I've decided Florida needs a new state motto. I've also taken the liberty of creating it for them:
Florida, where 16 year-olds go to learn to driveI'm sure there are plenty of fantastic drivers on the road here in Tampa, but my wife and I have survived what feels like a dozen attempts on our lives by incompetent teenage boys in gigantic pickup trucks in the last two days.I'm amending my original post. I shouldn't unfairly target 16 year-old boys. It seems no one in Tampa can drive.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Florida's New State Motto
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Life Imitates "West Wing"
If you were a 'West Wing' fan you'll probably enjoy this video from SlateV that my father sent my way. If the source is correct, and I don't know much about SlateV, then it seems much of the Matt Santos character was based on Barack Obama. At first I thought the video was going to suggest, ridiculously, that the Obama campaign was taking notes from West Wing scripts. I was very surprised to see just the opposite.If you notice some uncanny similarities between the 2008 presidential campaign and the final seasons of "The West Wing," there's a good reason.
Link: SlateV
Monday, February 25, 2008
What Are They Thinking?
I can think of only four reasons why these guys are still actively involved in the current political elections.
LA Time BlogThe 72-year-old, 10-term Republican congressman has just vowed to continue his current campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. There's been some confusion in recent days since Paul sounded like he was, in effect, withdrawing to refocus his political efforts on a well-funded House primary challenger in his home Texas district near Houston on March 4.
The Washington PostConsumer advocate Ralph Nader, blamed by many Democrats for their loss of the White House in the 2000 election, said on Sunday he is launching another independent campaign for the White House.
Nader, who will turn 74 this week, announced his longshot presidential bid on NBC's "Meet the Press" saying that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans were addressing problems facing Americans.
LA Times BlogJosh Romney, one of former Gov. Mitt Romney's five sons, says it's "possible" his father may rejoin the race for the White House, as a vice presidential candidate or as the Republican Party's standard-bearer if the campaign of Sen. John McCain falters.
More Dirty Politics from the Clinton Camp?
CBS News/Politico
Obama campaign manager David Plouffe accused the Clinton campaign Monday of "shameful offensive fear-mongering" by circulating a photo as an attempted smear.
Plouffe was reacting to a banner headline on the Drudge Report saying that aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) had e-mailed a photo calling attention to the African roots of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
"The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat front-runner dressed as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya," the Drudge Report said.
The Clinton campaign did not deny the charge, but did not comment further.
Photo credit: AP
Oops! Pakistan Accidentally Takes YouTube Offline
An ISP that supports Pakistan's Internet access was ordered by the Pakistani government to restrict access to YouTube.com. Instead of simply preventing Pakistani citizens from being able to visit the website, they got creative and decided to reroute traffic that was intended for YouTube.com to a completely different website. Unfortunately, with the way the Internet works, this updated route was then passed along to all of this ISP's peers who, in turn, also started honoring the new route. Now people outside of Pakistan couldn't get to the replacement website, so they didn't see anything, but they couldn't get to YouTube.com either.
Eventually, the company that provides Internet access to the Pakistani ISP was forced to drop them off the Internet completely in order to allow the rest of world access to YouTube. Until this has been straightened out, most of Pakistan is offline. I wonder if they've learned their lesson?
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Several Articles Worth Your Time
But it’s the Clinton strategists, not the Obama voters, who drank the Kool-Aid. The Obama campaign is not a vaporous cult; it’s a lean and mean political machine that gets the job done. The Clinton camp has been the slacker in this race, more words than action, and its candidate’s message, for all its purported high-mindedness, was and is self-immolating. The gap in hard work between the two campaigns was clear well before Feb. 5. Mrs. Clinton threw as much as $25 million at the Iowa caucuses without ever matching Mr. Obama’s organizational strength. In South Carolina, where last fall she was up 20 percentage points in the polls, she relied on top-down endorsements and the patina of inevitability, while the Obama campaign built a landslide-winning organization from scratch at the grass roots. In Kansas, three paid Obama organizers had the field to themselves for three months; ultimately Obama staff members outnumbered Clinton staff members there 18 to 3. I went to the Library of Congress Website. The FACTS of what each did in the Senate last year sure surprised me. I'm sure they will surprise you, too. Whether you love or hate Hillary, you will be surprised. Whether you think Obama is the second coming of JFK or an inexperienced lightweight, you will surprised.
