Public Credit,” Essays Moral, Political and Literary (1754)
The same tricks, played over and over again, still trepan them. The heights of popularity and patriotism are still the beaten road to power and tyranny; flattery to treachery; standing armies to arbitrary government; and the glory of God to the temporal interest of the clergy. – David Hume, “Of Public Credit,” Essays Moral, Political and Literary (1754)
Politics: Emanuel and Schumer protected the conservative domination of Congress in 2006
Progressive complaints about the failure of the Democratic majority to end the occupation of Iraq are based on a misunderstanding of what happened in the 2006 elections. A majority of Americans did not vote to end the war. As an article on Truthout makes clear, they were never given that choice (Democratic House Officials Recruited Wealthy Conservatives by Matt Renner; 2007-09-06).
But on Iraq, there has been no sellout by anti-war Democrats. In fact, considering the conservative makeup of the Congress, Pelosi, Reid, et al, have done a remarkable job of moving the peace process along. The peace movement needs to keep up the pressure to bring more members of Congress to its side. Charges of "betrayal" and "cowardice" against potential Democratic allies are not only inaccurate, they also make putting together a Congressional majority in favor of getting out of Iraq more difficult.
The rest of the story: Truthout.Org
According to Democratic candidates who ran for House of Representative seats in 2006, Rahm Emanuel, then head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, took sides during the Democratic primary elections, favoring conservative candidates, including former Republicans, and sidelining candidates who were running in favor of withdrawal from Iraq.If the Democrats have a clear mandate, it is to put an end to the corruption that became pervasive in the legislature and the executive under Republican control. And in so far as the expectation of a cleanup in Washington has gone largely unfulfilled, the voters are right to be angry and disillusioned.
Appointed as head of the DCCC by then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Emanuel spearheaded the Democratic Party effort to regain control of the House of Representatives during the 2006 election cycle. Emanuel claimed credit for the Democratic takeover and was promoted to chairman of the Democratic Caucus, the fourth-highest ranking position in the House. But his election tactics have been criticized by progressive activists and former Congressional candidates.
According to his critics, Emanuel played kingmaker by financially supporting his favored candidates during primary contests with other Democrats. His critics say that this interference was in direct contradiction of a DCCC policy to "remain neutral" in party primaries....
How Emanuel came to his decisions about which candidates to support against Democratic opponents is known only to Emanuel and his staff....But an examination of individual races reveals a pattern of financial and political support for wealthy conservative candidates and an assault on their grassroots-supported opponents who were running on platforms that included a full withdrawal of US forces from Iraq.
But on Iraq, there has been no sellout by anti-war Democrats. In fact, considering the conservative makeup of the Congress, Pelosi, Reid, et al, have done a remarkable job of moving the peace process along. The peace movement needs to keep up the pressure to bring more members of Congress to its side. Charges of "betrayal" and "cowardice" against potential Democratic allies are not only inaccurate, they also make putting together a Congressional majority in favor of getting out of Iraq more difficult.
The rest of the story: Truthout.Org
Our diminished realm: A few belated thoughts about Max Roach
I was in New York when Max Roach died, and both the local jazz stations -- imagine, a locale with two legitimate jazz outlets -- both stations spent the following week offering tributes that consisted largely of playing samples from the master's remarkable output: Roach was a teacher and civil rights activist, but he was in the end the most remarkable artist ever to choose the drums to express himself.
He was a driving force in the founding of bebop, and it is hard to
think of an artist who was more important in the last half of the 20th century. My own favorite records are those he cut in the 50s with the peerless trumpet player Clifford Brown -- I'd guess the music you encounter when you are a sophomore is always the best, but I can't think of a single instance of hearing Roach play in my adult life that didn't grab my attention.
And that's just as he intended. He once told Stanley Crouch that he worked so hard at the lucidity of his solos -- and every artist will recognize the truth of this -- in pursuit of two things: to teach the audience to follow his mind as he played, and to attract the interest of the ladies in the house.
I hope you spent the last week immersed in the music of Max Roach; there will never be a time when he won't entertain and enlighten us. But for an epitaph, I leave you with his own words: "I am an American and the drum set is one of the few instruments native to this country. This is a democratic nation and jazz is a democratic music in which we all express ourselves as individuals and cooperate for the overall good. That's good enough for the bandstand and it is good enough for the world. In music, you can make a dream come to life as a reality of design and feeling. Democracy is a dream of being able to do it better someday. I have never stopped dreaming."
Max Roach and Clifford Brown
He was a driving force in the founding of bebop, and it is hard to
think of an artist who was more important in the last half of the 20th century. My own favorite records are those he cut in the 50s with the peerless trumpet player Clifford Brown -- I'd guess the music you encounter when you are a sophomore is always the best, but I can't think of a single instance of hearing Roach play in my adult life that didn't grab my attention. And that's just as he intended. He once told Stanley Crouch that he worked so hard at the lucidity of his solos -- and every artist will recognize the truth of this -- in pursuit of two things: to teach the audience to follow his mind as he played, and to attract the interest of the ladies in the house.
I hope you spent the last week immersed in the music of Max Roach; there will never be a time when he won't entertain and enlighten us. But for an epitaph, I leave you with his own words: "I am an American and the drum set is one of the few instruments native to this country. This is a democratic nation and jazz is a democratic music in which we all express ourselves as individuals and cooperate for the overall good. That's good enough for the bandstand and it is good enough for the world. In music, you can make a dream come to life as a reality of design and feeling. Democracy is a dream of being able to do it better someday. I have never stopped dreaming."
Max Roach and Clifford Brown
Scientific Evidence of the Health and Fitness Benefits of Hot Tubs
“Not only does swimming slow down the aging process – by upwards of 20% in some cases -- in terms of respiration, muscle mass, bone density, cardiovascular activity and neurological function, but there’s also evidence to suggest that it increases mental health and even spiritual and social health.” -- Dr. Joel M. Stager, Medical Director, St. Luke’s Rehabilitation Institute, Spokane Washington
DIMENSION ONE SPAS AQUATIC EXERCISE MACHINE FOR THE HOME
16 TO 19 ft Swim-in-Place Workout Pool Offers Multi-Taskers Multi Benefits Making the Most of Exercise Space and Time
What is more efficient than a swimming pool, more sophisticated than a hot tub and safer than a backyard playground? Dimension One Spa’s revolutionary Aquatic Fitness Systems® is an aquatic exercise machine for the backyard where you can safely swim, walk, run, stretch, row, strength train and relax!
The line’s flagship model -- the AquaFit® 19 Dual Temp – is the ultimate hybrid of fitness and hydrotherapy.
This unique 19-foot high-tech tub makes it possible to swim stationary laps; row for a robust upper body and arm workout; attach specially designed bands for resistance training; run or jog in place for cardiovascular conditioning – all in cooler water. Then when your routine is done, muscles can be soothed with a relaxing hydrotherapy body massage in the hot tub section of the pool. This watery workout is an ideal environment for low impact exercises to tone, shape and enhance flexibility, while the body is suspended in buoyant security. Ideal for weekend warriors; aging boomers; overweight exercisers and athletes needing rehabilitation, D1 offers three models of the pool -- the AFS 16, 19 and 19 DT – and their retail price ranges from $29,000 to $39,000.
Superior to a traditional “swim spa” because of its multiple functions and sophisticated design, the AFS has garnered substantial industry recognition. The Society of Plastic Engineers granted the AFS a “People’s Choice Award,” Consumer’s Digest designated the AFS the “Best Buy in Portable Spas” in the Premium Products Category and the Robb Report included the pool in a “Best of” issue.
Effective and efficient, the D1 Spa’s AFS swim spa takes up less space than a conventional pool and can be installed inside or outside the home. The pool’s
Ultralife slip-resistant interior is surrounded by a durable, all-weather exterior, making the tub adaptable to either above ground or below ground installation. High volume swim jets are positioned to provide lift as well as current. The 100% insulated tub uses a stainless steal heater—the most reliable on the market – providing optimal heat recovery and lower energy consumption. And, pure, clean water year-round is easily achieved with an E-Z Lock filter cartridge and the ozone purification system, allowing the owner to use fewer chemicals than most competitive products.
Mary E. Sanders, PhD Professor at the University of Nevada’s School of Medicine and Public Health is known in fitness circles as the “water fitness guru.” The research her team has done with groups of aquatic exercisers over the years underscores the fact that water can be used as a liquid weight machine with unique benefits. “Water’s buoyancy reduces impact and supports the body for increased range of motion,” she explains. “And, the natural resistance of water (the harder you press the harder, the water presses back) provides an individualized personal training environment. Water’s viscosity or “thickness” -- being about 800 times greater than air – makes it an effective exercise environment in which to build muscular endurance. And using resistance tethers, like those featured in the AFS pool, provides additional core stabilization work.”
D1’s founder, Bob Hallam, is clear about his target market for AFS: “Baby boomers are the most health & lifestyle conscious group of people in history. They spend more on working out, plastic surgery, health care and vacations than any other generation. And now with options like the AFS, they can achieve wellness efficiently and safely, in their own backyards.”
Hallam also notes that his customers are choosing priorities carefully. “One couple who bought an AFS from us lives in a mobile home near a beautiful apple orchard in Northern California,” he says. “They told us they invested $30,000 in this pool because of the real and essential relief using it brings to the husband’s chronic back condition.”
When it comes to getting the most out of your exercise space and time, the AFS just makes sense. Dr. Joel M. Stager, Medical Director of the St. Luke’s Rehabilitation Institute in Spokane Washington, who has studied the effects of aquatic activities among athletes and people in need of recovery from injuries or ailments for the past 30 years said it best: “Simply being submersed in water up to the neck increases cardiac output by more than 30 percent in a sedentary individual. So, just by sitting in water, the hydrostatic pressure on your body and being in a buoyant state benefits the body.” How much more beneficial would using an aquatic exercise machine at your own home be?
Dimension One Spas® (D1®) was founded in 1977 in Vista, California by Bob and Linda Hallam. By combining innovations in materials science and water handling technology, D1 has set an industry benchmark and today is the leader in designing and manufacturing luxury home hydrotherapy and aquatic fitness products. The family-owned business is dedicated to bringing customers the most advanced spas in the world -- engineered to rejuvenate both body and mind.
