Modern Absurdities

They are middle-class* people so they deserve to get the bonuses.

And the people who are working there that are middle-class people, are expecting to get this bonus. If they do not get it, maybe they won’t be motivated enough to try to help the company turn around and getting the company to turn around and be more profitable is important for all of us.

Dana Perino, former Bush's press secretary

This is the 21st century but it seems it came way too early for many of our fellow humans. The problem is that several of those backward-looking people are also in position of power and can influence many others. Case in point, the Pope. He says that the scourge of AIDS is bad but condoms are worse! I'm not kidding. On his way to Africa--to enlighten the locals on the benefits of superstition, er, religion--he said, "You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms." So, anything that doesn't solve a problem is not a good idea?! Really? I don't think I have to explain how ridiculous this comment is.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Stem Sell

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Jim Cramer

What's with this medieval attitude towards sex? Surely, sex can be irresponsible, but in and by itself is not something bad--we're all here because of sex! I reckon that the church's dislike of sex has to do with the idea of pleasure. Oh, and that the human body is disgusting. Therefore, no sex for pleasure, just for procreation; hence, birth control is bad too. As for condoms--that have proven to be effective in the prevention of many communicable diseases--they are, too, bad!

Most women who get infected by HIV are married; they're infected by their husbands! Condoms you say? Well, not for them, not according to the dogmatic and "infallible" Pope. Here we have a proven method for preventing the spread of AIDS and other venereal diseases, but those who know very little about sex [isn't the Pope celibate?] say that they express God's mind on this issue.

Likewise, the conservatives & their Republican party in the US are against stem cell research. Why? Because the soul can exist in a petri dish--where 2 cells have merged! Yeah, I know, it is absurd. Yet, if we remain engaged in the process we will overcome the objections of those who have fought against Social Security, Medicare, science & education, labor laws, consumer protection, public health care, and electrification. We can't be a modern country with politics & attitudes fit for the Dark Ages. Besides, if we want to maintain our prominence, we have to become more educated, a fairer society, supporting science & technology, and a progressive culture of life.



UPDATE 3/18

Speaking of absurdities.. The conservatives have turned into a party of "no." Nothing new to offer, if anything at all. They hope that their best chance is for Obama and the Congressional Dems to fail or be corrupted by power for the GOP to return to relevancy. That might happen, but let's hope that the country doesn't have a short memory syndrome. The huge mess we're experiencing is the result of Republican policies and conservative ideology. It hasn't been only their incompetence that reduced our country by most meaningful measures!

Less than few weeks into his term, the spokespeople of the conservative base have been practicing Big Brother's revision of history. The economy? It's them liberals that started it all by ..forcing the banks to make bad loans! Awwww. Also, while we were attacked on our own soil under the Republican "watch", it's Obama that makes us less safe. That's what tricky Dickey just said.

Here's a good response by a former Republican senator.



Cheney is a jackass!

PS>Did you hear that Dubya is writing an "authoritarian" biography! "I'm going to put people in my place, so when the history of this administration is written at least there's an authoritarian voice saying exactly what happened." He said. Even though I hope the earth opens up and swallows Bush & Co, I'll miss him representing the idiots of this country.

*Middle class is anyone who makes less than $5 million a year! That's what McCain said during the campaign. I know, I'm making $4 mil. a year and I'm roughing it...

Aside from the definition of who's in the "middle class," how can a company give bonuses from the money it doesn't have? The US Treasury gave AIG $180 billion to bail it out. I like what some Dems in Congress are proposing: taxing the bonuses at 100% for any company that has received public money in a bailout.

President Obama Lifts the Gag Rule and the Ban on Science

Elections have consequences. President Obama is lifting a ban & a gag rule, but also ending the war on science that Bush and the Republicans have been waging. Scientific reason, method, and integrity will be the norm in the policies of our federal government. Many states are treading backwards, and it is there that the conservatives are making a stand. Well, it might take a couple more elections--and big defeats--for the moderate Republicans to muster enough courage and support and pull the GOP into the 21st century.




Please watch the video, because it shows that the new president "gets it." He understands what science is and realizes that it's to the country's advantage to seek new frontiers, be on the path of progess, and that the scientific way is the way to go forward.

An Argument in Defense of Blasphemy. [and a comment on the UN blasphemy resolution]

There are many things that offend me. High on my list is obligatory superstition and ignorance forced upon us, as well as violations of human rights & fundamental freedoms! On the other hand, I admit, I do like the occasional blasphemy routine (who doesn’t?), because it has a liberating effect on me. That’s right, it feels good to have the right to free expression! Even though, many things offend me, I support the conditions that ultimately make me happy. Such conditions allow others who disagree with my views and life style to pursue their own self-defined bliss. I can deal with offensive expressions by maintaining my personal choices and taste.

Boycotting, choosing not to, or ignoring something is not the same as legally banning it. I prefer not to be offended, but if it happens, I shouldn’t have the legal right to remain non-offended. This is easy to understand why: there’s isn’t anything under the sun that can’t be offensive to someone somewhere.

Morality, in its most basic application, is how we treat others in a civil society where a plurality exists. The conditions that support civil rights & constitutional liberal democracy are the most suited for enlightened, progressive human beings. A personal definition of fulfillment & purpose is appropriate for every thinking, mature individual. Free expression is in the core of such definition.

If you are a confident person you probably don't think that ideas (or expressions) are toxic, because you can handle them. Correct? Bad taste, stupidity, purposeful ignorance, prejudice, etc, can all be dismissed by the rational and confident mind. You probably worry that it is your fellow citizens who aren't equipped to handle such expression, and therefore you want to protect them by banning offensive material. Right?

Wrong! People have to grow up and deal with life and the real world--even if this means being offended here and there. Keeping people insulated in a web of mind control is not good. It results in ignorance, extremism, lack of confidence to deal with a crisis, and, obviously, authoritarian practices by small elites--benevolent dictators. We are better than that.

Besides, who is the best judge of what's offensive to me? Should I say, I don't want to be offended.. Should I elevate this to a legal right? What do you think?

