"Even confined to a wheelchair, Franklin Roosevelt can defeat Ayn Rand."
Monday, March 15, 2010
Them's fightin' words
Bring it on, Ayn Rand geeks!
"Even confined to a wheelchair, Franklin Roosevelt can defeat Ayn Rand."
"Even confined to a wheelchair, Franklin Roosevelt can defeat Ayn Rand."
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
TR and Health Care in the Early 20th Century
Basically I'm posting this because in spite of all the military involvement in the Philippines--and Cuba!--and Panama!--TR was still a pretty cool President. Besides, how cool is this?:
Friday, February 26, 2010
Lower the flags, Raise up the Earth
At 17, I would have loved this video...I think I still do. Strike Anywhere rocks!
Saturday, January 23, 2010
State of the Health Care Bill
Ta-Nahesi Coates (a daily read of mine) posted his discussion with Ezra Klein about the status of the Health Care bill now that Kennedy's Senate seat has been lost. Klein does an excellent job of explaining why the (Senate version of the) bill was (and still is) worth supporting. While Klein describes it as "intellectually honest" for progressives to admit that we truly wish for a single-payer system and that the current bill isn't really what we'd dreamed of, he rightly insists that the potential improvements to our present system included in the bill are too great for us to pass up.
Although my own insurance situation will not be affected either way (bill or no bill), I can't shake the feeling that we are missing a historic opportunity to accomplish something momentous in terms of social justice and economic fairness.
Perhaps most frustrating is the thought that the Democrats are on the verge of dropping this completely simply because their huge majority in the Senate was diminished by just one seat. One f'n seat! They still have 59 seats in their caucus. Maybe I'm overestimating the discipline of the congressional GOP, but I'm pretty confident that if they had a 59 seat majority in the Senate, with an insane majority in the House, not to mention a doctrinaire Republican in the White House, and that if they were then on the verge of passing legislation that was pretty much a pillar of their party's agenda for a generation or two (say tax code reform, for example), they would not hesitate to ram it through. They would succeed. Sure, some Senate Democrats would threaten to filibuster, but in the end, they would pass their bill, the President would sign it, and they would all celebrate together at parties with their mistresses, while drinking bourbon, and joking about how easy it all was.
Why can't the Democrats accomplish things the same way? Is it a matter of will? Are they just a bunch of cowards? Or is it just that a significant proportion of elected Democrats aren't committed to social democratic or progressive ideals to begin with? If so, what the eff are they doing in our party?
Although my own insurance situation will not be affected either way (bill or no bill), I can't shake the feeling that we are missing a historic opportunity to accomplish something momentous in terms of social justice and economic fairness.
Perhaps most frustrating is the thought that the Democrats are on the verge of dropping this completely simply because their huge majority in the Senate was diminished by just one seat. One f'n seat! They still have 59 seats in their caucus. Maybe I'm overestimating the discipline of the congressional GOP, but I'm pretty confident that if they had a 59 seat majority in the Senate, with an insane majority in the House, not to mention a doctrinaire Republican in the White House, and that if they were then on the verge of passing legislation that was pretty much a pillar of their party's agenda for a generation or two (say tax code reform, for example), they would not hesitate to ram it through. They would succeed. Sure, some Senate Democrats would threaten to filibuster, but in the end, they would pass their bill, the President would sign it, and they would all celebrate together at parties with their mistresses, while drinking bourbon, and joking about how easy it all was.
Why can't the Democrats accomplish things the same way? Is it a matter of will? Are they just a bunch of cowards? Or is it just that a significant proportion of elected Democrats aren't committed to social democratic or progressive ideals to begin with? If so, what the eff are they doing in our party?
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
16 again
Everytime I hear about Mumia Abu-Jamal, I feel like I'm 16 again---not necessarily in a good way. So confusing, I swear! Only, when I was 16 I didn't think it was confusing at all. But I think that's what adulthood's about, realizing that the world is a pretty complex place with very few simple answers (Occam's razor aside).