D1 spas and aquatic fitness products are now sold through a network of more than 200 dealers in the United States and 450 dealers worldwide in 35 countries. The company's four product lines include a selection of home hydrotherapy (ranging from $5,000-$18,000) and aquatic fitness products (ranging from $29k-$39k) that meet a variety of consumer needs and budgets: D1 Reflections®, D1 Bay Collection®, AFS- Aquatic Fitness Systems® and @ Home Hot Tubs®.
Holding more than 30 patents – more than any other company in the industry – D1 has earned accolades and awards from Consumer’s Digest, Robb Report, Poolandspa.com, Quality Buy and more, and in 2004 Bob Hallam was named Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year. D1 proudly supports Vision of Children, a national organization dedicated to the eradication of blindness and vision disorders in industrialized nations. For more information about Dimension One Spas, its hot tub products and practices for health, fitness, swimming and romance, please visit DimensionOne.com.
# # #
FINDINGS ON THE BENEFITS OF AQUATIC EXERCISE:
Total Wellness: Aquatic exercise is a medically proven solution to boosting one’s mental, physical and emotional well-being. Scientific studies reveal many impressive health benefits of exercise, which include healthier bones and muscles, a leaner body, radiant skin, a strong immune system, fast recovery from illness, and a higher quality of life.
Cardiovascular Health: Water Fitness Guru Mary E. Sanders (PhD, University of Nevada’s School of Medicine and Public Health) deems water an effective and safe liquid weight machine whose thickness and natural resistance reduces impact during activity while increasing range of motion and promoting muscular endurance.
Extensive studies by Dr. Joel M. Stager (Medical Director, St. Luke’s Rehabilitation Institute in Spokane, Washington) reveal that the hydrostatic pressure and buoyant state of being submersed in water increases cardiac output in a sedentary person by more than 30 percent.
Arthritis: New research by Marlene Fransen, PhD, explains that water therapy alleviates joint pain and directly improves one’s physical performance and function. The Arthritis Foundation, in fact, endorses water exercise as an ideal way to relieve arthritis pain and stiffness without harming joints. The Aquatic Fitness System drastically reduces excess strain on joints and muscles, and offers soothing therapeutic treatments provided by state-of-the-art massaging jets.
Diabetes: A recent study by SoJung Lee suggests aquatic activity can help lower the risk of deadly diseases by 44 percent through exercise that increases the vitality of the heart and lungs. Findings show that a fit heart and lungs decrease one’s chance of acquiring diabetes and related maladies, and further reflect low blood pressure and high HDL “good” cholesterol.
Sleep: Soaking in warm water is a natural, safe way to enhance deep sleep and ease sleep-related problems, according to the National Sleep Foundation. Water’s relaxing properties of buoyancy help promote sleep through the alleviation of pressure on joints and muscles, and by the creation of a peaceful, weightless sensation. Unlike sleeping aids, warm water is an organic and healthy remedy for sleep deprivation.
Weight Management: A recent study titled “Effects of Aquatic Exercise and Walking in Sedentary Obese Women” (published in the February 2007 launch of the International Journal of Aquatic Research and Education) examines weight loss resulting from a separate aquatic and land-based walking program. Participants in both the water and land-based groups significantly improved their total body weight, cardiorespiratory fitness, flexibility, strength and quality of life. The aquatic walking group, however, recorded slightly higher body weight losses, improvements in flexibility and greater attendance rates.
Back Pain: A study by Gerhard Strauss-Blasche, PhD, published in the Clinical Journal of Pain, finds exercise therapy to be an effective treatment for chronic back pain. Water exercise specifically prevents and reduces back pain by relieving the weight-baring effects of gravity on the lower extremities and spine. The built-in massage jets of the Aquatic Fitness System further reduce pain with varying bursts of water that offload the spine and buffet the body’s soft tissue.
Depression: Improved mental health is directly linked to the performance of fitness activities, including those done in water, according to a recent study called “The Influence of Exercise on Mental Health” by Dr. Daniel M. Landers (PhD, Arizona State University). An important conclusion of the study is that exercise is powerful in reducing mental ailments such as anxiety and depression.
Prenatal Health: A Journal of Perinatal Education study reports that aquatic exercise during pregnancy benefits both mother and baby, as psychological stress levels can lower and thus reduce complications including adverse fetal outcome.
###
Submitted by
Mary E. Sanders, Ph.D., FACSM
Associate Professor, Division of Medical Nutrition
Dept. of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine
Adjunct Professor, School of Public Health
University of Nevada, Reno
Director, WaterFit/Wave Aerobics
www.waterfit.com
Exercising in water improves respiration performance because the breathing mechanism must work harder when immersed, respiratory strengthening occurs. (Becker & Cole, 1997)
Effects on the circulatory and autonomic nervous systems facilitate improvements in muscle blood flow and increase the rate of removal of metabolic waste and injury products from deep within muscle tissues so normal and exercising muscles and ligaments experience beneficial effects (Becker & Cole, 1997).
Effects of immersion promote the excretion of metabolic wastes; assist with regulation of sodium, potassium, and water; and generally can lower blood pressure. (Becker & Cole, 1997).
Participants with chronic low back conditions, reported less pain after water training, with improvements in the quality of life for ADL (Ariyoshi et al., 1999; Landgridge & Phillips, 1988; Smit & Harrison, 1991).
Running in shallow water is rated in the “top 12” most strenuous exercises in terms of number of kcal expended per minute: Running in shallow water, 1.3 m depth, no buoyancy vest, maximal effort expends approximately 17.1 kcal/minute. (MacArdle, Katch, & Katch, 1999) Sports & Exercise Nutrition, Baltimore, LWW).
Women aged 55 and older improved their land-based functional skills such as stair climb, agility, sit-to-stand, speed walking, flexibility, and balance skills after only 16 weeks of water exercise training in shallow water. Participants also significantly improved strength and educed body fat with the training (Sanders, M. 1998 &2006).
Ten weeks of progressive aquatic resistance training targeting the lower body (using equipment for overload), resulted in significant improvement in muscular strength/endurance for 24 women, average age 34 years (Poyhonen, T., et al, 2002).
Older adults (age 60-75 years, average age 68 years) experienced a 6% improvement in back extension strength after 12 weeks, 3 days a week, 60 minutes per session by performing self- paced, vigorous shallow water exercise that included walking backwards. Additionally, their subjects improved significantly in cardiorespiratory endurance and body composition, muscle power for knee extension/flexion, vertical jumping, side step agility (Takeshima, N., M.E. Rogera, E. Wantanebe, W. F. Brechue, A. Okada, T. Yamada, M. M. Islam, J. Hayano 2002) Water-based exercise improves health-related aspects of fitness in older women Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 33(3), pp. 544-551)
Combining Turf & Surf for Weight Management: During another study, Nagle and colleagues (2003) combined diet plus water exercise and walking for a weight loss program. Forty-four obese, sedentary women with a BMI of 34.9, (mean age: 40 years), were randomly assigned to an aquatic exercise + walking on land group or a land walking only group for 16 weeks. The combined group (water exercise + land walking) participated in 2 shallow water exercise classes per week and the walking only group participated in 2 supervised walking classes per week. Both groups performed 3 sessions of land walking per week at home. According to Dr, Nagle, the pool exercises targeted cardiorespiratory training, were self-paced, and progressive with average intensity equivalent to walking about 4 miles per hour, or faster on land (moderate to vigorous). Sessions progressed from 20- 60 minutes over 16 weeks. Diet was controlled for reduced energy intake.
Both groups decreased body weight: combined water + land lost approximately 6.8 kg or 14.9 lbs while and land only group lost 5.6 kg or about 12.3 lbs. Both groups also improved in flexibility, lower body muscular strength and cardiovascular endurance. (Nagle, E.F., A.D. Otto, J.M., Jakicic, R.J. Robertson, F.L. Goss, J.L. Ranalli (2003) Effects of aquatic plus walking exercises on weight loss and function in sedentary obese females. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(5), May, S136, Abstract 753)
Trunk Core Training: During a study by Masumoto and colleagues (2003), participants who walked backwards, were measured using electromyography. Groups included walkers: on land, in water (xiphoid depth) without current and with a current applied (flume). Levels of muscle activity for the paraspinal muscles (erector spinae) while walking backwards with a current in shallow water were significantly greater when compared to walking on land. Water walking backwards, can possibly provide effective training for healthy backs and improved posture. (Masumoto, K., S. Takasugi, N. Hotta, K. Fujishima, Y. Iwamoto, Electromyographic analysis of walking backward in water. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(5), May, Abstract 1356, S141.)
DIMENSION ONE SPAS AQUATIC EXERCISE MACHINE FOR THE HOME
16 TO 19 ft Swim-in-Place Workout Pool Offers Multi-Taskers Multi Benefits Making the Most of Exercise Space and Time
What is more efficient than a swimming pool, more sophisticated than a hot tub and safer than a backyard playground? Dimension One Spa’s revolutionary Aquatic Fitness Systems® is an aquatic exercise machine for the backyard where you can safely swim, walk, run, stretch, row, strength train and relax!
The line’s flagship model -- the AquaFit® 19 Dual Temp – is the ultimate hybrid of fitness and hydrotherapy.
This unique 19-foot high-tech tub makes it possible to swim stationary laps; row for a robust upper body and arm workout; attach specially designed bands for resistance training; run or jog in place for cardiovascular conditioning – all in cooler water. Then when your routine is done, muscles can be soothed with a relaxing hydrotherapy body massage in the hot tub section of the pool. This watery workout is an ideal environment for low impact exercises to tone, shape and enhance flexibility, while the body is suspended in buoyant security. Ideal for weekend warriors; aging boomers; overweight exercisers and athletes needing rehabilitation, D1 offers three models of the pool -- the AFS 16, 19 and 19 DT – and their retail price ranges from $29,000 to $39,000.Superior to a traditional “swim spa” because of its multiple functions and sophisticated design, the AFS has garnered substantial industry recognition. The Society of Plastic Engineers granted the AFS a “People’s Choice Award,” Consumer’s Digest designated the AFS the “Best Buy in Portable Spas” in the Premium Products Category and the Robb Report included the pool in a “Best of” issue.