When I was very young, I saw the American flag being burnt in protest by veterans of the Vietnam war. I was offended. I hadn't separated the material of the flag with what the flag represents. Just as I was offended when my religion was being attacked as a myth. Yes, once I believed in Zeus, Santa Claus, Superman, and the Tooth Fairy. I grew up since. Today, I'm offended mainly by actions that attempt to limit the conditions of freedom--including banning free speech. Being challenged on my core beliefs back then resulted in re-examining those long-held beliefs. I'm better for it. This has been another liberating experience for me. I mean, it's a relief not to have to worry about offending the big man in the sky. My dress code, eating patterns, sex, and how I relate to others, all improved after this discovery.

I do support blasphemy. I support it because I want to offend those who don't want free-thinkers around. And, I want to fight for liberty, including the liberty of those who oppose free expression; though I oppose their plans to gag the rest of us into submission.

By now you've probably heard about the UN General Assembly's resolution to ban "defamatory" speech against Islam and religion in general. If this is not a defamation of liberty & free expression I don't know what it is! It's not just the Islamic countries that are pushing this, mind you. They have many Christian sympathizers, because most of the Church hierarchy does not care to defend free thought & expression; it wants more religion! I bet many western Churches dream longingly of the European theocracies of the past! The Archbishop of Canterbury, for example, favors Sharia law in the Muslim communities in Britain!!! Sharia law in a constitutional liberal democracy??!! Well, that's really offensive!

Germany shares a big slice of the blame here. It's illegal in that country to deny the Jewish holocaust--an offense that can land you 3 years in jail. Obviously, only ignorant persons or Nazi-sympathizers deny the holocaust, but those bigots should have a right to their own propaganda and indoctrination, even if they're 100% wrong and offensive to the rest of us. As others have the right to make up and believe in their own myths, like winged horses, virgin births, walking through walls, warlords from outer space, and the earth resting on a giant tortoise.

After all, there are many types of deniers out there, like those who deny the notion that Zeus is the God of all gods. I suppose this is fine, because only a handful of people follow the ancient Hellenic religion today, right? There are others, though, who make extraordinary claims without offering any proof while their claims could not stand against rudimentary logic. What's really crazy it's the view that irrational & superstitious beliefs deserve an absolute protection from blasphemy. I'd say, {it is precisely those beliefs that we must offend}, and offend with impunity!

Maybe this way, sometime soon, we can reclaim our humanity from those who want to impede our species' intellectual progress and self-fulfillment.
[Here's an older post written at the time of the Danish cartoon controversy. Who's afraid of offensive speech?]




PS>The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which has been signed by most UN members, should be re-read by those who seek to limit free expression. From the UDHR:

Article 19

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

The Party of Beavis and Butthead

In all of my classes today, we've been discussing Obama's first speech to Congress and the Republican response by gov. Jindal. The two men delivered two very different views on the role of government. Obviously one was a much better messenger but the point of their differences should not be missed. I now think that they both are addressing a different audience. If Jindal and the conservatives think this kind of idiotic appeal works, I hope they keep using it. I wouldn't be surprised if the hard-core conservatives thought Jindal scored big... they thought the same about Sarah Palin!

On the other hand, Obama must win his bet, that is, like FDR, he has to show that sensible government can be a powerful means for improving the lives of most Americans. The conservatives have opposed every single worthwhile policy that today we take for granted and don't want to give up. Social security, medicare, seat belts, collective bargaining (unions), and electrification--just to name a few. If Obama passes a meaningful health care reform, it will further limit the conservative appeal and reduce their maneuvering space . Likewise with immigration reform--Latinos have been voting Democratic by 3-1. If this group solidifies behing the Dems, there will be a new political realignment that can last generations.

Last November, the Economist published an article, Ship of Fools, referring to the Republican party.

The Republicans lost the battle of ideas even more comprehensively than they lost the battle for educated votes, marching into the election armed with nothing more than slogans. Energy? Just drill, baby, drill. Global warming? Crack a joke about Ozone Al. Immigration? Send the bums home. Torture and Guantánamo? Wear a T-shirt saying you would rather be water-boarding. Ha ha. During the primary debates, three out of ten Republican candidates admitted that they did not believe in evolution...

..The Republican Party’s divorce from the intelligentsia has been a while in the making. The born-again Mr Bush preferred listening to his “heart” rather than his “head”. He also filled the government with incompetent toadies like Michael “heck-of-a-job” Brown, who bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina. Mr McCain, once the chattering classes’ favourite Republican, refused to grapple with the intricacies of the financial meltdown, preferring instead to look for cartoonish villains. And in a desperate attempt to serve boob bait to Bubba, he appointed Sarah Palin to his ticket...

The public seems to be supporting the president, and a sizeable majority wants Obama to pursue his policies with or without Republican support. As we've seen before the election, there are some noticeable trends in American society. There are majorities that support more regulation, a stronger social safety net, an active government for the commonwealth, and 7 in 10 Americans would favor the government's influence over the health care system in an attempt to reduce costs and expand coverage!

When liberalism's revolutionary ideas broke the Old Regime, and with the American political experiment (post-war of independence), the government was seen as a threat to liberty. For thousands of years, the government was controlled by the aristocracy, the very few who had ascribed status. But, with an evolving political system, and changing conditions, the liberals realized that the government can be "re-captured." Of, by, for, the people means a government where the people can participate in, that it relies on popular consent, and it operates for the benefit of all. We progressives expect the government to empower and protect--with an expanded definition of these two words.



UPDATE, 2/26/09
Wait, there's more. In their own words....






The Conservatives are having their annual get-together at CPAC. I hope more Americans paid attention to this gathering, because the conservative parade is very interesting and clearly show their core beliefs. I wrote this post a couple years ago, but not much has changed since then. In 2007, the cons' CPAC took place after a severe beating of the GOP at the polls (Nov. 2006). It's the same situation this year. The more the lose, the more bitter and extreme they get. This regressive party must be pushed aside and a newer, more modern, should take its place--much like some of the (western & northern) European conservative parties.

