Terrorism kills, and Barbara Boxer is worried about the weather.
Today is election day in California, and the air is tingling with an astonishing lack of enthusiasm. Maybe because all we have left are bad choices, or maybe really really bad choices. Calitics makes a good argument against all of the initiatives--in effect, they mitigate the short-term crisis but lock in bad policy (spending caps, e.g.) in the long term.
What Calitics doesn't offer is a plausible path to a better result. Despite 30 years of grim reality, Californians still seem to believe in the anti-tax fairy, who delivers all the goods and services of government without anyone having to pay. Worse, for some inexplicable (but probably related) reason, California voters overwhelmingly support the 2/3 majority requirement for passing a budget; when 35% of the legislature holds a gun to California's head, 60% of the voters are right there with them. We don't need initiatives to lock in bad policy. That shit is locked in already.
Here's the official voter guide. Figure it out for yourselves; I sure as shit don't know what to do.
I could smell the smoke when I walked outside this morning. To the east, the sky was a thick smoky brown. An extremely dry spring combined with a freak thunderstorm add up to 842 wildfires burning in Northern California.
And the season is just starting. It's going to be a smoky summer.
Earthquakes? No big deal. Fire, flood, mudslide, tsunami--whatever. The most terrifying threat in California is something else entierely--something man-made.
I'm talking about elections.
Yeah, it's another goddamn election day. Seems like we had one just last week, but apparently that wasn't enough. We're just gluttons for punishment.
The worst thing on the ballot is Proposition 98, another power grab by the property-rights fundamentalists disguised (of course) as 'eminent domain' reform. More... (Yes, we've seen this movie before.) The summary version:
Once again, eminent domain is the cover for a full-scale assault on land-use regulation. And you did notice that bit about rent control, right?
Fortunately, it's behind in the polls. Let's make sure it goes down to flaming ignominious defeat, folks.
Also on the ballot is Proposition 99, which would limit the use of eminent domain without eviscerating land use regulation in general. Arguably unnecessary in itself, the best reason to vote for it is that it might head off more Prop 98/Prop 90 type measures down the line.
For other measures, here's a voter guide from Shystee. If you've got anything about any of the ballot measures (state or local Bay Area), link to it in comments and I'll add yours to this post.
The WaPo had so much going on this morning I barely knew where to start. Lil Scotty Mclelland's article had 812 975 comments when I looked at it and I'm willing to bet that lots of **##'s got removed. A quick impression of the article reminds me of the story of Aron Ralston, the climber who cut off his own arm with a pocketknife to survive. Somebody's figured out there were war crimes and is doing their best to avoid being charged with one while at the same time trying to provide imaginary cover for those left behind. And Katrina was a costly blunder. No kidding.
While still smiling More... at the image of Lil Scotty realizing he had been had and hoping that he has a loyal security detail, I moved on to the right whining about how MSNBC is too left leaning and how they don't like Lil John McCain as much as they like Lil Obama, knowing full well that they had to turn their attention somewhere as soon as they got rid of Lil Hillary. Now that was a hatchet job, with several people wielding the hatchets. Sort of like the stories on John Edwards haircut. Designed to do nothing to further policy or decent political discussions and quite a lot to do with making sure that the candidate they were in love with had no viable competition. After enduring all these years of Fox News I have little to no sympathy for people who whine about the press.
But the Meyerson article, oh Mr. Meyerson, you raised my blood pressure so high, the first thing that I did was reach for my Fosinopril. Let me state first that Hillary was neither my first or second choice in the California primary, but neither one of them were still running, but their names were still on the ballot by the time it was our turn to vote. So, as is usual out here in California, we had to pick the lesser of two evils and it wasn't Obama. Sigh, I'm really tired non-choices like that. Anyway, back to your article.
Hillary's campaign ruined democracy and feminism? Are you serious?Blow it out your ass. Oops, I see you already did. The Democratic Party (they're in the Constitution where?) had no right to exclude the votes of the people of Florida and Michigan, no matter what time frame they held their election in, because they are citizens of the United States and deserve to have their votes counted. Period. And if Obama had won those states he wouldn't want those delegates seated? Get real.
The hypocrisy of anyone talking about Indiana's photo ID requirement in order to vote and then disregarding the votes of thousands of people in two other states is mind boggling. Not quite as mind boggling as accusing women of ruining democracy while you briefly mention the rampant sexism in the united campaign against Hillary and then you attack her supporters for complaining about it, but it's darned close. From start to finish, this race hasn't been about policy issues, it's been about hair, clothes and makeup. Throw in a little bowling and a shot of whiskey (if I was her I would have been so grateful to have had an excuse for a drink since the press hounded her almost as much as they do Paris or Britney neither one of which are anywhere near the same intelligence or contributions to society) with the guys and you have a campaign.