Effective and efficient, the D1 Spa’s AFS swim spa takes up less space than a conventional pool and can be installed inside or outside the home. The pool’s
Ultralife slip-resistant interior is surrounded by a durable, all-weather exterior, making the tub adaptable to either above ground or below ground installation. High volume swim jets are positioned to provide lift as well as current. The 100% insulated tub uses a stainless steal heater—the most reliable on the market – providing optimal heat recovery and lower energy consumption. And, pure, clean water year-round is easily achieved with an E-Z Lock filter cartridge and the ozone purification system, allowing the owner to use fewer chemicals than most competitive products.Mary E. Sanders, PhD Professor at the University of Nevada’s School of Medicine and Public Health is known in fitness circles as the “water fitness guru.” The research her team has done with groups of aquatic exercisers over the years underscores the fact that water can be used as a liquid weight machine with unique benefits. “Water’s buoyancy reduces impact and supports the body for increased range of motion,” she explains. “And, the natural resistance of water (the harder you press the harder, the water presses back) provides an individualized personal training environment. Water’s viscosity or “thickness” -- being about 800 times greater than air – makes it an effective exercise environment in which to build muscular endurance. And using resistance tethers, like those featured in the AFS pool, provides additional core stabilization work.”
D1’s founder, Bob Hallam, is clear about his target market for AFS: “Baby boomers are the most health & lifestyle conscious group of people in history. They spend more on working out, plastic surgery, health care and vacations than any other generation. And now with options like the AFS, they can achieve wellness efficiently and safely, in their own backyards.”
Hallam also notes that his customers are choosing priorities carefully. “One couple who bought an AFS from us lives in a mobile home near a beautiful apple orchard in Northern California,” he says. “They told us they invested $30,000 in this pool because of the real and essential relief using it brings to the husband’s chronic back condition.”
When it comes to getting the most out of your exercise space and time, the AFS just makes sense. Dr. Joel M. Stager, Medical Director of the St. Luke’s Rehabilitation Institute in Spokane Washington, who has studied the effects of aquatic activities among athletes and people in need of recovery from injuries or ailments for the past 30 years said it best: “Simply being submersed in water up to the neck increases cardiac output by more than 30 percent in a sedentary individual. So, just by sitting in water, the hydrostatic pressure on your body and being in a buoyant state benefits the body.” How much more beneficial would using an aquatic exercise machine at your own home be?
Dimension One Spas® (D1®) was founded in 1977 in Vista, California by Bob and Linda Hallam. By combining innovations in materials science and water handling technology, D1 has set an industry benchmark and today is the leader in designing and manufacturing luxury home hydrotherapy and aquatic fitness products. The family-owned business is dedicated to bringing customers the most advanced spas in the world -- engineered to rejuvenate both body and mind.
D1 spas and aquatic fitness products are now sold through a network of more than 200 dealers in the United States and 450 dealers worldwide in 35 countries. The company's four product lines include a selection of home hydrotherapy (ranging from $5,000-$18,000) and aquatic fitness products (ranging from $29k-$39k) that meet a variety of consumer needs and budgets: D1 Reflections®, D1 Bay Collection®, AFS- Aquatic Fitness Systems® and @ Home Hot Tubs®.
Holding more than 30 patents – more than any other company in the industry – D1 has earned accolades and awards from Consumer’s Digest, Robb Report, Poolandspa.com, Quality Buy and more, and in 2004 Bob Hallam was named Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year. D1 proudly supports Vision of Children, a national organization dedicated to the eradication of blindness and vision disorders in industrialized nations. For more information about Dimension One Spas, its hot tub products and practices for health, fitness, swimming and romance, please visit DimensionOne.com.
# # #
FINDINGS ON THE BENEFITS OF AQUATIC EXERCISE:
Total Wellness: Aquatic exercise is a medically proven solution to boosting one’s mental, physical and emotional well-being. Scientific studies reveal many impressive health benefits of exercise, which include healthier bones and muscles, a leaner body, radiant skin, a strong immune system, fast recovery from illness, and a higher quality of life.
Cardiovascular Health: Water Fitness Guru Mary E. Sanders (PhD, University of Nevada’s School of Medicine and Public Health) deems water an effective and safe liquid weight machine whose thickness and natural resistance reduces impact during activity while increasing range of motion and promoting muscular endurance.
Extensive studies by Dr. Joel M. Stager (Medical Director, St. Luke’s Rehabilitation Institute in Spokane, Washington) reveal that the hydrostatic pressure and buoyant state of being submersed in water increases cardiac output in a sedentary person by more than 30 percent.
Arthritis: New research by Marlene Fransen, PhD, explains that water therapy alleviates joint pain and directly improves one’s physical performance and function. The Arthritis Foundation, in fact, endorses water exercise as an ideal way to relieve arthritis pain and stiffness without harming joints. The Aquatic Fitness System drastically reduces excess strain on joints and muscles, and offers soothing therapeutic treatments provided by state-of-the-art massaging jets.
Diabetes: A recent study by SoJung Lee suggests aquatic activity can help lower the risk of deadly diseases by 44 percent through exercise that increases the vitality of the heart and lungs. Findings show that a fit heart and lungs decrease one’s chance of acquiring diabetes and related maladies, and further reflect low blood pressure and high HDL “good” cholesterol.
Sleep: Soaking in warm water is a natural, safe way to enhance deep sleep and ease sleep-related problems, according to the National Sleep Foundation. Water’s relaxing properties of buoyancy help promote sleep through the alleviation of pressure on joints and muscles, and by the creation of a peaceful, weightless sensation. Unlike sleeping aids, warm water is an organic and healthy remedy for sleep deprivation.
Weight Management: A recent study titled “Effects of Aquatic Exercise and Walking in Sedentary Obese Women” (published in the February 2007 launch of the International Journal of Aquatic Research and Education) examines weight loss resulting from a separate aquatic and land-based walking program. Participants in both the water and land-based groups significantly improved their total body weight, cardiorespiratory fitness, flexibility, strength and quality of life. The aquatic walking group, however, recorded slightly higher body weight losses, improvements in flexibility and greater attendance rates.
Back Pain: A study by Gerhard Strauss-Blasche, PhD, published in the Clinical Journal of Pain, finds exercise therapy to be an effective treatment for chronic back pain. Water exercise specifically prevents and reduces back pain by relieving the weight-baring effects of gravity on the lower extremities and spine. The built-in massage jets of the Aquatic Fitness System further reduce pain with varying bursts of water that offload the spine and buffet the body’s soft tissue.
Depression: Improved mental health is directly linked to the performance of fitness activities, including those done in water, according to a recent study called “The Influence of Exercise on Mental Health” by Dr. Daniel M. Landers (PhD, Arizona State University). An important conclusion of the study is that exercise is powerful in reducing mental ailments such as anxiety and depression.
Prenatal Health: A Journal of Perinatal Education study reports that aquatic exercise during pregnancy benefits both mother and baby, as psychological stress levels can lower and thus reduce complications including adverse fetal outcome.
###
Submitted by
Mary E. Sanders, Ph.D., FACSM
Associate Professor, Division of Medical Nutrition
Dept. of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine
Adjunct Professor, School of Public Health
University of Nevada, Reno
Director, WaterFit/Wave Aerobics
www.waterfit.com
Exercising in water improves respiration performance because the breathing mechanism must work harder when immersed, respiratory strengthening occurs. (Becker & Cole, 1997)
Effects on the circulatory and autonomic nervous systems facilitate improvements in muscle blood flow and increase the rate of removal of metabolic waste and injury products from deep within muscle tissues so normal and exercising muscles and ligaments experience beneficial effects (Becker & Cole, 1997).
Effects of immersion promote the excretion of metabolic wastes; assist with regulation of sodium, potassium, and water; and generally can lower blood pressure. (Becker & Cole, 1997).
Participants with chronic low back conditions, reported less pain after water training, with improvements in the quality of life for ADL (Ariyoshi et al., 1999; Landgridge & Phillips, 1988; Smit & Harrison, 1991).
Running in shallow water is rated in the “top 12” most strenuous exercises in terms of number of kcal expended per minute: Running in shallow water, 1.3 m depth, no buoyancy vest, maximal effort expends approximately 17.1 kcal/minute. (MacArdle, Katch, & Katch, 1999) Sports & Exercise Nutrition, Baltimore, LWW).
Women aged 55 and older improved their land-based functional skills such as stair climb, agility, sit-to-stand, speed walking, flexibility, and balance skills after only 16 weeks of water exercise training in shallow water. Participants also significantly improved strength and educed body fat with the training (Sanders, M. 1998 &2006).
Ten weeks of progressive aquatic resistance training targeting the lower body (using equipment for overload), resulted in significant improvement in muscular strength/endurance for 24 women, average age 34 years (Poyhonen, T., et al, 2002).
Older adults (age 60-75 years, average age 68 years) experienced a 6% improvement in back extension strength after 12 weeks, 3 days a week, 60 minutes per session by performing self- paced, vigorous shallow water exercise that included walking backwards. Additionally, their subjects improved significantly in cardiorespiratory endurance and body composition, muscle power for knee extension/flexion, vertical jumping, side step agility (Takeshima, N., M.E. Rogera, E. Wantanebe, W. F. Brechue, A. Okada, T. Yamada, M. M. Islam, J. Hayano 2002) Water-based exercise improves health-related aspects of fitness in older women Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 33(3), pp. 544-551)
Combining Turf & Surf for Weight Management: During another study, Nagle and colleagues (2003) combined diet plus water exercise and walking for a weight loss program. Forty-four obese, sedentary women with a BMI of 34.9, (mean age: 40 years), were randomly assigned to an aquatic exercise + walking on land group or a land walking only group for 16 weeks. The combined group (water exercise + land walking) participated in 2 shallow water exercise classes per week and the walking only group participated in 2 supervised walking classes per week. Both groups performed 3 sessions of land walking per week at home. According to Dr, Nagle, the pool exercises targeted cardiorespiratory training, were self-paced, and progressive with average intensity equivalent to walking about 4 miles per hour, or faster on land (moderate to vigorous). Sessions progressed from 20- 60 minutes over 16 weeks. Diet was controlled for reduced energy intake.