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Orel Hershiser
True Blue LA has a pretty extensive piece describing the greatness of Orel Hershiser in the 80s. As I was reading through, I was struck by how hard is for me to believe there was a time when the Dodgers were so dominant. I mean, I know the facts: The Yankees had the most wins in the decade, but the Dodgers won the most World Series (2). Orel won the Cy Young award, not to mention SI's Sportsman of the Year Award in 88, too. Kirk Gibson was MVP that year. Fernandomania in 1981 (149 pitches in Game 3 of the WS!). It's just difficult to picture the Dodgers being something other than an obscure hobby that my family shares with...no one else I ever encounter.
What TBLA does in the Hershiser piece totally captures so much of what I love about baseball as a game: Yes, there are endless statistics and detail that can be broken down and analyzed so many ways for years and years, but it's combined with simple, beautifully romantic, and intrinsically American narrative. No wonder there are so many movies made about baseball.
What TBLA does in the Hershiser piece totally captures so much of what I love about baseball as a game: Yes, there are endless statistics and detail that can be broken down and analyzed so many ways for years and years, but it's combined with simple, beautifully romantic, and intrinsically American narrative. No wonder there are so many movies made about baseball.
Glenn Beck = Hannibal
Jon Stewart's coverage of the Glenn Beck-Sarah Palin interview almost makes one feel a little sympathy for the Alaskan Wolf-Hunter. Not quite, but almost.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
40 Days
So, here I am watching the Lakers getting handled by the Spurs, and I decide to check on the Dodgers' Spring Training schedule. I have good news: There are just 40 Days until pitchers and catchers report to Spring Training on February 21, 2010.
I really want to get out to Glendale for at least one weekend in March. It didn't happen last year, but last year I talked about it all winter. This year, I hadn't even thought about it until it occurred to me a moment ago. Somehow that seems more promising.
Anyway, I'm pumped. Go Dodgers!
Economic Rights
Michael Lind boosts economic rights in his Salon column this week. Lind often refers to himself as a "New Deal Democrat", so it's fitting that the piece centers around the policies of FDR. The money is in the FDR quote:
"This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights ...As our nation has grown in size and stature, however -- as our industrial economy expanded -- these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness."
In addition to arguing for the extension of "economic citizenship" to the general populace, FDR rebuked the notion that economic rights should take priority over political rights and liberties, but in doing so underscored the point that without economic rights, citizens of a state are unlikely to truly enjoy said rights and liberties.
"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. 'Necessitous men are not free men.' People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made." (emphasis mine)
With the news that Sarah Palin is getting her own show, FDR's words really stand out. I am concerned that we may be in a situation that is ripe for something like dictatorship. Not that Palin is herself a fascist or a dictator, but that sort of rabid tendency is there in her intended audience. Look: Palin, Tea-Parties, Glenn Beck, Minutemen, Lou Dobbs, etc. For all their rhetoric about "liberty" and retro "Don't tread on me" flags, there is an undeniably scary feel to the way they stand around with boogey-man signs of an African-American President, openly brandishing guns, endlessly blaming our country's troubles on immigrants, and rambling on about other baseless garbage (ie. death panels and the like).
With such a terrible economic situation, and a relatively tame government response (at least by FDR's standards), should we be surprised that so many have reacted this way? Right-wing crazies have always been with us (see: Slavery), they were quiet for a while, but now they are back big-time. The problem is, this time, they are getting quite a few more fans than just nuts like Timothy McVeigh.
What to do about this?
For one, this shouldn't just be about winning. It should be about creating a situation in which more people get a fairer share of the pie. More economic security, more political freedom, and a greater stake in preserving and protecting those securities for future generations. This is what the President should be working on. A newer New Deal. Then I'll call myself a "New New Deal Democrat".
"This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights ...As our nation has grown in size and stature, however -- as our industrial economy expanded -- these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness."