The Washington PostPROVIDENCE, R.I. -- A day after she angrily criticized Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton delighted a crowd of supporters here by playfully mocking her opponent.
The Washington PostHumor me while we conduct a little thought experiment. Imagine that Barack Obama had lost 10 contests in a row. Imagine that he now trailed Hillary Clinton substantially in the number of Democratic primaries and caucuses won, in total votes cast, in pledged convention delegates, in the overall delegate count, in fundraising and in the ineffable attribute called mojo. Imagine that Obama was struggling, at this late hour, to come up with the right message. What would the conventional wisdom say?
The New York Times
The Daily KosI refuse to buy into the hype, on either side, but especially on that of Obama. However the "empty rhetoric" v. "history of accomplishments" arguments have prompted me to check it out on my own, not relying on any candidate's website, book, or worst of all supporters' diaries, like this one.
Democratic UndergroundBill Clinton was here a few weeks ago. I went to hear him speak and they asked for my name and phone number at the door. The next day I got a phone call from a Hillary campaign worker asking me for a donation or to volunteer. I said thanks for the call but I am supporting John Edwards. The campaign worker asked why did I go to a Hillary campaign event and give my name and number if I didn't support Hillary. I explained I went to hear Bill Clinton speak and they asked for my info at the door. And the worker said "BUT IT WAS A HILLARY CAMPAIGN EVENT!" I said I know but I am supporting Edwards at this time. And the worker HUNG UP ON ME.
Olberman Timeline of Bush Administration's Exploitation of Terror
On Thursday night's 'Countdown', Keith Olbermann put together a compelling video timeline of how the Bush administration has used the public's fear of terrorism to manipulate the mainstream media's coverage of news. It's 17 minutes long, but worth the time if you can spare it.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Hey, remember me?! - Ralph Nader
Ralph Nader, consumer advocate and perennial presidential hopeful, is expected to announce a third run for president this weekend on Meet the Press.
Given his excellent public record I assume he doesn't expect he has a chance of winning and is only running to promote the discussion of topics he feels are being overlooked by the media and politicians in our country. I can understand, in principal, how that could be his motivation, but I have to question how much money and resources will go into promoting his campaign over the course of the next nine months and whether or not those resources couldn't be put to better use. I'm not saying they would be, I'm just contemplating. It's very possible the free press his campaign will get through media coverage is far more valuable than the sum of his campaign donations and volunteers time.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Antsy Clinton Supporters Consider Averting Election Laws - Continued
RealTimeKarma visitor dl004d wrote in a comment:
"Wait, why would it be immoral for Clinton supporters to create a group that would place ads in Ohio & Texas? (Assuming the ads target "issues" and not candidates, that is.) And why should Clinton herself "publicly condemn" such behavior?" -dl004d
Sorry, I wasn't clear about how this group of supporters is breaking campaign laws in my first post. I can't find a working .gov website to save my life, but basically 527 political committees are legal when they are formed to combat specific policies or issues. They are not allowed to coordinate with, or offer direct advocacy for, candidates. In this case, Clinton supporters have created one as a means of skirting the federal election campaign rules on fund raising. They've said they hope to raise $10 million in the weeks before the March 4 primaries and will use that money to air ads that both attack Senator Obama and clearly advocate Senator Clinton.
She should condemn the formation of this group for several reasons.
- First, the ad will backfire (see it here) and clearly be seen as a negative attack which has not helped her at all against Senator Obama thus far.
- Second, condemning it might negate some of the fairly earned perceptions that her campaign is fighting dirty. (Can't do much about the unfairly earned perceptions.) Plus, it wouldn't cost her a thing. All of the supporters who were willing to donate large sums into the 527 can keep their money and still feel satisfied that they helped their candidate.
Make sense?
Antsy Clinton Supporters Consider Averting Election Laws
Several wealthy Clinton campaign supporters are reportedly creating a 527 political group with the expressed intent of using it to gather massive cash donations and flooding Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania with pro-Clinton/anti-Obama TV spots.
I guess it's time to make another donation to the Obama campaign. That's the only effective way I know how to show my indignation over what some Clinton hopefuls think is an acceptable way to show their support. I find it hard to believe the Clinton campaign won't be involved in the decisions being made by such a political action group, directly or in some supervisory capacity. As independent as they might say they are, one phone call from Clinton campaign HQ could halt this plan and making such a call would do more to build my support for the Clinton campaign than anything Senator Clinton herself could say, because as she's reminded us again and again, words are cheap.