Both groups decreased body weight: combined water + land lost approximately 6.8 kg or 14.9 lbs while and land only group lost 5.6 kg or about 12.3 lbs. Both groups also improved in flexibility, lower body muscular strength and cardiovascular endurance. (Nagle, E.F., A.D. Otto, J.M., Jakicic, R.J. Robertson, F.L. Goss, J.L. Ranalli (2003) Effects of aquatic plus walking exercises on weight loss and function in sedentary obese females. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(5), May, S136, Abstract 753)
Trunk Core Training: During a study by Masumoto and colleagues (2003), participants who walked backwards, were measured using electromyography. Groups included walkers: on land, in water (xiphoid depth) without current and with a current applied (flume). Levels of muscle activity for the paraspinal muscles (erector spinae) while walking backwards with a current in shallow water were significantly greater when compared to walking on land. Water walking backwards, can possibly provide effective training for healthy backs and improved posture. (Masumoto, K., S. Takasugi, N. Hotta, K. Fujishima, Y. Iwamoto, Electromyographic analysis of walking backward in water. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(5), May, Abstract 1356, S141.)
quote unquote: James Madison On War
Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for
bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. -- James Madison, Political Observations, Apr. 20, 1795 [more]
bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. -- James Madison, Political Observations, Apr. 20, 1795 [more]
California: 39 counties' vote systems in question
L.A.'s InkaVote method may be recertified, but others face starting from scratch with a primary election looming.
By Hector Becerra and Jordan Rau, (Los Angele Times, 2007-08-05)
County election officials scrambled on Saturday to develop contingency plans for the February presidential primary election after California's secretary of state imposed broad restrictions on electronic voting machines that she said are susceptible to hacking.
Secretary of State Debra Bowen decertified the voting machines used in 39 counties, including Los Angeles County's InkaVote system.
She said some of the systems could be recertified in time for the primary if new security upgrades are made.
L.A. County's system, with which voters use ink devices to mark ballots that are tabulated with a scanner, could be recertified by February. The county did not submit the system for an audit by Bowen's office, and that appears to be why it was decertified.
But Bowen's rules so strictly curtail the use of some machines that some counties on Saturday mulled a return to paper ballots for the February vote.
The rest of the story: The Los Angeles Times
By Hector Becerra and Jordan Rau, (Los Angele Times, 2007-08-05)
County election officials scrambled on Saturday to develop contingency plans for the February presidential primary election after California's secretary of state imposed broad restrictions on electronic voting machines that she said are susceptible to hacking.
Secretary of State Debra Bowen decertified the voting machines used in 39 counties, including Los Angeles County's InkaVote system.
She said some of the systems could be recertified in time for the primary if new security upgrades are made.
L.A. County's system, with which voters use ink devices to mark ballots that are tabulated with a scanner, could be recertified by February. The county did not submit the system for an audit by Bowen's office, and that appears to be why it was decertified.
But Bowen's rules so strictly curtail the use of some machines that some counties on Saturday mulled a return to paper ballots for the February vote.
The rest of the story: The Los Angeles Times
Activism: Singer-songwriter James McMurtry
James McMurtry's We Can’t Make It Here turned the reclusive Texan into a political activist. On his blog, the singer-songwriter posts on topics that range from airport security and the current administration to the 2008 race for the White House: "Will the Democrats please stop running for president and begin the work we elected them to do."
We Can’t Make It Here was downloadable for free from his website during the 2004 campaign, and you can still listen to it on line at MySpace. In Entertainment Weekly,
Stephen King called it “stark and wrenchingly direct," concluding that "this may be the best American protest song since Masters of War" (he also called the artist "the truest, fiercest songwriter of his generation"). Then Congressman Bernie Sanders used the song last year during his successful campaign for the U.S. Senate. McMurtry's most recent album, Childish Things, includes We Can’t Make It Here in a version without any of the lyrics bleeped to protect the sensitive ears of the FCC (the equally righteous follow-up, God Bless America, is the download that's currently available on the artist's site).
McMurtry takes his politics on the road -- he's played the national convention of Veterans for Peace, Farm Aid, political rallies, and the like; at Cindy Sheehan’s vigil outside Bush's spread in Crawford, Texas, he joined Steve Earle for a free concert (hilariously, James McMurtry is one of the artists the White House confirms is on the president’s iPod). In April, he received Esquire Magazine's 2007 Esky Award for "Biggest Agitator."
"I've always been a little put off by activists," he says, "so you know it's a dire situation when I have to become one myself."
James McMurtry: <http://myspace.com/jamesmcmurtry/>
[McMurtry's label, Compadre Records, also has releases by Townes Van Zandt, Suzy Bogguss, Flaco Jimenez, and the great Billy Joe Shaver, among others.]
We Can’t Make It Here was downloadable for free from his website during the 2004 campaign, and you can still listen to it on line at MySpace. In Entertainment Weekly,
Stephen King called it “stark and wrenchingly direct," concluding that "this may be the best American protest song since Masters of War" (he also called the artist "the truest, fiercest songwriter of his generation"). Then Congressman Bernie Sanders used the song last year during his successful campaign for the U.S. Senate. McMurtry's most recent album, Childish Things, includes We Can’t Make It Here in a version without any of the lyrics bleeped to protect the sensitive ears of the FCC (the equally righteous follow-up, God Bless America, is the download that's currently available on the artist's site).McMurtry takes his politics on the road -- he's played the national convention of Veterans for Peace, Farm Aid, political rallies, and the like; at Cindy Sheehan’s vigil outside Bush's spread in Crawford, Texas, he joined Steve Earle for a free concert (hilariously, James McMurtry is one of the artists the White House confirms is on the president’s iPod). In April, he received Esquire Magazine's 2007 Esky Award for "Biggest Agitator."
"I've always been a little put off by activists," he says, "so you know it's a dire situation when I have to become one myself."
James McMurtry: <http://myspace.com/jamesmcmurtry/>
[McMurtry's label, Compadre Records, also has releases by Townes Van Zandt, Suzy Bogguss, Flaco Jimenez, and the great Billy Joe Shaver, among others.]
Reform: Congressional Spending Databases
"LegiStorm...is dedicated to providing a variety of important information about the US Congress....a database of congressional staff salaries,...the most comprehensive database of all privately financed trips taken by members of Congress and congressional staffers.
"The information is provided in a strictly factual, non-partisan fashion. We have no political affiliations and no political purpose except to make the workings of Congress as transparent as possible. We expect this resource to be useful to journalists, researchers, lobbyists and current and would-be staffers - as well as regular citizens who simply want to know how their representatives spend public money....
"If you have questions or comments about Congress and its workings,...post them on our congressional forum....
"LegiStorm...is a sister company to Storming Media, a company supplying a wide range of technical, policy and strategy papers from the Pentagon, and PatentStorm, a searchable database of millions of US patents." -- from the website. <http://www.legistorm.com/>
"The information is provided in a strictly factual, non-partisan fashion. We have no political affiliations and no political purpose except to make the workings of Congress as transparent as possible. We expect this resource to be useful to journalists, researchers, lobbyists and current and would-be staffers - as well as regular citizens who simply want to know how their representatives spend public money....
"If you have questions or comments about Congress and its workings,...post them on our congressional forum....
"LegiStorm...is a sister company to Storming Media, a company supplying a wide range of technical, policy and strategy papers from the Pentagon, and PatentStorm, a searchable database of millions of US patents." -- from the website. <http://www.legistorm.com/>
2008: California Proposal Could Sway Outcome of Race
By Michael R. Blood (Associated Press, 2007-07-31)
LOS ANGELES (AP) - A Republican-backed ballot proposal could split left-leaning California between the Democratic and GOP nominees, tilting the 2008 presidential election in favor of the Republicans.
California awards its cache of 55 electoral votes to the statewide winner in presidential elections - the largest single prize in the nation. But a prominent Republican lawyer wants to put a proposal on the ballot that would award the statewide winner only two electoral votes.
The rest would be distributed to the winning candidate in each of the state's congressional districts. In effect, that would create 53 races, each with one electoral vote up for grabs.
California has voted Democratic in the last four presidential elections. But the change - if it qualifies for one of two primary ballots next year and is approved by voters - would mean that a Republican would be positioned the following November to snatch 20 or more electoral votes in GOP-leaning districts.
That's a number equal to winning Ohio....
Democratic consultant Chris Lehane called the plan "an effort to rig the system in order to fix the election.''
"If this change is made, it will virtually guarantee that a Republican wins the White House in 2008,'' Lehane said
Nineteen of the state's 53 congressional districts are represented by Republicans. President Bush carried 22 districts in 2004, while losing the statewide vote by double digits....
The rest of the story.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although this proposal is being made in order to help the national Republicans in case of a close race in the electoral college, it is clearly more democratic than the current winner-take-all system. But even better would be proportional representation; not only would apportioning the vote on the basis of the real tally be fairer to Democratic and Republican voters, but it would mean that voters who support Green, Peace and Freedom, or independent candidates could send their delegates to the electoral college where, again if a race is close, they might turn out to be decisive. -- J.
LOS ANGELES (AP) - A Republican-backed ballot proposal could split left-leaning California between the Democratic and GOP nominees, tilting the 2008 presidential election in favor of the Republicans.
California awards its cache of 55 electoral votes to the statewide winner in presidential elections - the largest single prize in the nation. But a prominent Republican lawyer wants to put a proposal on the ballot that would award the statewide winner only two electoral votes.
The rest would be distributed to the winning candidate in each of the state's congressional districts. In effect, that would create 53 races, each with one electoral vote up for grabs.
California has voted Democratic in the last four presidential elections. But the change - if it qualifies for one of two primary ballots next year and is approved by voters - would mean that a Republican would be positioned the following November to snatch 20 or more electoral votes in GOP-leaning districts.
That's a number equal to winning Ohio....
Democratic consultant Chris Lehane called the plan "an effort to rig the system in order to fix the election.''