In addition to arguing for the extension of "economic citizenship" to the general populace, FDR rebuked the notion that economic rights should take priority over political rights and liberties, but in doing so underscored the point that without economic rights, citizens of a state are unlikely to truly enjoy said rights and liberties.
"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. 'Necessitous men are not free men.' People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made." (emphasis mine)
With the news that Sarah Palin is getting her own show, FDR's words really stand out. I am concerned that we may be in a situation that is ripe for something like dictatorship. Not that Palin is herself a fascist or a dictator, but that sort of rabid tendency is there in her intended audience. Look: Palin, Tea-Parties, Glenn Beck, Minutemen, Lou Dobbs, etc. For all their rhetoric about "liberty" and retro "Don't tread on me" flags, there is an undeniably scary feel to the way they stand around with boogey-man signs of an African-American President, openly brandishing guns, endlessly blaming our country's troubles on immigrants, and rambling on about other baseless garbage (ie. death panels and the like).
With such a terrible economic situation, and a relatively tame government response (at least by FDR's standards), should we be surprised that so many have reacted this way? Right-wing crazies have always been with us (see: Slavery), they were quiet for a while, but now they are back big-time. The problem is, this time, they are getting quite a few more fans than just nuts like Timothy McVeigh.
What to do about this?
For one, this shouldn't just be about winning. It should be about creating a situation in which more people get a fairer share of the pie. More economic security, more political freedom, and a greater stake in preserving and protecting those securities for future generations. This is what the President should be working on. A newer New Deal. Then I'll call myself a "New New Deal Democrat".
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Harry Reid
For once I agree with Michael Steele. If a Republican had said the same thing I would have referred to him as a racist until the day he died, and then forever after (see Strom Thurmond). I'm pretty surprised that (so far) Reid's getting a pass for this from all the important players.
I should emphasize though, we should never be surprised when racist comments slip out among powerful elected officials of either party. Yeah, the Democrats should be better on this, and to a certain degree, they run into this problem less often than than Republicans do. But don't forget how apparently common this sort of attitude is even among significant Democrats. Remember Joe Biden's "slip"?:
“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
Of course, Biden went on to be Obama's running mate and our eventual VP.
If the President can hear someone talk like that, and then make the guy his VP, how often has he heard similar comments in his life? It makes me sick to my stomach to think of how the President of the United States has heard so much of this garbage in his life that he's just numb to it. He just ignores it, when he probably wants to push them right off of Air Force One...or, at least give them a strong rebuke.
Point is, it should be considered unacceptable. Reid should pull his foot all the way out of his mouth and then step down as the Majority Leader.
I should emphasize though, we should never be surprised when racist comments slip out among powerful elected officials of either party. Yeah, the Democrats should be better on this, and to a certain degree, they run into this problem less often than than Republicans do. But don't forget how apparently common this sort of attitude is even among significant Democrats. Remember Joe Biden's "slip"?:
“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
Of course, Biden went on to be Obama's running mate and our eventual VP.
If the President can hear someone talk like that, and then make the guy his VP, how often has he heard similar comments in his life? It makes me sick to my stomach to think of how the President of the United States has heard so much of this garbage in his life that he's just numb to it. He just ignores it, when he probably wants to push them right off of Air Force One...or, at least give them a strong rebuke.
Point is, it should be considered unacceptable. Reid should pull his foot all the way out of his mouth and then step down as the Majority Leader.
Monday, December 28, 2009
The State of Liberalism
I've been a fan of Michael Lind for some time now. The guy just brings such a clear representation of what liberalism and social democracy can and should mean in America. His weekly columns on Salon really get at the heart of why I consider myself pretty much a doctrinaire left-liberal and a social democrat.
Anyway, Lind's current column posted over at Salon is a pretty effective description of what threatens our liberal hopes in the near-term. Honestly, I was struck by this paragraph:
"The reality as well as the perception of government incapacity threatens liberalism more than conservatism. After all, if public safety deteriorates, antisocial plutocrats can retreat into doormanned buildings and gated communities and hire their own private security forces, and rural conservatives can amass home arsenals. And if the costs of personal security reduce the room for taxes for public goods, well, then, so much the better, from the perspective of certain strains of anti-government conservatism."