Charles Darwin's Bicentenial: A Good Reason to Celebrate Our Species Inquiry into Our Origins

Seeking and Examining the Evidence

It's not easy having our long-held beliefs challenged, especially when those beliefs have become part of one's identity. Science has given us knowledge--often by destroying our esteemed views of humanity and the world around us. But, this is good; we have a brain that can learn lots, think in the abstract, and able to create greatness.... if we want to.

It's incredible that more Americans today believe in creationism than evolution. A religious belief that we were made in our present form a few thousand years ago. This is despite the theory of evolution being one of the strongest scientific theories we've got--tested and confirmed many times over. Yes, science has told us that we are not the center of the universe and that our species wasn't created in the image of gods, but the other way around. Of course, we're special, but in our brief moments of existence, we should try to make the best of it through a progressive culture of life!

Two hundred years ago, on February 12, Charles Darwin was born. Fifty years later (another reason to celebrate, the 150th anniversary this year), he published THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES, but it seems that news travels very slowly in a dense medium....

Anyway, another great great thinker, Richard Dawkins summarizes Darwin's discoveries in the following video:

Our leaders must provide leadership and not try to appeal to the lowest common denominator. It unconscionable that presidential candidates declare, and being proud of it, that they don't believe in evolution. It's appalling that we still pay such a great homage to superstition and ignorance. There's a price to pay for shunning knowledge, reason, and progress.

There's something about science that I find fascinating, and it falls within my definition of the meaning of life. My need to know is greater than my fears. I welcome a challenge and I'm open to revision. It's incredible that I'd hold a belief just because it made feel good when the evidence is contradictory.

PS>Today it's Abe Lincoln's birthday too. He was also a person who helped humanity take a couple big steps forward.

Sometimes Being in the Middle of the Road Results in Roadkill

It seems that Republicans are on a mission from God, as evidenced by their behavior so far: . They have created this huge mess, and now all of them (sans 3, yes, just t-h-r-e-e in the Senate) have been opposing any effort by the newly-elected and 70%-approval-rated president to deal with the crisis. I think Obama is learning quickly that he cannot depend on the conservatives for help to build a progressive country by redefining the role of government. Nobel laureate, Paul Krugman, nails it (again) about the Destructive Center.

Here's the Barack Obama we liked during the campaign:

It's About Time We Think and Act Big. [and Why Republicans Should Oppose all of it]

Sometimes you have to thing big and act accordingly. What the country needs is bold moves right now, from the economy to education, health care, and even what we do in everyday life. We come from the past and certainly we want to maintain a continuity but not at the expense of having a better life in the future. We should also be open to reality and spend some time learning about the important issues, because many policies will be implemented in our name. All this assumes that people are mature enough to re-examine certain myths that sustained our politics & policies in the last several decades.

We've already taken some bold steps with the election of Barack Obama. Some bank checks are written for hundreds of billions of dollars--and they're not issued only by Wall Street as bonuses to its executives. Our government is writing big checks right now and we are being charged that amount. At last count, the national debt exceeded $11 trillion. This has to be paid back but how it's done will depend on what we do today and how we use all this money. It's about time we became smarter as a nation and how we behave politically--which involved lots more than voting every couple years. But, how does one become smart?

This is an Equal-Opportunity Project. We All Have a Role to Play

It starts with the family that imbues children with proper attitude and good habits. We have to examine the conditions that make a family stable. There are some actions individuals can make while the government provides access to information, proper nutrition & health care, and better education. Spend in advance so we can save money later. Crime costs this country a pretty penny, and the cost isn't just what we spend on more police, courts, prisons & housing of inmates.

Information--accurate and informative--is power. Access to the Internet is a necessity today and every citizen should have it. Researching, learning, exercising one's civic duty & rights, keeping an eye on our elected officials, finding a (better) job can all be done via the cyberspace. Faux News can still exist (so we can always point to an example of stupidity, prejudice and intellectual blindness), but we have to maintain those media that inform and pursue the evidence no matter where it leads. Funding (private & public) for PBS, NPR and your local non-for-profit media is necessary. Democracy cannot exist without free media, but free media doesn't necessarily mean good information.

Speaking of evidence, we have to make sure that the scientific way wins over superstition and ignorance. There's a strong correlation between science and democracy and this will become even more prescient in the 21st century. Science embodies the notion of inquiry, increasing knowledge & finding new stuff, while amending beliefs is a welcomed outcome if better evidence is found. Intellectual pursuits are good, despite the official mantra of the last 8 years of Bush & Co--which includes much of his conservative base. The anti-science stance must end right away; it hurts the country and harms the individual. We've become a great country partly because we embraced science, and despiteour population being one of the most ignorant among industrialized nations.

Universal health care is way overdue. We can have it, we can afford it--providing we reform the present system--and it has been tried with success elsewhere. This is a huge topic by itself and I will return to it, but I find unconscionable that so many people die due to lack of health care and/or appropriate insurance. [see sidebar, American Cancer Society's way of reducing cancer deaths by 50%!] If one of the goals of government is to protect, then providing decent health care is it! Terrorists kill far fewer Americans than other preventable causes. It's only a matter of priorities.

All the talk these days is the economy. How did we get to this? Short memory syndrome is one cause. We forgot that the banking system & Wall Street cannot self-regulate! The Republicans helped erase our memories of the Great Depression and perpetuated harmful myths while creating huge gaps of wealth in our society. Sadly, many voters have supported policies against their own interests. But, hey, the GOP gave those people what they wanted: the 3 Gs (God-gays-guns). Now they say tax breaks are what's need. Trickle down riches, and tides that lift all boats are crackpot folklore.