I find myself scratching my head and wondering, why doesn't her campaign get the appeal that the Obama campaign has and how it's stealing her support? She's a very savvy politician and some adviser on her staff has to see what a slick move it would be to publicly condemn this group. With less and less to lose as their campaign runs into the ground I expect we'll either see some brilliant new angles of self-promotion or the tried and true (but failing thus far) method of attack attack attack. I expected the former but have so far been disappointed to see the later. It's been said before, but if this is the best her team and she can do, then I'm glad we're seeing it now and not in the general election.
Additional credit to the Daily Kos
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Mayor Bloomberg Claims Voter Fraud in NYC Primary
"If you want to call it significant undercounting, I guess that's a euphemism for fraud," - NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg
If you aren't familiar with what the Mayor is referring to, it turns out that numerous NYC voting precincts reported 0 votes for one of the two candidates in the NY democratic primary. Some precincts showed no votes for Obama and some, though far fewer, showed no votes for Clinton.
Now today, according to the Washington Post, the NYC Board of Elections is stating these inaccuracies aren't inaccuracies at all. They simply haven't finished counting the votes. I know it sometimes takes weeks to designate the results of an election as 'official', but I've never heard of it taking weeks to get a first count!
As of now the original count of 55 precincts reporting no votes for Obama is down to 27 and all precincts are reporting at least one vote for Clinton. No word on how many additional votes each candidate has gotten, but with Clinton only winning Brooklyn by 2%, a handful of votes may go a long way. Combine that with the fact that when the delegates are re-assigned based on the 'official' results, any additional delegates transitioned to Obama will come from those currently being counted by the Clinton campaign meaning each change will affect the democratic delegate counts by two, not just one.
Update: Here's a link to the original NYTimes report of the vote irregularities from 2/16
What does Obama's win in Wisconsin mean?
Politico offers an insightful breakdown of what Obama's win in Wisconsin means. Not only did he overcome Senator Clinton's double-digit lead from a few weeks ago, he managed to eat into every one of Clinton's strong supporter demographics. Lower income white men and women had remained Clinton's last stronghold of support and after tonight, he either stole that support, or split it 50/50 with her. In Wisconsin that is. In Hawaii it wasn't even a competition. (With only 8% of the vote reported, I'm comfortable 'projecting' a strong win for Obama. Currently he's leading 77% to 22%.)
While I've been very discouraged with CNN over the last year, I have to credit their write-up of how Obama has eroded Clinton's support. They do a much better job of breaking down the numbers with greater simplicity than the article on Politico.com that I referenced when I originally posted.
Superdelegate Commitments
Politico has a great page tracking which superdelegates have committed to which candidate. They keep it updated as superdelegates retract or announce commitments.
Link: Politico
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Shame on you Middleton, WI!
Cap Times election blog: Middleton turnout lower than expected
Middleton reporting (4:34 p.m.)
The city of Middleton has two polling places, with roughly an equal number of residents eligible to vote in each: St. Bernard's Parish Center and the high school.
When I voted at 3 p.m. at the school, I was No. 1,759. The polling place was not all that busy, but a poll worker said it had been fairly steady.
Patricia Amble, city clerk-treasurer, said at 3:45 that she thought the turnout so far was "less than expected." Basing her estimate partially on the number of voters by 3 p.m. at the high school, she said she expected a total of around 5,000 votes. With about 13,000 voters registered in Middleton, that turnout would be 38 percent.
Amble said that percentage was somewhat lower than the 2004 presidential primary, but she didn't have the exact figures at hand.
There were 480 people who voted absentee in the city. My daughter and her friend voted at the school about 4 o'clock and said they were Nos. 1,927 and 1,928.
--Bill Dunn
R.I.P. HD DVD
Toshiba has announced it is no longer going to manufacture or market HD DVD players and recorders. This comes after most major movie studios made the decision to exclusively support Blu-ray as their high definition disc of choice.
Sorry to everyone who decided to make the plunge and guessed wrong. :(
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Over 400,000 unauthorized iPhones being used in China
While Apple hasn't yet released the iPhone in China there are already over 400,000 active phones operating on the network. If you're China Mobile, the largest cellular provider in China, what motivation do you have to negotiate a deal with Apple to "legitimately" offer the iPhone on your network?