"If this change is made, it will virtually guarantee that a Republican wins the White House in 2008,'' Lehane said
Nineteen of the state's 53 congressional districts are represented by Republicans. President Bush carried 22 districts in 2004, while losing the statewide vote by double digits....
The rest of the story.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although this proposal is being made in order to help the national Republicans in case of a close race in the electoral college, it is clearly more democratic than the current winner-take-all system. But even better would be proportional representation; not only would apportioning the vote on the basis of the real tally be fairer to Democratic and Republican voters, but it would mean that voters who support Green, Peace and Freedom, or independent candidates could send their delegates to the electoral college where, again if a race is close, they might turn out to be decisive. -- J.
Planning: The McMansion - Threat or Menace
Planners Move to Close Window on US 'McMansions' in the Guardian is about city and county governments finally getting wise, a decade or so late, to the possibility that building houses of 10,000 square feet for two people might not be such a wise thing for maintaining scale, husbanding resources, and keeping communities connected other than by three-hour freeway commutes (although, when you think about it, the same logic applies to single-family homes of any size). The development may mean more trouble for those invested in the struggling housing market, but for the rest of us it's welcome news.
The rest of the story: The Guardian.
In Boulder County, Colorado, which has recently adopted measures to cap the size of new homes, houses have grown from an average of 3,900 square feet in 1990 to 6,300 square feet last year.Now if we can just pass the Stop Building Cheap, Crappy Condos Act, we'll really be getting somewhere.
Last month in Los Angeles, the city's planning commission passed a motion to restrict the size of new homes. If the city council adopts the measure it could affect 300,000 properties in the city. Similar measures have been adopted in Minneapolis and in Florida.
"I think people are suspicious of development in the US right now," says John Chase, architecture critic and urban designer for the city of West Hollywood. "People have an unconscious cultural association with a place. Mansion-building takes away from a person's sense of the identity of a place."
The rest of the story: The Guardian.
Iraq: Active-duty officer takes on the generals (Armed Forces Journal)
A private who loses a rifle suffers far greater consequences than a general who loses a war. -- Lt. Col. Paul Yingling, U.S.Army.
This essay by Army lieutenant colonel and Iraq veteran Paul Yingling recently published in Armed Forces Journal is a sizzling indictment of the cadre of military yes-men Bush has chosen to run his war. There is dissent, and there is informed dissent. We have a well-trained military, as this essay shows, but the White House, always with the compliance of most members of Congress, Republican or Democrat, has shown little inclination to listen to their advice.
A failure in generalship by Lt. Col. Paul Yingling
You officers amuse yourselves with God knows what buffooneries and never dream in the least of serious service. This is a source of stupidity which would become most dangerous in case of a serious conflict. -- Frederick the Great
For the second time in a generation, the United States faces the prospect of defeat at the hands of an insurgency. In April 1975, the U.S. fled the Republic of Vietnam, abandoning our allies to their fate at the hands of North Vietnamese communists. In 2007, Iraq's grave and deteriorating condition offers diminishing hope for an American victory and portends risk of an even wider and more destructive regional war.
These debacles are not attributable to individual failures, but rather to a crisis in an entire institution: America's general officer corps. America's generals have failed to prepare our armed forces for war and advise civilian authorities on the application of force to achieve the aims of policy. The argument that follows consists of three elements. First, generals have a responsibility to society to provide policymakers with a correct estimate of strategic probabilities. Second, America's generals in Vietnam and Iraq failed to perform this responsibility. Third, remedying the crisis in American generalship requires the intervention of Congress.
Armies do not fight wars; nations fight wars. War is not a military activity conducted by soldiers, but rather a social activity that involves entire nations. Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz noted that passion, probability and policy each play their role in war. Any understanding of war that ignores one of these elements is fundamentally flawed.
The rest of the story: Armed Forces Journal
This essay by Army lieutenant colonel and Iraq veteran Paul Yingling recently published in Armed Forces Journal is a sizzling indictment of the cadre of military yes-men Bush has chosen to run his war. There is dissent, and there is informed dissent. We have a well-trained military, as this essay shows, but the White House, always with the compliance of most members of Congress, Republican or Democrat, has shown little inclination to listen to their advice.
A failure in generalship by Lt. Col. Paul Yingling
You officers amuse yourselves with God knows what buffooneries and never dream in the least of serious service. This is a source of stupidity which would become most dangerous in case of a serious conflict. -- Frederick the Great
For the second time in a generation, the United States faces the prospect of defeat at the hands of an insurgency. In April 1975, the U.S. fled the Republic of Vietnam, abandoning our allies to their fate at the hands of North Vietnamese communists. In 2007, Iraq's grave and deteriorating condition offers diminishing hope for an American victory and portends risk of an even wider and more destructive regional war.
These debacles are not attributable to individual failures, but rather to a crisis in an entire institution: America's general officer corps. America's generals have failed to prepare our armed forces for war and advise civilian authorities on the application of force to achieve the aims of policy. The argument that follows consists of three elements. First, generals have a responsibility to society to provide policymakers with a correct estimate of strategic probabilities. Second, America's generals in Vietnam and Iraq failed to perform this responsibility. Third, remedying the crisis in American generalship requires the intervention of Congress.
Armies do not fight wars; nations fight wars. War is not a military activity conducted by soldiers, but rather a social activity that involves entire nations. Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz noted that passion, probability and policy each play their role in war. Any understanding of war that ignores one of these elements is fundamentally flawed.
The rest of the story: Armed Forces Journal
Business As Usual: Officials deny there's a link of gaining lobbyist access by giving to top lawmakers' cause (Sacramento Bee)
According to a report in the Sacramento Bee, health industry-related organizations have contributed at least a half a million dollars this year to a ballot initiative intended to ease term limits. It probably comes as no surprise to you that the beneficiaries of this largess are the very lawmakers in charge of the health care overhaul under consideration in the capitol.
Hospitals, drug companies, doctors, dentists and others with a stake in the health care debate, according to the Bee, have put up about a fifth of the roughly $2.6 million collected by those advocating a change in the 1990 term limits law. The measure, if passed by voters Feb. 5, would lower from 14 to 12 the total number of years a lawmaker could serve, but also would allow Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata to remain in their leadership posts for up to six and four years, respectively, beyond 2008.
Even though the don't officially support the measure, some donors from the health care industry are giving directly to the term limits committee, which is run by Núñez's top political adviser.
One donor admits his organization gave to guarantee access to the top players in health care reform. "The whole system of campaign fundraising is such that you have a (political action committee) because you want to get access to people," said Gary Robinson, the executive director of the Union of American Physicians and Dentists, which gave $5,000 to the term limits measure in late June. "I think everybody's contribution relates to the ability to go to the fundraisers and meet the staff and the members," Robinson said.
Team Núñez, on the other hand, doesn't see a problem.
Hospitals, drug companies, doctors, dentists and others with a stake in the health care debate, according to the Bee, have put up about a fifth of the roughly $2.6 million collected by those advocating a change in the 1990 term limits law. The measure, if passed by voters Feb. 5, would lower from 14 to 12 the total number of years a lawmaker could serve, but also would allow Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez and Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata to remain in their leadership posts for up to six and four years, respectively, beyond 2008.
Even though the don't officially support the measure, some donors from the health care industry are giving directly to the term limits committee, which is run by Núñez's top political adviser.
One donor admits his organization gave to guarantee access to the top players in health care reform. "The whole system of campaign fundraising is such that you have a (political action committee) because you want to get access to people," said Gary Robinson, the executive director of the Union of American Physicians and Dentists, which gave $5,000 to the term limits measure in late June. "I think everybody's contribution relates to the ability to go to the fundraisers and meet the staff and the members," Robinson said.
Team Núñez, on the other hand, doesn't see a problem.
The War: W.Hollywood Council Unanimously Adopts Resolution in Support of the Impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney
[While under normal circumstances I agree that the Santa Monica city council should stick to local issues and not spend its time on resolutions to save the redwoods or nuke the whales, these are not normal times. The very active local peace movement should follow up West Hollywood's action and get the Santa Monica council to go on record in support of the impeachment of Bush and Cheney for their various crimes, although the best reason to get rid of them is to prevent future debacles, like attacking Iran (according to press reports -- see, Cheney pushes Bush to act on Iraq -- the Vice has talked the Little President into war with Iran as soon as a pretext can be manufactured). - jg]
West Hollywood makes history in becoming the first city in Southern California to pass an impeachment resolution (press release)
"The City of West Hollywood was the first City to oppose the war in Iraq, as it was obvious that the United States was being dragged into a war under false pretenses," said West Hollywood Mayor John Duran. "Now the truth is out. Our President and Vice President misled the country and failed the American people, and for those reasons they should be impeached," he continued.
"The time has come to call for impeachment," said West Hollywood Councilmember Abbe Land. "Bush and Cheney lied to Congress and the American public on the justifications for the Iraq war, conducted illegal wiretaps of American citizens and violated the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners of war. The U.S. Constitution provides a mechanism to hold them accountable. West Hollywood is proud to add its voice to the growing movement across the nation in calling for a full investigation to be undertaken by the U.S. Congress," she continued.
The proposed resolution states that President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney have repeatedly violated the U.S. Constitution and other laws of the United States. Other impeachable actions cited in the Impeachment Resolution include:
For more information, please contact Hernan Molina, Deputy to West Hollywood Mayor John Duran or Lisa Belsanti, Deputy to West Hollywood Councilmember Abbe Land at 323-848-6460.
West Hollywood makes history in becoming the first city in Southern California to pass an impeachment resolution (press release)
"The City of West Hollywood was the first City to oppose the war in Iraq, as it was obvious that the United States was being dragged into a war under false pretenses," said West Hollywood Mayor John Duran. "Now the truth is out. Our President and Vice President misled the country and failed the American people, and for those reasons they should be impeached," he continued.
"The time has come to call for impeachment," said West Hollywood Councilmember Abbe Land. "Bush and Cheney lied to Congress and the American public on the justifications for the Iraq war, conducted illegal wiretaps of American citizens and violated the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners of war. The U.S. Constitution provides a mechanism to hold them accountable. West Hollywood is proud to add its voice to the growing movement across the nation in calling for a full investigation to be undertaken by the U.S. Congress," she continued.