A Chance at Change But Success Comes With Prudent Choices

There's a window of opportunity to revamp many of our own myths, past practices, and show that a new approach can be a winning strategy for most of us. The government has an important role to play--that's why often it's not necessarily the size (the stone of contention between cons and libs) but whom we put there! Give me the best (whatever size) organization and put the wrong person in decision-making position, and I can guarantee you failure. We've done this for far too long. The Wall Street geniuses believed their own delusions and became arrogant. They formed close-knit groups and served on each other's boards, giving themselves huge pay packages & bonuses. While we privitized profit, we socialized the risk. The taxpayers are bailing them out because they became too big & too entrenched in the wallets of most Americans to fail.

There is some good news in this mess. The Republicans have become a regionally-based party which is shrinking. They still hold the illusion that it was Bush or McCain (strangely, not Sarah Palin--judging from her popularity in the GOP) that failed the ideology. Their strategy is to "just say NO!" and hope that Obama fails, that new scandals will wash away the Republican sins of the last 12 years, so the GOP will return to power. Wishful thinking? We'll see.

I do hope no Republican senator votes for Obama's economic plan. Like their counterparts in the House did--not a single Republican voted for it. And, I hope they elevate Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter, Sean Hanity, Bill O'Reilly, Laura Ingraham, and all such wingnuts to official spokesmen for the GOP. This party should either modernize or be relegated to the dustbin of history. Thus far it hasn't shown any inclination to progress. It hasn't realized that from a majority party, controlling the White House, and both chambers of Congress, it has become a small minority!

It's time we think big. All small-minded people please step aside and take your ignorance, prejudice, and myths with you.

This Day in History. Barack Obama Ushers a New Era in The United States

It may not be the most elegant thing to do during the celebration of a new president, but I couldn't help it.. Along with the crowd, a message to Bush... I did, too, uttered: Nananana, hey, hey, goodbye! Good riddance, once again. Gone but not forgotten, and I don't mean this in a positive way.

The legacy of Bush&Co: Torture, lies, waste and no-bid contracts, bad economy & the falling standards of the middle class, hurricane-size indifference, incompetence, violation of civil liberties, trashing of the US constitution, dumbing down, politics of fear, ignorance, religious nuttery, marring US reputation & standing in the world, etc, etc...

On to the future while remembering the lessons of the past. Cheers!

PS>The picture is from an art project, "drildo,"... and it may not be related to the story about the BushCo's legacy or any reaction to such.

Bush 43: One of the Worst Presidents in US History Exits

“I will live and lead by these principles: to advance my convictions with civility, to pursue the public interest with courage, to speak for greater justice and compassion, to call for responsibility and try to live it as well.”
G W Bush, inaugural speech, 2001.

Just a few HOURS before one of the worst US presidents leaves office. I don't know if Obama meant it, "no hard feelings," but I think my own feelings of anger, disappointment, and good-riddance, are shared by millions of Americans.



I didn't watch Bush's final address, and only saw some clips from his last press confernce. He either doesn't get it or he wants to maintain his illusions. Here's a great recap by Chris Matthews:

Along with the departure of the decider, I hope we got rid once and for all the following individuals who were appointed by G W Bush and are also responsible for devaluing our country. [the list from Think Progress click for more info and to refresh your memory]

Dick Cheney, Condie Rice, Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzalez, Don Rumsfeld, P. Wolfowitz, G. Tenet, M. Brown, D. Addington, J. Yoo, D Faith, P Bremer, J. Bolton, A. Fleisher (and all the other lying spokespersons), L. Libby, Miers, Paulson, Goodling, Norton, Chao, and Collin Powell who didn't have the balls to be honest when it mattered.

2009 Has to Be Better Than the Last Eight

For starters, 2009 will be better than the last 8 years in terms of leadership in our country. You may disagree with Obama's priorities [or, because he's a Muslim, cohorts with terrorists, etc], but he's not clueless. Obviously, he has to prove that he can lead--and lead the US in a progressive direction. Yet, I have some realistic hope of better years ahead. Since he won't get to work until the 20th, let's take a look at what the departing president told us. Unfortunately, he was able to convince a large number of Americans--and here lies our responsibility as citizens to keep an watchful eye on our leaders, and to take proper care in making important decisions.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS! May the New Year Bring More of a Progressive Culture of Life.

Ah, this is a great time for celebrating. The colder weather--at least here in the northeast--requires a cozy atmosphere. The winter solstice just took place, so the "new sun" will rise higher and higher for the next 6 months, but every season is nice to experience... all because our earth wobbles like a drunkard! ha!

Enjoy life and don't waste your time with pettiness and unnecessary grief.

This is an 0ld time favorite.

The President-elect is Stuffing his Santa Bag with Goodies & Coal

As we progressives look at the president-elect's choices for his cabinet, it's a mixed bag of goodies & baddies. This election was about change, and Obama has promised to usher a new era of healing and true progress--a progress in science & technology, civil rights & liberties, and caring for the world & our fellow humans. That is a very tall order, but, as I've maintained here, it is imperative that the new president steers the USS America in the correct direction. The speed on which we travel remains to be determined.

One of the most important powers the president has is the power to convince. He is the center of attention, so his choices set the national agenda. Impressions also matter as they set the tone. Take for example his choice for Energy Secretary, Dr. Chu. As a energy-hungry nation we need to make the right choices today and this a nice way to start by having someone who knows lots about this subject.

Now, on the other hand, what the heck was BO thinking when he chose Rev. Rick Warren to deliver some voodoo during the innauguration? Yes, I said, it's voodoo, because it's prejudicial, superstitious, and does not reflect a truly enlightened society. Obviously, Mr. Warren thinks he's praying to a god that wants the gays, Jews and Muslims to burn in hell, women not to have reproductive choice, and all sorts of other nonsense, like the soul existing in a petri dish--hence, the religious nuts opposing stem cell research.

I understand that this country is religious, but it wasn't necessary for BO to pick anyone like this backward-looking "reverend." There are plenty of much better choices out there that have more progressive views. If the new president wants a godly approach, he should pick people whose gods are more humanistic. After all, if BO is intent upon carrying out his social, pro-"main street" policies, he shouldn't be so accepting of people (like Warren) who call such approach marxist!