Link: Fortune
Friday, February 15, 2008
Obama speaks on Faith in a Democratic Nation
Organized religion makes me nervous. I don't have any dispute with individuals who feel a sense of spirituality in the world around them and numerous conversations with religious friends have reminded me that much good has been brought into this world as a direct result of churches and religious institutions. This has left me debating, internally, what I feel the value and proper place of religion is in our government.
With all of that in mind, I want to share a speech Senator Obama gave in June of '06 that talks about the relationship between politics and religion and how both sides, believers and non-believers, can better work together while allowing their beliefs to guide their philosophies but not ostracizing the beliefs of others. Typically the debate has quietly brewed with vocal non-believers fighting for an absolutely secular republic while vocal believers push to integrate religion into many aspects of our government. Senator Obama chooses not to take either side but instead of skirting the issue, he suggests an acceptance can be found and tolerated by each side. Believers obviously can't 'leave their religious beliefs at the door' as they are fundamental to who they are, but in a pluralistic society there must be confidence in the acceptance of all faiths and all beliefs. This isn't a new or original idea, in fact it's quite straighforward and simple. But his logical, thoughtful and reasonable speech he makes me feel welcomed in his view of our country without, I hope, ostracizing anyone else. It's his delivery that allows me to believe he is sincere in what he suggests as an answer to my concerns about religion's place in government. Something I haven't felt when hearing similar ideas from other politicians in the past.
I feel this is indicative of his appeal as a presidential candidate. He doesn't seek to win converts by dividing issues into two sides and inciting fear and anger in one side or the other as has become the recipe for success in politics for nearly the last 30 years. Instead he brings people together in what looks like an almost effortless manner.
A full transcript of the speech and a video of it can be found below, but here is the section I found most compelling:And that is why that, if we truly hope to speak to people where they're at - to communicate our hopes and values in a way that's relevant to their own - then as progressives, we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse.
Because when we ignore the debate about what it means to be a good Christian or Muslim or Jew; when we discuss religion only in the negative sense of where or how it should not be practiced, rather than in the positive sense of what it tells us about our obligations towards one another; when we shy away from religious venues and religious broadcasts because we assume that we will be unwelcome - others will fill the vacuum, those with the most insular views of faith, or those who cynically use religion to justify partisan ends.
In other words, if we don't reach out to evangelical Christians and other religious Americans and tell them what we stand for, then the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons and Alan Keyeses will continue to hold sway.
More fundamentally, the discomfort of some progressives with any hint of religion has often prevented us from effectively addressing issues in moral terms. Some of the problem here is rhetorical - if we scrub language of all religious content, we forfeit the imagery and terminology through which millions of Americans understand both their personal morality and social justice.
Imagine Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address without reference to "the judgments of the Lord." Or King's I Have a Dream speech without references to "all of God's children." Their summoning of a higher truth helped inspire what had seemed impossible, and move the nation to embrace a common destiny.
Our failure as progressives to tap into the moral underpinnings of the nation is not just rhetorical, though. Our fear of getting "preachy" may also lead us to discount the role that values and culture play in some of our most urgent social problems.
After all, the problems of poverty and racism, the uninsured and the unemployed, are not simply technical problems in search of the perfect ten point plan. They are rooted in both societal indifference and individual callousness - in the imperfections of man.
Solving these problems will require changes in government policy, but it will also require changes in hearts and a change in minds. I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manufacturers' lobby - but I also believe that when a gang-banger shoots indiscriminately into a crowd because he feels somebody disrespected him, we've got a moral problem. There's a hole in that young man's heart - a hole that the government alone cannot fix.
I believe in vigorous enforcement of our non-discrimination laws. But I also believe that a transformation of conscience and a genuine commitment to diversity on the part of the nation's CEOs could bring about quicker results than a battalion of lawyers. They have more lawyers than us anyway.
I think that we should put more of our tax dollars into educating poor girls and boys. I think that the work that Marian Wright Edelman has done all her life is absolutely how we should prioritize our resources in the wealthiest nation on earth. I also think that we should give them the information about contraception that can prevent unwanted pregnancies, lower abortion rates, and help assure that that every child is loved and cherished.