The proposed resolution states that President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney have repeatedly violated the U.S. Constitution and other laws of the United States. Other impeachable actions cited in the Impeachment Resolution include:
- Stripping Americans of their constitutional rights;
- Ordering and authorizing the U.S. Attorney General to override judicial order for the release of detainees;
- Directing the National Security Agency to spy on Americans; and
- Misguiding Congress and the country on false intelligence in order to lead the United States into war.
For more information, please contact Hernan Molina, Deputy to West Hollywood Mayor John Duran or Lisa Belsanti, Deputy to West Hollywood Councilmember Abbe Land at 323-848-6460.
Planning: Paris Aims to Cut Traffic With Bikes
In Santa Monica, we think it's a big deal to offer validated parking for bicycles.
Elsewhere in the country, in such places as Austin, Boulder, San Francisco, Madison, Minneapolis, Oakland, Boston, Seattle, Athens (Georgia) and Lawrence (Kansas), the city governments are devoted to expanding the use of bicycles to mitigate traffic and air pollution, providing hundreds of miles of bike trails and dedicated traffic lanes to thousands of commuters.
But nowhere has an American city gone as far as Paris (France, not Texas) where, according to a story today in the New York Times, city hall launched a new municipal service that has placed 10,600 bikes at 750 stations all over town.
Any user can rent and return a bike from any station anywhere in the city. A yearlong pass for the service costs $39.50, a one-day pass goes for $1.36, and a seven-day ticket is $6.80. But the project is designed for short rides (the first half hour is free) and is priced on a sliding scale to keep the bikes in rotation.
The program, called Velib' from the words for bike (velo) and liberty (liberte), is being pushed by Socialist mayor Bertrand Delanoe who, like his counterparts in London and New York, has made fighting traffic and pollution his No. 1 goal.
For Parisians, the bicycle service means another public transport option, in addition to the subway, buses and trams, Delanoe said.
"In the morning, you can go to work in the tram and come home by bike; it depends on the weather, it depends on your mood and on your friends," Delanoe said at the launch.
Business was brisk the first day, according to the Times. The service is accessible to tourists as well as residents; it's offered in eight languages, and its machines accept foreign credit cards.
Paris is following the example of other European cities with inexpensive bicycle services, including Stockholm, Vienna, Brussels, Barcelona and Copenhagen. The City of Light now has 230 miles of bike lanes.
Full disclosure: I suggested a similar idea for Santa Monica a couple of years ago. General hilarity ensued. He who laughs last, though. I'm just sayin'.
The rest of the story: The New York Times
Update: French Ideal of Bicycle-Sharing Meets Reality by Steven Erlanger and Maia de la Baume (New York Times 2009-10-30)
Elsewhere in the country, in such places as Austin, Boulder, San Francisco, Madison, Minneapolis, Oakland, Boston, Seattle, Athens (Georgia) and Lawrence (Kansas), the city governments are devoted to expanding the use of bicycles to mitigate traffic and air pollution, providing hundreds of miles of bike trails and dedicated traffic lanes to thousands of commuters.
But nowhere has an American city gone as far as Paris (France, not Texas) where, according to a story today in the New York Times, city hall launched a new municipal service that has placed 10,600 bikes at 750 stations all over town.
Any user can rent and return a bike from any station anywhere in the city. A yearlong pass for the service costs $39.50, a one-day pass goes for $1.36, and a seven-day ticket is $6.80. But the project is designed for short rides (the first half hour is free) and is priced on a sliding scale to keep the bikes in rotation.
The program, called Velib' from the words for bike (velo) and liberty (liberte), is being pushed by Socialist mayor Bertrand Delanoe who, like his counterparts in London and New York, has made fighting traffic and pollution his No. 1 goal.
For Parisians, the bicycle service means another public transport option, in addition to the subway, buses and trams, Delanoe said.
"In the morning, you can go to work in the tram and come home by bike; it depends on the weather, it depends on your mood and on your friends," Delanoe said at the launch.
Business was brisk the first day, according to the Times. The service is accessible to tourists as well as residents; it's offered in eight languages, and its machines accept foreign credit cards.
Paris is following the example of other European cities with inexpensive bicycle services, including Stockholm, Vienna, Brussels, Barcelona and Copenhagen. The City of Light now has 230 miles of bike lanes.
Full disclosure: I suggested a similar idea for Santa Monica a couple of years ago. General hilarity ensued. He who laughs last, though. I'm just sayin'.
The rest of the story: The New York Times
Update: French Ideal of Bicycle-Sharing Meets Reality by Steven Erlanger and Maia de la Baume (New York Times 2009-10-30)
Universal Health Care: It's Time
With the leading Democratic candidates for president united in one way or another around the idea of providing health care for the insurance industry, it's important that the only real proposal to establish genuinely universal health care, HR-676 -- The Expanded and Improved Medicare For All Act, introduced by Reps. John Conyers and Dennis Kucinich with the support of over 70 congressional cosponsors so far, get everyone's full support. (Go to the Physicians for a National Health Plan website for more information and links.)
Whether or not he or she is among the cosponsors, contact your rep to let them know you support passage of the bill in this Congress, before another president steps up with a bogus plan.
And if you are active as a volunteer or donor in the Clinton, Edwards or Obama campaigns, now is a good time to inform them that you think it's way past time for this country to provide its citizens with true publicly supported universal health care.
Physicians for a National Health Plan: <http://www.pnhp.org>
Also, see 2008: The case for John Edwards universal health care plan; Impractical Proposals 2007-07-05)
Whether or not he or she is among the cosponsors, contact your rep to let them know you support passage of the bill in this Congress, before another president steps up with a bogus plan.
And if you are active as a volunteer or donor in the Clinton, Edwards or Obama campaigns, now is a good time to inform them that you think it's way past time for this country to provide its citizens with true publicly supported universal health care.
Physicians for a National Health Plan: <http://www.pnhp.org>
Also, see 2008: The case for John Edwards universal health care plan; Impractical Proposals 2007-07-05)
The Franchise: Questions persist about California vote system review
Missed deadlines, miscommunication mar evaluation
By Kat Zambon (electionline.org)
In a 2006 election debate between incumbent California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson (R), and state Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Marina del Rey, the challenger said if elected she would “revisit systems that have been approved by the state and create stricter monitoring requirements.”
Now, six months into her term as secretary of state, Bowen is following through on her campaign promise with a top-to-bottom review of the state’s voting systems.
"The stakes are too high," Bowen said, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. "The voters need to feel confident that their votes are being counted."
However, questions remain about the implications of the results of those tests, which started in late May and are scheduled to end in late July. And since a recent move pushed the California state primary to the beginning of February, there is little time for error.
The rest of the story: Election Line Weekly (2007-07-12)More on voting in California: Absentee voting, Voting system review, Voting changes , Right to vote
Quote Unquote: Tyrants and The Law -- Euripides
Nothing does more harm to the state than a tyrant; when he rules, equal application of law comes to an end, the one man is tyrant, and he keeps unto himself and in secrecy the law, and so perishes justice. But when the laws are written down, rich and poor alike have equal justice, and it is open to the weaker to use the same language to the 
prosperous when he is reviled by him, and the weaker prevails over the stronger if he have justice on his side. Freedom’s mark is also seen in this: “Let any man possessed of wisdom give counsel to the state.” And he who comes forward and counsels well, gains renown, while he, who has no wish, holds his silence. What greater equality can there be in a state? Again, where the people are absolute rulers of the land, they rejoice in having the openness and exuberance of youth, while a tyrant counts this a danger, and seeks to slay or silence those possessed of spirit, while the discreet fear his power and violence. –Euripides, The Suppliants
prosperous when he is reviled by him, and the weaker prevails over the stronger if he have justice on his side. Freedom’s mark is also seen in this: “Let any man possessed of wisdom give counsel to the state.” And he who comes forward and counsels well, gains renown, while he, who has no wish, holds his silence. What greater equality can there be in a state? Again, where the people are absolute rulers of the land, they rejoice in having the openness and exuberance of youth, while a tyrant counts this a danger, and seeks to slay or silence those possessed of spirit, while the discreet fear his power and violence. –Euripides, The Suppliants
The Tarnished White House: Is it time for Bush and Cheney to go?
The media pumped for Bill Clinton's impeachment with seven months of non-stop focus on the presidential privates, while the Republican leadership bet the farm animals on ousting him 
from office for being human, but the American public never bought it. Now, with the media dismissing talk of punishing the administration for corruption and incompetence and the Democratic leadership refusing even to talk about bringing the Bush-Cheney criminal enterprise to a close, a clear majority of the citizenry has concluded on its own that Dick Cheney should be impeached, convicted and removed from office, and a large and growing number think George Bush should meet the same fate. Clearly we worry too much about the influence of the media on public opinion. Maybe, also, we should give up looking to the incumbent Democrats to represent us and try to identify new champions among the third parties and on the Dems' left flank. And maybe we should forget about impeachment. Let's just find a conscientious prosecutor somewhere -- New Orleans, perhaps? (where is Jim Garrison when you need him?), forgo the Constitutional rigamarole, and hit the White House with a RICO bust.
See also, Impeachment is Democrats' sworn duty by Cenk Uygur (The Politico)
from office for being human, but the American public never bought it. Now, with the media dismissing talk of punishing the administration for corruption and incompetence and the Democratic leadership refusing even to talk about bringing the Bush-Cheney criminal enterprise to a close, a clear majority of the citizenry has concluded on its own that Dick Cheney should be impeached, convicted and removed from office, and a large and growing number think George Bush should meet the same fate. Clearly we worry too much about the influence of the media on public opinion. Maybe, also, we should give up looking to the incumbent Democrats to represent us and try to identify new champions among the third parties and on the Dems' left flank. And maybe we should forget about impeachment. Let's just find a conscientious prosecutor somewhere -- New Orleans, perhaps? (where is Jim Garrison when you need him?), forgo the Constitutional rigamarole, and hit the White House with a RICO bust.See also, Impeachment is Democrats' sworn duty by Cenk Uygur (The Politico)
Iraq: "It is time for the United States to leave..." (New York Times editorial)
And speaking of waking up (see post below), the New York Times finally has realized that the light at the end of the tunnel is out:
"President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have used demagoguery and fear to quell Americans' demands for an end to this war. They say withdrawing will create bloodshed and chaos and encourage terrorists. Actually, all of that has already happened - the result of this unnecessary invasion and the incompetent management of this war. It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit." -- from an editorial in the New York Times.