"Like every candidate, Obama must appeal to millions of voters who believe that without religion, most of us would spend our days raping and killing our neighbors and stealing their pornography. Examples of well-behaved and comparatively atheistic societies like Sweden, Finland, Norway, and Denmark--which surpass us in terrestrial virtues like education, health, public generosity, per capita aid to the developing world, and low rates of violent crime and infant mortality--are of no interest to our electorate whatsoever. It is, of course, good to know that people like Reverend Wright occasionally do help the poor, feed the hungry, and care for the sick. But wouldn't it be better to do these things for reasons that are not manifestly delusional? Can we care for one another without believing that Jesus Christ rose from the dead and is now listening to our thoughts?

Yes we can"

Sam Harris, What Barack Obama Could Not Say.

Of Sunsets and Unicorns

With the new president-elect being more visible and active that the sitting president, much has been said about Obama's choice regarding his cabinet and other high posts in his administration. I've been part of endless discussions about Obama scorning the progressive community that played a huge part--especially early on when he mostly needed the money and the ground troops--in his campaign for the presidency. But let's see what this man does when he has power.

Reaching to the established powers and even across the aisle is less important than the actual policy implemented. If, like he recently re-affirmed, he is the author of new policy, then I don't care who implements it. Of course I have issues with, say, keeping Gates in the Defence Dpt. This reinforces the notion that Republicans are stronger on defense! And, the economic team does not include Nobel-laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz, the one who has progressive ideas on economic and warned us about "free market fundamentalism."

Perhaps this is Obama's way of saying, I'm mainstream, but will nevertheless push for progressive politics. The other reality is that Obama probably feels that there's no option for failure. The country is quite messed up, domestically and internationally. This is a chance for redefining the role of government and re-arranging our national priorities. This is a chance for a non-traditional leader to show that certain ceilings & barriers should be demolished for good.

If there's progress regarding health care, access to education, the environment, science, and smarter foreign policy, I'd be ecstatic! Let's see what takes place.

PS. You might find this opinion on The Washington Post interesting. David Corn criticizes BO for his early picks.

It's Time to Say "Good Riddance" to Anachronisms in our Politics

Truthiness is a Sign of Ignorance

It's extraordinary that a minority party obtains such big majorities, plus a 7 point win for the presidency, in just 2 years! Perhaps the stars were properly aligned, or there was a perfect storm, but nevertheless the Dems won big and now have a mandate--which also means a great responsibility. The other side is trying to figure our what went wrong. The initial spin is that the problem was Bush & company, and Mac-Palin. Surely these were important factors but there's lot more to it. [my latest posts focus more on this]

Two weeks later, and the election of 2008 is not over. There are 3 US Senate seats to be decided, and Missouri hasn't declared either. Obama's EV total stands at 365, with the latest addition of 1 from Nebraska! Oh, in the Senate, Lieberman must be kicked out of the important chairmanship of Security and Governmental Affairs. He's an embarrassment and a buffoon. He has not investigated the incompetence & corruption of the Bush administration and he won't do it even after Obama becomes president. We have a right to know what happened during the last 8 years, so let's get a decent fellow in instead of someone who worked against what we tried to achieve before and during this election.

Hillary Clinton is rumored to have been offered the Secretary of State job but, even though she'll be a great fit, I don't know if she'll take it.... unless, she's tired of her place in the Senate and wants a different direction now. She can easily win in New York and probably stay in the Senate for as long as she wants, but a SoS position will definitely be shorter. The Dems look good in 2 years when they'll have another good chance to top 60 seats in the US Senate--and by doing this, break a pattern that the party in the White House loses seats in midterm elections. The GOP will most likely be an obstructionist faction, as they did when Clinton came to the White House. They were rewarded in the midterm elections but I think the times are much different now.

The Republican party is going through a crisis. I do prefer a modern political party to be in opposition, but this GOP is anachronistic and not good for the country. If it self-destructs, I won't miss it. I wonder whether some (few) reasonable voices will be heard or understood. Take for example the Republican MN gov. Tim Pawlenty who said:

"We cannot be a majority governing party when we essentially cannot compete in the Northeast, we're losing our ability to compete in the Great Lakes States, we cannot compete on the West Coast, and the Democrats are winning in the Western States.".... "we cannot compete and prevail.. if we have a significant deficit, as we do, with women, where we have a large deficit with Hispanics, where we have a large deficit with African-American voters, where we have a large deficit with people of modest incomes and modest financial circumstances...."

In a way, I'd like Palin, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, Liddy, Savage, Ingraham, Coulter, and all the other wingnuts to take complete control and try their version of conservatism. Actually, I would very much like to see this, because their views defy logic. It's not about a reasonable difference of opinion or priorities but a wingnuttery steeped in ignorance.

As long as their party embraces ignorance and an ideology that does not appeal to the majority of the American people, their victories will be short and regional. The Dems can mess things up thereby giving an opportunity for the GOP to come back, however--as a party that has it's power base in the religious conservatives, the racially motivated, the big business interests, anti-science, anti-environment, anti-minority, and ignorance--it will diminish in the years to come. And, may I say, good riddance to such a party!

UPDATE 11/20/08

Check this article from the Economist. The US has been changing and it seems that the Democratic party has an ideology and direction that the majority of Americans supports. Anti-intellectualism may be appealing to many Americans but their numbers are declining. Here's an excerpt from the Economist's Ship of Fools:

The Republicans lost the battle of ideas even more comprehensively than they lost the battle for educated votes, marching into the election armed with nothing more than slogans. Energy? Just drill, baby, drill. Global warming? Crack a joke about Ozone Al. Immigration? Send the bums home. Torture and Guantánamo? Wear a T-shirt saying you would rather be water-boarding. Ha ha. During the primary debates, three out of ten Republican candidates admitted that they did not believe in evolution...