But, you know, my Bible tells me that if we train a child in the way he should go, when he is old he will not turn from it. So I think faith and guidance can help fortify a young woman's sense of self, a young man's sense of responsibility, and a sense of reverence that all young people should have for the act of sexual intimacy.
I am not suggesting that every progressive suddenly latch on to religious terminology - that can be dangerous. Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic expressions of faith. As Jim has mentioned, some politicians come and clap -- off rhythm -- to the choir. We don't need that.
In fact, because I do not believe that religious people have a monopoly on morality, I would rather have someone who is grounded in morality and ethics, and who is also secular, affirm their morality and ethics and values without pretending that they're something they're not. They don't need to do that. None of us need to do that.
But what I am suggesting is this - secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglas, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryant, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King - indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history - were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. So to say that men and women should not inject their "personal morality" into public policy debates is a practical absurdity. Our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Links:
Transcript of the Speech (obama.senate.gov)
Video of the Speach
BioBags - Compostable 'Plastic' Bags
BioBag is a Norwegian company that sells fully biodegradable and compostable products that range from shopping bags to garden liners. We use their bags for our trash cans and for our kitchen compost container. The bags work very well and allow our waste to decompose quickly rather than sitting in a plastic bag at the dump for the next one thousand years.
Best of all, the products are made from corn. ;)
Link: BioBag
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Interesting Articles I Read This Week (02/14/08)
Here are some campaign related articles that I've enjoyed and/or found interesting in the past week.
Why Republicans like Obama and what it means
Link: The Huston Chronicle (2/5/08)
Obama has advantage in head-to-head with McCain
Link: CNN (2/8/08)
Sexist Coverage of Hillary Brings Women to Her Corner
Link: The Boston Herald (2/10/08)
Yes, Virginia, I Need a Santa Claus
Link: The San Francisco Chronicle (2/12/08)
Dear Senator Hillary Clinton, Please Step Down
Link: The Queen of Spain Blog (2/12/08)
Behind Obama's Wave of Victories: The more they know him...
Link: The Huffington Post (2/13/08)
McCain adviser won't campaign against Obama
Link: The Baltimore Sun Blog (2/13/08)
Interesting Articles I Read This Week (02/14/08)
Why Republicans like Obama and what it means
Link: The Huston Chronicle (2/5/08)
Obama has advantage in head-to-head with McCain
Link: CNN (2/8/08)
Sexist Coverage of Hillary Brings Women to Her Corner
Link: The Boston Herald (2/10/08)
Yes, Virginia, I Need a Santa Claus
Link: The San Francisco Chronicle (2/12/08)
Dear Senator Hillary Clinton, Please Step Down
Link: The Queen of Spain Blog (2/12/08)
Behind Obama's Wave of Victories: The more they know him...
Link: The Huffington Post (2/13/08)
McCain adviser won't campaign against Obama
Link: The Baltimore Sun Blog (2/13/08)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
The latest Indiana Jones movie will be released on May 22. WooHoo!
Link: Yahoo! Movies
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Same Great Taste...
In keeping with the address for my blog, I've renamed the site 'RealTimeKarma'. None of the ingredients have changed and you can expect to find the same great taste as before!
Link: RealTimeKarma.com
Foreign Military Financing (How much military aid the US gives to other countries)
No real point to be made here, just thought this was interesting information. The State Department lists the military aid spent in 2005 - 2008 OUTSIDE of the US. (actual spending for '05 & '06, requested spending for '07 & '08) This is money given to other countries to 'promote U.S. national security'.
[Foreign Military Financing] provides grants for the acquisition of U.S. defense equipment, services, and training. It is intended to promote U.S. national security by contributing to regional and global stability, strengthening military support for democratically-elected governments and containing transnational threats, including terrorism and trafficking in narcotics, weapons, and persons. These grants enable allies and friends to improve their defense capabilities and foster closer military relationships between the U.S. and recipient nations.
There isn't enough information here, nor do I have the time or experience, to judge the benefits of the money being spent here, so I'm not passing any kind of judgment, but none the less it saddens me that spending on 'Enhanced International Peacekeeping Capabilities' was 93 times less than spending on the administration of FMF spending:
| '05 - '08 | |
| FMF Administration | ~$166,165,000.00 |
| Enhanced International Peacekeeping Capabilities | ~$1,786,000.00 |
Link: US Department of State
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