The description here sounds just like things I've heard libertarian/conservative friends express in the past about a future world they actually envision. A sort-of right-libertarian utopia, if you will, where they get to sit in their fortresses like John Galt. I can't say how much I have personally railed against this tendency in the past, only to see the strength of these sentiments seemingly grow in the past couple of years, in spite of successes like the 2008 election. But, Lind lays out the essential problem why this continues to plague those of us who would put our faith in civil society:
With Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and Michelle Bachman getting so much play in 2009, it really is starting to seem like I grew up and a lot of America hasn't yet. They want the apparatus of security, including arms, police, etc., but they don't want the other part, the part that involves any provisions beyond a base security--or at least the appearance of security. They like having things like public police, firefighters, national military, Medicare, Social Security, schools, roads, and all the rest, but decry "socialism" anywhere their keen eyes are riled enough to see anything public. Or civil. Or decent. Or diverse. I know that's not completely true. But it sure as hell feels like it sometimes.
Anyway, Lind's current column posted over at Salon is a pretty effective description of what threatens our liberal hopes in the near-term. Honestly, I was struck by this paragraph:
"The reality as well as the perception of government incapacity threatens liberalism more than conservatism. After all, if public safety deteriorates, antisocial plutocrats can retreat into doormanned buildings and gated communities and hire their own private security forces, and rural conservatives can amass home arsenals. And if the costs of personal security reduce the room for taxes for public goods, well, then, so much the better, from the perspective of certain strains of anti-government conservatism."
The description here sounds just like things I've heard libertarian/conservative friends express in the past about a future world they actually envision. A sort-of right-libertarian utopia, if you will, where they get to sit in their fortresses like John Galt. I can't say how much I have personally railed against this tendency in the past, only to see the strength of these sentiments seemingly grow in the past couple of years, in spite of successes like the 2008 election. But, Lind lays out the essential problem why this continues to plague those of us who would put our faith in civil society:
"In contrast, America's modest and inadequate system of social democracy rests on economic growth made possible by effective government provision of basic public goods. Economic growth in turn rests on physical security — the protection of citizens against criminals in their midst and hostile or law-breaking foreigners. Libertarians to the contrary, the indispensable preconditions for the free society are effective armed forces and police forces, be they citizen militias or professionals.
"Social democracy, in the form both of middle-class social insurance like Social Security and Medicare and means-tested programs for the poor, is a luxury of countries with secure borders and advanced, functioning mixed economies. You can have a generous welfare state only after you have effective soldiers, police forces and intelligence agencies and well-run industries, infrastructure and utilities."
It's funny because when I was a little younger I used to think that it was cool and liberal to hate on authority (police, military, etc.), and since then it's seemed like growing-up meant to accept that what police and the military do in general is very necessary to the liberal/democratic/peaceful/prosperous society I believe in.With Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and Michelle Bachman getting so much play in 2009, it really is starting to seem like I grew up and a lot of America hasn't yet. They want the apparatus of security, including arms, police, etc., but they don't want the other part, the part that involves any provisions beyond a base security--or at least the appearance of security. They like having things like public police, firefighters, national military, Medicare, Social Security, schools, roads, and all the rest, but decry "socialism" anywhere their keen eyes are riled enough to see anything public. Or civil. Or decent. Or diverse. I know that's not completely true. But it sure as hell feels like it sometimes.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Michael Vick
Deadspin has an insightful and biting comment on Michael Vick being the Eagles' nominee for the The Ed Block Courage award. The award is intended to honor players for sportsmanship, and is often seen as a personal tribute for overcoming unlikely odds. Players on each NFL team vote to nominate one player from their team for the league award.
Seriously, Eagles? You'd think that players in Philly, the city of Rocky, would get what this is all about and award their teammates accordingly. Instead they gave it to Mike Vick.