The Republican Party’s divorce from the intelligentsia has been a while in the making. The born-again Mr Bush preferred listening to his “heart” rather than his “head”. He also filled the government with incompetent toadies like Michael “heck-of-a-job” Brown, who bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina. Mr McCain, once the chattering classes’ favourite Republican, refused to grapple with the intricacies of the financial meltdown, preferring instead to look for cartoonish villains. And in a desperate attempt to serve boob bait to Bubba, he appointed Sarah Palin to his ticket, a woman who took five years to get a degree in journalism, and who was apparently unaware of some of the most rudimentary facts about international politics...

Republicanism’s anti-intellectual turn is devastating for its future...

A Historic Election: The United States Re-invents Itself!

At around 9 pm, when it seemed that Ohio would go blue, we knew that this election had been won by Obama. So, I was off by a couple hours in my prediction. However, I had also predicted:

• 57 Democratic Senate seats (not counting the 2 independents); As of 11/5/08, the senate races in Oregon and Minnesota are yet to be decided. So, I'll probably be off by 1.
• 41 Republican Senate seats. (See above)
• 251 Democratic House seats. The Dems have 250 as of now and 4 are tied.
• 184 Republican House seats. Spot on!
• 364 Obama Electoral Votes!!!!!!! Spot on!
• 174 McCain Electoral Votes. Ditto!
  

There have been several trends and indicators that let me to believe Obama could ride a wave of change, a political realignment. When I wrote about this back in June, it was a hard sell. Again, right after the GOP convention--when MacPalin were "ahead" in the polls--I thought this bounce (like most convention bounces) would dissipate. My previous posts here explain in detail my thinking. Finally, after almost 2 years since the candidates prepared themselves to run for the nomination, the contest comes to an end. A happy end of us progressives.

One more observation. I argued that the longer contest (that lasted until last June) was good for Obama. It tested him, it introduced him to the American people, and the latter became more comfortable with the him. He looked poised, cool & collected, knowledgeable and presidential. I also thought that the animosities between Sen. Clinton and BO back in the first half of 2008 would be "ancient history" by September. I'm glad that close to 90% of Dems came home to vote for BO. Without having seen the numbers, I'm willing to bet that not only the majority of Dem women but women at large voted for BO.

Here's are some more pictures from Times Square.

All these pictures are from Midtown Manhattan, where people gathered to celebrate BO's victory. Traffic came to a standstill, and for many blocks people filled the streets.
I took these pictures shortly after the networks called it for Obama.

We almost had a riot when all the big screens (as seen here) in Times Square went blank at the moment when Obama came out to speak in Chicago. Fortunately, it only lasted a minute or two.

This is the Fox (Faux) News building on 6th Av. It's about 1 am on Wednesday... I thought this was really funny. Notice that the banner says "projects"... Everyone else knew it, but Faux was still projecting it! Ha! I think all the cons left the building much earlier after they realized their ticket and party would take a good beating!

Sure, it's not the ideology, the view on the role of government, that's responsible for this defeat. Like in other regressive systems, the ideology or the system is never at fault; it's always the "few bad people" that fail. That's what they'll tell us now.

Well, at least we now know that the conservatives and their Republican party is a minority, regional party. If it chooses the likes of Sarah Palin as the flag bearer, it'll further shrink. Carl Rove's (and several others) had predicted a new Republican majority in 2000, a political realignment for the next several generations, have been proven wrong.

In the next few days, when the numbers come in, it'll be interesting to crunch them and see how the country voted. Meanwhile enjoy this! Oh, I think we should move the inauguration of the new president on December 1st. We moved in once from March to January, now we should do it again.

This Liberal Citizen Endorses Barack Obama For President [and an update]

This isn't a surprise, I admit, but this is an enthusiastic endorsement for a candidate who will be a great president and a decent world leader. Of course I understand that, as a the only nationally-elected leader, he has to govern a very diverse country that is more conservative than the progressives. He has to speak to the minds and hearts of people who believe in American exceptionalism and in a God that blesses the US and decides about the lives of everyone. But, in a democratic country, the people have the right to elect leaders who espouse the sentiment of the majority.

On the other hand, I think this country has a majority that is closer to liberal ideals than the regressive conservatism; we just have to do a better job in framing the issues. Another very encouraging trend is that the younger generations don't have the same gender and racial biases. And, they seeem to be more engaged (and voting) than previous generations of the same age group.

This election may answer the question about the role of the government--an issue that divides the two major political parties. If BO and the Dems trounce the GOP, then it'll be their chance to show that re-arranging our priorities (less war, for example), being pro-active & smarter, we can have a state that delivers for the middle class and the poor. It's no surprise that vast majorities in other democracies support a social safety net that makes people happier and live longer! Even the Swiss now highly approve of the universal health care they enjoy--and it took political courage and a few hundred extra votes to initially pass this reform.

We've engaged in debates of all sorts about the qualifications of a the major candidates, but the bottom line is a core of issues most likely dictates how people vote. We progressives have to remember to bring the conversation "back to the basics" and be proud for what we believe in. The worst thing to do is to be Republican-light. No, this election will hopefully deliver a repudiation to a party that has embraced extremists and ignorance.

We don't have to surrender the word liberal. All democracies today are liberal democracies, whereas human & civil rights, privacy, tolerance, the scientific method, access to opportunity, social safety net, education, and all those other goodies that makes you want to live in such a society instead of another.

Over the last 4 years since this blog was born, I've written extensively on the issues, how to frame them, and why an enlightened human being is a progressive person. Here are some of the important issues to ponder and which presidential candidate has a progressive stance:

• Health care. Right or a privilege?


• Education. I'm only going to say, more educated people are good for a country.


• The Economy. Self-regulating unbridled capitalism leads to its own demise. Somebody has to be at the wheel watching the road.


• Religion. The religious conservatives and any fanatic can continue to believe whatever they want. They just can't impose their superstition and suspension of reason on the rest of us.


• Race. No further explanation needed.


• SEX! Enough of the conservative stupidity & discrimination. And, yes, a modern society provides its young with appropriate sex education and reproductive choices.