"President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have used demagoguery and fear to quell Americans' demands for an end to this war. They say withdrawing will create bloodshed and chaos and encourage terrorists. Actually, all of that has already happened - the result of this unnecessary invasion and the incompetent management of this war. It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit." -- from an editorial in the New York Times.
Health Care: Michael Moore’s “Sicko," a review
By Gary Gordon
It is difficult to review a Michael Moore film without reviewing Michael Moore. He is the upstart troublemaker, activist, trickster, vaudevillian, the sore spot on the ass of the official story; celebrated, vilified, studied by anthropologists. Oh, and he’s popular.
In “Roger & Me,” he documented the economic collapse of Flint, Michigan as General Motors reorganized and the local Chamber of Commerce simultaneously denied the collapse and concocted bizarre and unsuccessful plans to revitalize the place.
In “Fahrenheit 9/11,” he argued that the “war on terror” and the invasion of Iraq were based on lies.
Now, in “Sicko,” he declares the healthcare system in the United States is broken, owned and operated by a greedy and often corrupt insurance industry and their servile politicians in both major parties, and there has to be a better way.
Through heartbreaking interviews with healthcare system victims, including 9/11 heroes who worked ground zero, and those in middle-management who once perpetuated the system and have since defected, Moore clearly documents the problems created by the for-profit health industry.
Through interviews with citizens of Canada, England, France and Cuba, Moore presents exciting aspects of their national health systems and maintains this kind of socialized approach is a solution for us to grab. To detractors of socialized systems, he points to long-socialized American institutions: medicare, our police and fire departments, our post office, public schools and libraries.
Critics of Moore often pick over his films the way vultures devour roadkill, finding fault and what they argue is deception and manipulation. Unfortunately, by some reputable accounts, Moore leaves himself open to these attacks because there are times when his use of narrative and moving images slights the truth of a more complex situation. His celebration of then-First Lady Hillary Clinton’s health care plans, as if her call for a national health plan was not a colossal deception designed to maintain the insurance industry’s grip speaks to his occasional naiveté. To his credit, he points out her rank as senator and presidential candidate among recipients of health insurance industry donations: she is number two.
The thing is, Flint, Michigan’s economy did collapse when General Motors shifted facilities and tens of thousands of jobs to Mexico and the Chamber’s schemes flopped, the “war on terror” and the invasion and occupation of Iraq were and are based on lies, and the US healthcare system is broken.
In other words, despite Moore’s faults and his critic’s best efforts, Moore gets it right.
CBS Anchorman Walter Cronkite once observed that anyone who got their news solely from him was a fool, that many sources should be sought and considered.
Moore’s is not the first nor final word on the healthcare debate, but his film “Sicko” is a brilliant, devastating and at times an oddly entertaining and humorous portrait of a sick system and a poignant draft of a possible solution.
Activist and singer-songwriter Gary Gordon is the creator of The Fictional Times.
----------------
Michael Moore Rips Into CNN's Wolf Blitzer
Sicko director Michael Moore gives host Wolf Blitzer and resident MD Dr. Sanjay Gupta a dressing-down in a must-see live TV moment (watch until the end to see CNN try to put Moore back in place before the next segment).
- Watch the clip here:
<http://youtube.com/watch?v=6TR1SG8WDbU>
- Watch Sanjay Gupta's 'Sicko Reality Check' here:
<http://www.crooksandliars.com/>
- Read Moore's point by point rebuttal to the 'Sicko Reality Check' here:
<http://www.michaelmoore.com/>
It is difficult to review a Michael Moore film without reviewing Michael Moore. He is the upstart troublemaker, activist, trickster, vaudevillian, the sore spot on the ass of the official story; celebrated, vilified, studied by anthropologists. Oh, and he’s popular.
In “Roger & Me,” he documented the economic collapse of Flint, Michigan as General Motors reorganized and the local Chamber of Commerce simultaneously denied the collapse and concocted bizarre and unsuccessful plans to revitalize the place.
In “Fahrenheit 9/11,” he argued that the “war on terror” and the invasion of Iraq were based on lies.
Now, in “Sicko,” he declares the healthcare system in the United States is broken, owned and operated by a greedy and often corrupt insurance industry and their servile politicians in both major parties, and there has to be a better way.
Through heartbreaking interviews with healthcare system victims, including 9/11 heroes who worked ground zero, and those in middle-management who once perpetuated the system and have since defected, Moore clearly documents the problems created by the for-profit health industry.
Through interviews with citizens of Canada, England, France and Cuba, Moore presents exciting aspects of their national health systems and maintains this kind of socialized approach is a solution for us to grab. To detractors of socialized systems, he points to long-socialized American institutions: medicare, our police and fire departments, our post office, public schools and libraries.
Critics of Moore often pick over his films the way vultures devour roadkill, finding fault and what they argue is deception and manipulation. Unfortunately, by some reputable accounts, Moore leaves himself open to these attacks because there are times when his use of narrative and moving images slights the truth of a more complex situation. His celebration of then-First Lady Hillary Clinton’s health care plans, as if her call for a national health plan was not a colossal deception designed to maintain the insurance industry’s grip speaks to his occasional naiveté. To his credit, he points out her rank as senator and presidential candidate among recipients of health insurance industry donations: she is number two.
The thing is, Flint, Michigan’s economy did collapse when General Motors shifted facilities and tens of thousands of jobs to Mexico and the Chamber’s schemes flopped, the “war on terror” and the invasion and occupation of Iraq were and are based on lies, and the US healthcare system is broken.
In other words, despite Moore’s faults and his critic’s best efforts, Moore gets it right.
CBS Anchorman Walter Cronkite once observed that anyone who got their news solely from him was a fool, that many sources should be sought and considered.
Moore’s is not the first nor final word on the healthcare debate, but his film “Sicko” is a brilliant, devastating and at times an oddly entertaining and humorous portrait of a sick system and a poignant draft of a possible solution.
Activist and singer-songwriter Gary Gordon is the creator of The Fictional Times.
----------------
Michael Moore Rips Into CNN's Wolf Blitzer
Sicko director Michael Moore gives host Wolf Blitzer and resident MD Dr. Sanjay Gupta a dressing-down in a must-see live TV moment (watch until the end to see CNN try to put Moore back in place before the next segment).
- Watch the clip here:
<http://youtube.com/watch?v=6TR1SG8WDbU>
- Watch Sanjay Gupta's 'Sicko Reality Check' here:
<http://www.crooksandliars.com/>
- Read Moore's point by point rebuttal to the 'Sicko Reality Check' here:
<http://www.michaelmoore.com/>
Iraq: A Republican Senator Wakes Up
New Mexico Senator Pete Domenici, certainly deserving of the sobriquet "senior Republican" after more than three decades in the Senate, has decided as regards Iraq that, in Capital Hill Blue's description, "enough is enough."
Sen. Domenici, who by the way looks about as much like a
"Pete" as Vladimir Putin looks like a "Pootie-Poot," joined other Republican "statesmen" -- John Warner, Richard Lugar, George Voinovich -- who latterly have indicated varying degrees of discomfort with the endless and, more to the point, pointless slaughter in the Middle East.
Sen. Domenici, who not coincidentally is up for reelection in 2008, has signed on to the bill introduced in the upper house by Lamar Alexander, among others, that would turn the recommendations of the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group into policy. The panel recommended getting most US combat troops out of Iraq, with a target date for withdrawal of March 2008.
At the current pace, that might mean another 1000 or so needless American deaths, but, hey, who's counting?
Probably not Sen. Domenici. By his own account (in an interview 2007-07-06 All Things Considered), he began thinking seriously about Iraq only ten days ago. Ten days ago. Not to belabor the point, but as a senior member of the committee that oversees defense spending, what the hell has he been thinking about for the past four years? If this is true (and appallingly revealing admissions usually are), it goes a long way toward explaining how we got into this, uh, quagmire.
One doubts Domenici is any more dimwitted than Warner, Lugar or Voinovich, and he's probably scads of IQ points ahead of -- and certainly more responsible than -- the dozens of Republicans (and Joseph Lieberman) who still seem to think that tossing away American lives, wealth and standing in the world is just peachy, so it's probably safe to say that we got into the mess in Iraq because our congressional leaders were too busy thinking about something -- earmarks, possibly? -- other than the most important matter we've offered into their hands.
Enough is enough is about right.
Sen. Domenici, who by the way looks about as much like a
"Pete" as Vladimir Putin looks like a "Pootie-Poot," joined other Republican "statesmen" -- John Warner, Richard Lugar, George Voinovich -- who latterly have indicated varying degrees of discomfort with the endless and, more to the point, pointless slaughter in the Middle East.Sen. Domenici, who not coincidentally is up for reelection in 2008, has signed on to the bill introduced in the upper house by Lamar Alexander, among others, that would turn the recommendations of the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group into policy. The panel recommended getting most US combat troops out of Iraq, with a target date for withdrawal of March 2008.
At the current pace, that might mean another 1000 or so needless American deaths, but, hey, who's counting?
Probably not Sen. Domenici. By his own account (in an interview 2007-07-06 All Things Considered), he began thinking seriously about Iraq only ten days ago. Ten days ago. Not to belabor the point, but as a senior member of the committee that oversees defense spending, what the hell has he been thinking about for the past four years? If this is true (and appallingly revealing admissions usually are), it goes a long way toward explaining how we got into this, uh, quagmire.
One doubts Domenici is any more dimwitted than Warner, Lugar or Voinovich, and he's probably scads of IQ points ahead of -- and certainly more responsible than -- the dozens of Republicans (and Joseph Lieberman) who still seem to think that tossing away American lives, wealth and standing in the world is just peachy, so it's probably safe to say that we got into the mess in Iraq because our congressional leaders were too busy thinking about something -- earmarks, possibly? -- other than the most important matter we've offered into their hands.