In Vick's case, I'm all for moving on, letting him prove himself, move on with his life, just so long as he doesn't hurt any more dogs, etc. The guy served his time, apologized, blah blah blah. Should he get to go out and play football again? I don't have a big problem with that. Does he deserve an award for his "efforts"? Hell no. But I don't think there's anyway the NFL will let Vick get the overall league honor.
Seriously, Eagles? You'd think that players in Philly, the city of Rocky, would get what this is all about and award their teammates accordingly. Instead they gave it to Mike Vick.
In Vick's case, I'm all for moving on, letting him prove himself, move on with his life, just so long as he doesn't hurt any more dogs, etc. The guy served his time, apologized, blah blah blah. Should he get to go out and play football again? I don't have a big problem with that. Does he deserve an award for his "efforts"? Hell no. But I don't think there's anyway the NFL will let Vick get the overall league honor.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Were you there?
Finally, the Onion has clarified something I've always wondered, the reaction of other onlookers to the events described in the Bible.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Bynum's Back
Andrew Bynum is back tomorrow night against the Suns. No Pau, but hey, we're making progress.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Album Release Party
My dad just finished recording his third album. On Saturday, they (my mom and dad) had about fifty close friends and family over to hear him play a backyard concert.
Some background: My father was a professional-level musician in the 1970s and early 1980s, prior to becoming an educator. At 54, my dad now has Parkinson's Plus, which is a condition similar to Parkinson's Disease, but with some additional symptoms similar to ALS. (That is a very simplistic discription--for more, see my dad's blog.) So, for my dad to play and record, and then perform for a group of people is really a BIG deal.
The concert went really well and was really fun to hang out with my parents' friends, and to get to see my aunt Teri and uncle Matt.
One of our longtime family friends, Jeremy Ricketts took some pictures. Here's a little slideshow:
Some background: My father was a professional-level musician in the 1970s and early 1980s, prior to becoming an educator. At 54, my dad now has Parkinson's Plus, which is a condition similar to Parkinson's Disease, but with some additional symptoms similar to ALS. (That is a very simplistic discription--for more, see my dad's blog.) So, for my dad to play and record, and then perform for a group of people is really a BIG deal.
The concert went really well and was really fun to hang out with my parents' friends, and to get to see my aunt Teri and uncle Matt.
One of our longtime family friends, Jeremy Ricketts took some pictures. Here's a little slideshow:
Saturday, November 7, 2009
If only...
Jon Stewart does a parody of Glenn Beck. Along the lines of something I have been contemplating for a while, but I don't have a platform like Jon Stewart.
Dia de los Muertos in La Ciudad
Here in the Ciudad, the Dia de los Muertos celebration is going strong. Cosme does so much for Riverside.
I was too sick to go this year (just a cold, not the swine flu), but I wish I had at least been at the Evergreen Cemetery event. One of my great-great-great-grandfathers is buried there who died of TB back in the 1880s.
Seriously, though, I love Southern California life.
I was too sick to go this year (just a cold, not the swine flu), but I wish I had at least been at the Evergreen Cemetery event. One of my great-great-great-grandfathers is buried there who died of TB back in the 1880s.
Seriously, though, I love Southern California life.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Lake Show vs. Atlanta Hawks
I harbor no ill will toward the Hawks, but I do hope that Mike Bibby is crying by the end of the night.
On the other hand, I hope he's in better spirits by the time he's up against the Celts in the playoffs. Atlanta has quite a bit of young talent. They're the kind of team that has the capability to shock a team like the Lakers or Celts on a given night (though the LAL are leading 90-70 at present). It has been fun watching them push teams to the limit late in the season and in the playoffs. Let's just hope it's not tonight.
On the other hand, I hope he's in better spirits by the time he's up against the Celts in the playoffs. Atlanta has quite a bit of young talent. They're the kind of team that has the capability to shock a team like the Lakers or Celts on a given night (though the LAL are leading 90-70 at present). It has been fun watching them push teams to the limit late in the season and in the playoffs. Let's just hope it's not tonight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