• Patriotism. Who's a true patriot? It's the one that uplifts his/her country, makes it safer, speaks up when necessary, and improves the conditions of freedom & welfare of the commonwealth.


• Poverty. I suppose it's OK for millions of children to go to bed starving every night; or, that poor people are always responsible for their predicament.... Com'on now. Let's be real, and humane!
  


• Foreign Policy. Is the US safer today? What is our standing in the world, and does this have an implications on our national security? If I hear another, we're fighting them over there, so we don't have to fight them here, I'm going to become violent and hit hard whomever doesn't get my point! Unwise use of force works! No?
  


• Taxes. If you buy the GOP's allegation that BO is a socialist or that redistributing the wealth in un-American, you've got to open up a dictionary asap; then, if you still don't get it, go live in the vacuum of space, because all liberal & capitalist democracies engage in redistribution of wealth. The more you have the more you pay in taxes, and the less you have the less you pay. Adam Smith said so! Progressive taxation in our constitution... though, we all know what Bush & his cohorts have done to the constitution!


• Environment. Unless you (like too many Americans) believe that this is the end of times, protecting & improving the environment is a good thing for us and our children.


• SCIENCE. Since Newtonian science took roots (at least in the places in did), humanity advanced by leaps and bounds. The physical world could be explained without the need for the supernatural, and, get this, human life improved and life expectancy doubled within just one century. The scientific method is the best tool we have for understanding the world around us and for improving the quality of our life. Here's an endorsement of Obama by a scientific community:

"Science is a way of governing, not just something to be governed. Science offers a methodology and philosophy rooted in evidence, kept in check by persistent inquiry, and bounded by the constraints of a self-critical and rigorous method. Science is a lens through which we can and should visualize and solve complex problems, organize government and multilateral bodies, establish international alliances, inspire national pride, restore positive feelings about America around the globe, embolden democracy, and ultimately, lead the world. More than anything, what this lens offers the next administration is a limitless capacity to handle all that comes its way, no matter how complex or unanticipated." Seed Magazine

Finally, you know it, we have no margin for serious errors any more. We need a captain that will steer the US in the right direction, elevate our national dialogue, and inspire the nation to do its best in this new century. Thankfully, we do have a great choice this year, and it's Barack Obama.

UPDATE, Nov. 2nd

Instead of opening a new thread, I'll add some thoughts here. In our excitement--especially if BO wins--we may take our eyes off the ball, but we have to remain vigilant and demand more answers of what happened during the Bush years. It's not vengeance but those who broke the law must be brought to justice.

As the incompetent and corrupt regime is nearing its final 2.5 months in office, there's a parade of industry executives and lobbyists in the White House asking for further deregulation on--get this--consumer protection and the environment! BushCo have nothing to lose and they can further inflict damage on our country.

First I laughed, then I got irritated, and then I realized that the Republicans are laying the ground for de-legitimizing the next (BO) Dem president by their personal attacks against Obama! They question Obama's loyalty to the United States! He's not a "true Christian," cohorts with terrorists, and his "socialism" is un-American, they say! They did it to Clinton in 1992 and kept attacking him personally. Unless we're aggressive in defeating such tactics, they'll do the same for the next four years. I'm tired of having the conservatives wasting the nation's time, money, and energy on frivolous topics that only distracts us from the real issues.

I hope BO really trounces Mac and that the GOP suffers one of its worst defeats ever, and that the new president can claim a true mandate from the American people, unlike Dubya who... (well, you know how he got in).

Elections do matter. Elections have consequences! Ballots can change history, sometimes in more profound ways than bullets can. We have a responsibility as citizens in a democratic country to take the time & effort to educate ourselves about the major issues and render a thoughtful decision through our votes.

Liberal democracy was a radical concept, and emerged in a world whereas the ruling classes did not want the common people to be educated and making decisions--including redistribution of wealth! Self-government relies on sensible, mature citizens. Let's show that we are indeed grown-ups!

When It's Desperation Time, Some Politicians Become Even More Ridiculous

Putting America First...

It seems that Liberal Citizen was right about Sarah Palin. According to a NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, the Alaska governor is McCain's biggest liability now.

It's desperation time for the Republicans as a whole. It's not only their top ticket but down the line as well that will take a beating.

Two years ago, up to Labor Day, most people expected that the Dems would retake the House. The Senate seemed out of reach; it was tight, but the Dems edged out the Repubs by winning 6 extra seats. Today, the question that remains unanswered is whether they'll make it to 60 Senate seats! In the House the Dems will add to their majority. This is an amazing turnaround in such a brief time.



Have you been ticked off by the "un-American" talk lately? Is this what the Repubs have left? Apparently they're running against straw men, but the country isn't bying it. On the ground, Mac has pulled out of Michigan, New Mexico, Colorado, and has conceded Iowa. The GOP is still fighting a losing battle in PA, but there's no way this state will go red. Mac simply doesn't have enough states in the Electoral College to win this. He never managed to bring in any blue state that Kerry won in 2004. With Iowa, lost early on, and several other marginal red states flipping also early, it became increasingly difficult for the Repubs to be competitive.

CO, NM, IA are worth 21 EV. Add them to the 252 Kerry won and you get 273, three more that's needed to win the presidency! So, Mac needs PA or any other big state to turn red, but it's not happening by any stretch right now. On the flip side, big states Bush won in 2004, like Florida and Ohio are treading blue.

On election night, by 7 or 7:30 pm, if Virginia goes blue, it's all over.... 3 hours before polls close on the West Coast! Now the media likes a horse race, but they'll be hard pressed not to admit the obvious.

If you're wondering about your identity of a American patriot and small-town values, here's Jon Stewart to put things in (better than the national media) perspective.





Aren't we better as a country not to have to deal with this crap? I understand that most of us ain't buying it this year, but empty rhetoric and stupidity have been effective in the past. Check this out:

An Election at the Brink of A Major Political Realignment

<-Air is Running Out for One of These Two Guys...