Enough is enough is about right.
2008: The case for John Edwards' universal health care plan
Of the Democratic candidates, John Edwards has offered the most thorough (this is drawn from a piece by Timothy Noah in Slate, with which I agree) -- and the most progressive -- program for achieving universal national health.
Paul Krugman, who showed in an essay in the New York Review of Books ("The Health Care Crisis and What To Do About It") how far the current health-care debate misses the mark, gave Edwards' health-care plan thumbs up in a February column in the Times ("Edwards Gets It Right").
When the Democratic presidential candidates gathered in Las Vegas in March to debate health care, Marc Cooper of The Nation reported that Edwards' speech was the standout (see also, Impractical Proposals, 2008: Seven Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate Health Care), showing up both Clinton's program to save the insurance industry and Obama's bland assurances that something would be done (Obama's eventual proposal, while an admirable effort at political counter-punching, is not very well thought out; meanwhile, the only candidate who actually endorses single-payer, the commonsensical approach to providing health care of our international rivals, is Dennis Kucinich, who typically is short on the nuts and bolts of making it work).
William F. Buckley doesn't like Edwards' plan, a further indication that Edwards is on to something.
With his focus on poverty, universal health care, and immediate and complete withdrawal from Iraq, Edwards is well to the left of the other major contenders for the Democratic nomination; this is why, I'm guessing, his is virtually the only name I hear when ordinary citizens discuss politics out here, 3,000 miles from the Beltway and the Manhattan media; the situation strikes me as very similar to 2004 when one candidate (Kerry/Clinton) had been anointed by the Democratic establishment because he/she "can win" (momentum? moderation? money? -- I forget now what the reason was) and another (Dean/Obama) had captured the imagination of the romantics in the party because he promised change without pain.
(While there's no likelihood Obama will implode in a fit -- of passion, exaltation, outrage or any other emotion -- as Dean did, he is also about as likely to become president as Kucinich; out here in the boonies, take it for what it's worth, there is a strong feeling that Sen. Clinton -- momentum, moderation, money and whatnot notwithstanding -- cannot win; it's not that we wish her ill -- we're as stupified as you are by the prospect that the Oval Office might next be occupied by Newt Gingrich or someone of his ilk; on the contrary, we long with all our hearts for a real Democrat, at long last; it's just that we think it has been clear since Reagan beat Carter that, with the exception of charismatic Bill Clinton's runs -- Elvis Presley cast against the political equivalents of Dennis Weaver and Walter Brennan, the Democrats can't win as GOP lite.)
Asides aside, when it comes to health care, Edwards' liberalism, in addition to the nostalgic bonus of causing Buckley, the WSJ, Forbes, et al, to see "Red," is good for the campaign. As Noah writes, this is one debate that needs to shift leftward.
Despite the fact that it will probably be seen only by Democratic primary voters -- if nothing else, that may have the benefit of making it harder for Sen. Clinton to bloviate about the issue, despite its merits Michael Moore's Sicko by itself won't be enough to do the job of forcing the next Congress to take up universal health care (partly because the movie doesn't engender sympathy for the program's natural political allies in the business community).
But at least Moore's movie will help to keep the issue percolating through November 2008. And it should help to forestall efforts by "moderates" in Congress to pass an industry-backed "reform" of the current health-care setup as a way to block the adoption of a truly universal single-payer system.
To get back to specifics, then, how does the Edwards plan measure up? Here, in Edwardscare: A Trojan Horse, is what Noah finds.
Paul Krugman, who showed in an essay in the New York Review of Books ("The Health Care Crisis and What To Do About It") how far the current health-care debate misses the mark, gave Edwards' health-care plan thumbs up in a February column in the Times ("Edwards Gets It Right").
When the Democratic presidential candidates gathered in Las Vegas in March to debate health care, Marc Cooper of The Nation reported that Edwards' speech was the standout (see also, Impractical Proposals, 2008: Seven Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate Health Care), showing up both Clinton's program to save the insurance industry and Obama's bland assurances that something would be done (Obama's eventual proposal, while an admirable effort at political counter-punching, is not very well thought out; meanwhile, the only candidate who actually endorses single-payer, the commonsensical approach to providing health care of our international rivals, is Dennis Kucinich, who typically is short on the nuts and bolts of making it work).
William F. Buckley doesn't like Edwards' plan, a further indication that Edwards is on to something.
With his focus on poverty, universal health care, and immediate and complete withdrawal from Iraq, Edwards is well to the left of the other major contenders for the Democratic nomination; this is why, I'm guessing, his is virtually the only name I hear when ordinary citizens discuss politics out here, 3,000 miles from the Beltway and the Manhattan media; the situation strikes me as very similar to 2004 when one candidate (Kerry/Clinton) had been anointed by the Democratic establishment because he/she "can win" (momentum? moderation? money? -- I forget now what the reason was) and another (Dean/Obama) had captured the imagination of the romantics in the party because he promised change without pain.
(While there's no likelihood Obama will implode in a fit -- of passion, exaltation, outrage or any other emotion -- as Dean did, he is also about as likely to become president as Kucinich; out here in the boonies, take it for what it's worth, there is a strong feeling that Sen. Clinton -- momentum, moderation, money and whatnot notwithstanding -- cannot win; it's not that we wish her ill -- we're as stupified as you are by the prospect that the Oval Office might next be occupied by Newt Gingrich or someone of his ilk; on the contrary, we long with all our hearts for a real Democrat, at long last; it's just that we think it has been clear since Reagan beat Carter that, with the exception of charismatic Bill Clinton's runs -- Elvis Presley cast against the political equivalents of Dennis Weaver and Walter Brennan, the Democrats can't win as GOP lite.)
Asides aside, when it comes to health care, Edwards' liberalism, in addition to the nostalgic bonus of causing Buckley, the WSJ, Forbes, et al, to see "Red," is good for the campaign. As Noah writes, this is one debate that needs to shift leftward.
Despite the fact that it will probably be seen only by Democratic primary voters -- if nothing else, that may have the benefit of making it harder for Sen. Clinton to bloviate about the issue, despite its merits Michael Moore's Sicko by itself won't be enough to do the job of forcing the next Congress to take up universal health care (partly because the movie doesn't engender sympathy for the program's natural political allies in the business community).
But at least Moore's movie will help to keep the issue percolating through November 2008. And it should help to forestall efforts by "moderates" in Congress to pass an industry-backed "reform" of the current health-care setup as a way to block the adoption of a truly universal single-payer system.
To get back to specifics, then, how does the Edwards plan measure up? Here, in Edwardscare: A Trojan Horse, is what Noah finds.
2008: Non-candidate Fred Thompson #1 with Republican voters
So shallow is the GOP bench that non-announced candidate Fred Thompson now leads in the polls. Thompson, sometime senator, sometime actor, sometime lobbyist, sometime simple country lawyer and all-time blowhard, has turned vaporous politics, folksiness and a non-threatening sex-appeal into a serious shot at the presidency.
Call him the Republican Barack Obama.
Rudy Giuliani still manages to grip second place with a campaign targeted squarely on appeals to the "be afraid" crowd. He's also holding his own in fund-raising, though its hard to see how an unlikeable, cross-dressing, thrice-married, baby-killing social moderate can last through the convention, no matter how many times he cites 9/11.
Cult member Mitt Romney edges out hapless John McCain for third place, but Romney has had to loan money to his campaign in order to stay viable, while cash-poor McCain is reduced to laying off staff and curbing appearances. McCain has apparently decided to revert to the Iowa-New Hampshire-South Carolina boost strategy that became moot the moment the big states moved up their primary dates to get in on all that campaign dough.
Likable Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee leads the also-rans and might even have a shot but for the prospect of late and later entrances by Thompson and non-stop speaker Newt Gingrich.
Call him the Republican Barack Obama.
Rudy Giuliani still manages to grip second place with a campaign targeted squarely on appeals to the "be afraid" crowd. He's also holding his own in fund-raising, though its hard to see how an unlikeable, cross-dressing, thrice-married, baby-killing social moderate can last through the convention, no matter how many times he cites 9/11.
Cult member Mitt Romney edges out hapless John McCain for third place, but Romney has had to loan money to his campaign in order to stay viable, while cash-poor McCain is reduced to laying off staff and curbing appearances. McCain has apparently decided to revert to the Iowa-New Hampshire-South Carolina boost strategy that became moot the moment the big states moved up their primary dates to get in on all that campaign dough.
Likable Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee leads the also-rans and might even have a shot but for the prospect of late and later entrances by Thompson and non-stop speaker Newt Gingrich.
According to Rasmussen Reports:
After weeks of turmoil and change, the race for the Republican Presidential nomination has stabilized.
Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson remains on top in Rasmussen Reports national polling with 27% support. That's unchanged from a week ago. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is three points behind at 24%.
Thompson has a 16-point advantage over Giuliani among conservatives while Giuliani holds an even larger edge among moderate voters. However, in the race for the Republican Presidential nomination, there are always more conservative voters than moderates.
A separate survey found that Thompson is currently viewed as the most conservative of all GOP candidates. Giuliani remains the best liked candidate. Seventy-four percent (74%) of Republicans now have a favorable opinion of America's Mayor. Thompson's numbers among the GOP faithful have been moving in the opposite direction. Sixty-four percent (64%) of GOP voters have a favorable opinion of the actor while just 12% have an unfavorable view.
This week's national GOP poll also finds former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney with a one-point edge over Arizona Senator John McCain for the fourth time in six weeks. Romney and McCain were tied during the other two weeks. Now, the numbers are 13% for Romney and 12% for McCain.
Romney is viewed favorably by 58% of Republican voters while 30% have a less flattering opinion. McCain is viewed favorably by 55% and unfavorably by 40% of Republicans.
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is atop the second tier at 3%. Six other candidates--Senator Sam Brownback, Congressman Ron Paul, Congressman Tom Tancredo, former Governor Tommy Thompson, Congressman Duncan Hunter, and former Governor Jim Gilmore split 4% of the vote. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