OK, folks, there's nothing to see here, move on. The third debate has concluded, and as a columnist put it, we've reached the end of a long road of debates, soon to wrap up our even longer campaign season for the presidency. It's not up to the McCain-Palin team anymore. They can't change the dynamics of race to the White House. Maybe I should take this back. They can make it worse for them. Did you see Mac on Letterman? He said he knew the reputation of Sarah Palin. Sounds too highschoolish to me. Those signs their supporters wave, "America First," should serve a reminder to big Mac--that his VP choice shouldn't have been done like his first blind date.

Now the question is whether the US Senate will have a Democratic super-majority. It's almost 50-50 right now. If the Dems get very close to a comfortable majority--especially if conservative icons like McConnell and Dole are defeated--Sen. majority leader, Harry Reid, will be able to get a couple Repubs to stop the filibuster (60 votes needed), and perhaps to jump ship.

Another intriguing scenario is for President Obama (oh, that sounds great, doesn't it?) to appoint Olympia Snowe (R-ME) to a position in his government. Olympia is a fine human being and a very moderate politician who I happen to know and like. She's also a dying species in the GOP, as the latter has turned/surrendered to extremes. I couldn't understand why she has remained in a GOP controlled by the loonies. The Maine gov. is a Dem, and govs appoint people to fill vacant senatorial seats until the next election. BO and the Dems will have the opportunity to do good. On the other hand, they'll have no excuse if they fail. With power comes responsibility. Soon we'll see if they're up to the task.

Leadership is important. A wise leader can steer our ship, elevate the political discourse, focus the attention of the nation on the important issues, etc. Or, not! As we all know from the injurious leadership of the worst president ever!

I'm looking forward to this election with a good feeling that I haven't experienced in a very long time. Last time we thought we'd have excellent chance of winning was in the Clinton years.

But, let me clarify the "we" part. I'm a progressive liberal above all, and I would have liked to see more progressive politicians win. Yet, I understand the country and my fellow Americans... they are more conservative, or middle-of-the-road species. Gradualism (moving slowly, like molasses) isn't attractive either when you want to get to the promised land asap. [this is a metaphor, not a religious reference]

In kindergarten I was taught to compare and contrast. Didn't forget that. By doing so, and assuming some minimum standards are met, I choose to support individuals for leadership positions. Democrats come the closest to my ideology, my views, my aspirations, and the vision for the future. Clinton (and his Democratic Leadership Council) was too conservative, but I understood the big difference between Clinton and any Repub. So, I was elated he won.

Barack Obama holds more promise; I hope he delivers, even though I expect him to disappoint many people when he doesn't deliver all the things they expect and demand. That's politics, especially in a big and diversified country like the US. Our own politician system is designed for gridlock and slow change, though change is not only desirable but also possible under a president who understands the times and manages to steer the country into the right direction. That's very important, more important today since our country has been seriously injured under the tutelage of George Bush and his Republican party! There's simply no margin for errors any more.

A New America

Back in June, I thought [wrote about it on this blog] that there was a good chance this election would produce a new political realignment, and that, unless the Dem nominee committed political suicide, the election wouldn't be close. BO has scratched the surface of the heavy coats of paints piled by the conventional media. There were certain trends going on for a long while in our country, and, finally, BO managed to ride the wave into an seemingly improbable victory in Iowa--a very white state that GW Bush had won in 2004. That demonstrated BO could energize lots of people, many of whom were newcomers to politics. Hundreds of thousands of new voters came out in the middle of winter to participate in the caucuses! This tremendous wave has continued. I don't see why it won't show in the general election too. BO also proved many people wrong (including some of his advisers) that the country wasn't ready to elect a black man president.

The other trend was the Hispanic vote. This block is the new majority of the minorities. It is socially conservative, but issues like immigration and, yes, the economy, has driven it to the Democrats by 2 to 1 margin. This appears to be solidifying. If they stick with the Dem party of a couple more elections, we'll be talking about a huge advantage--bigger than the one the GOP enjoyed via its "Southern strategy."

The country has been undergoing some important trends. Older people with stale views (including racism) have been dying off and the new gens don't have the same racial biases as their parents. Population growth and movements within the country. The GOP has lost ground in some of the "reddest" states that are becoming "purple" if not blue!


There's been a cultural change too. Americans under 40 see the world differently than those over 50. Technology, information explosion, rise of education, peace and relative prosperity, all have been attitude changers. What generational change? Let me give you a great example: Same-sex marriage. While the country overall rejects it, Americans under 30 overwhelmingly approve it, or are not bothered by it.

Studies have shown that if a young person (under 30) votes 2-3 times for the same party then he/she will remain loyal in their later years as well. The young vote (at least the ones that bother to vote) is heavily Democratic today.

Furthermore, in the last 25 years there has been a change regarding:

• The role of government! This has been one fundamental difference between the conservatives and liberals the last 2 centuries. Majorities now want the government to be more active not an impotent observer. The latest excesses of Wall Street and the financial debacle further reinforced this view.

• Moral absolutism is no more! People today more readily accept that as long as others don't trample on their rights, it's OK for others to have their own morality. The government should not be used to impose and intrude.

• The US foreign policy should not be of unilateralism and only via brute force. Bush's disastrous war has divided our friends and united our enemies. Our country's standing in the world has declined. Americans seem to understand this.

These are all progressive views; I just hope the Dem party takes advantage of these trends and finally puts the country on a progressive path for good. I believe that progressive politics are good even for the non-progressives. The conservatives always come late to accept the ideas of liberalism. Most of them accept the ideals that came out of the Renaissance, the Age of Reason, and today enjoy the freedoms of liberal democracy!

What I think will happen after the election is that the GOP will go through an identity crisis, because political realignments signal a repudiation of a party's ideology, policy, and leadership. I hope that the Republican party will emerge as a modern party that embraces tolerance, has a modern view of the role of government, and finally rejects ignorance! However, I don't see this happening any time soon. I expect most of the conservatives (like many people do in times of crisis) to fall back on their "tried & true" dogma. It might take another election or two of bad defeats for them to change course and revise their ideology.