I'm a feminist because I'm a woman. I consider myself the equal of any man under normal circumstances. And the abnormal ones would be so abnormal that whatever sex you are will be one of the last things on your mind. While I may not be able to heave boulders due to brute strength (is that needed anymore?), I am quite capable of using a lever and gravity to accomplish the same task. The odds are that a man invented the hammer, the javelin and the sword, but a woman invented the wheel, pulley, lever and pivot. You develop what you need to survive. Or conquer, as the case may be.
Now that we're supposedly in the 21st century, the skills needed to survive are quite different since we don't have anything left to conquer except each other. And what a shame that is. Nowadays this can be done way too efficiently and requires no brute strength (and judging by reduced requirements to join the military, a minimum of intelligence) at all. Just because one is tall, short, white, brown, black, blue eyed, brown eyed, male, female, rich, poor, right handed, left handed, religious or nonreligious, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, Hindi, Muslim, skinny, fat, young or old does not automatically infer competency, incompetency, superiority, stupidity or a tendency towards evil. To say that the women who support Clinton and want the delegates seated is to make a mockery of both democracy and feminism while showing a complete disregard for the people of the two states not being represented and a whopping display of misogyny because women are being so vocal about how their candidate got marginalized, all under the cloak of rules instead of common sense and compassion. But those are traits that come to people who think and who have spent more than enough time clinging to the bottom rung of the ladder to recognize when someone is stamping on their fingers and trying to make them fall off into nonexistence.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the only way we are ever going to have fair elections in this country is if we have a national primary, followed by the national elections thirty days later. Between television, radio and the internet people will have plenty of opportunity to explore their candidate and the press will have less of an opportunity to choose our candidates for us.
And that's what most of the press and Mr. Meyerson are really afraid of.
3Bs and Debsweb.
This is a personal rant and if one of the Barbarians could bring a printed copy to our next outing, I would greatly appreciate it. I don't have a printer and need a copy for my records. Plus, I need to vent.
My worker's comp representative never returns my phone calls and after leaving her a message last week about the latest refusal to hire me for a job that I really wanted, and which could have substantially improved the quality of my life, I finally received the doctor's determination yesterday and I have to say that I disagree. Not only did it not address my issues, but after two years and a private investigator, More... they are still trying to blame it on a previous injury. One I have never had. And just for the record, I have never complained about my ankle. It has never been twisted or strained, was never mentioned as part of the work comp injury and I really don't understand why it was included in the QME report. I read for a hobby, I don't ski, play tennis or basketball, jog or do any type of high impact sports. I have never had a broken bone.
Work comp believes that my toe (the one that's fused with two screws in it) is only 5% disabled. The toe itself may be only 5%, but it affects the quality of my life every day, both waking and sleeping. The weight of the covers on the toe wakes me up at least five times a night. And heaven forbid that I get twisted under the covers. That pain is a real eye opener, complete with stars.
Previous to the injury I walked my dog daily, could move quickly through Costco at least 25 times a shift and had successfully taken off 50 pounds. Just by walking daily. Since the accident I have been unable to walk my dog around the park without my knee swelling and my toe becoming numb, red and I am unable to stand in an anatomically correct manner. I have always had good posture (courtesy of the Army) until recently but now I find that I balance most of the weight on my left leg and hip which is causing its own little problems with my back. I am constantly shifting my weight from side to side and if forced to stand more than a few minutes (like in a grocery line) I look for ways to prop my right foot higher than the left.
I have also regained 45 of the 50 pounds (and my dog has gained five), can no longer walk more than a mile without pain and have to use a step stool to get things off the back of my kitchen shelves since I can't stand on my toes. It's a good think I'm not a ballerina. It's a bad thing that I am 5'1".
My work and everything that I have been trained to do requires that I stand for 8 to 9 hours with constant walking in between, so saying that I am fully able to return to work is a crock and is a decision made by someone who thinks that walking to their car constitutes getting around. Who cares if I can't and could never do squats? As I told Dr. B, this was first noticed at fourteen (not 17) when my dad came back from Korea and was showing us how the natives sat. I now walk on the outside of my foot because my big toe only contacts the ground if I deliberately force it by rolling my foot to the inside with every step and then my knee has sharp lances of pain horizontally across the kneecap. In what way am I capable of working a 10 hour shift on my feet, carrying an average of 40 pounds at the same time and then do it all over again the next day? And the day after that.
Previous to the injury I wore a size 6 shoe, a 6 1/2 if they were of the skinny variety. Now I require a 7 to 7 1/2. They must be completely flat with a hard sole, a rounded toe and a large toe box to accommodate the angle the toe is fused at. For some reason, the scar from the fusion is exactly where the edge of the top flap of the shoe presses on the foot and the pain located on the ball of the foot, where most people put pressure while walking or running. Any type of heel is totally out of the question. I have taken witnesses (you should try shopping for these requirements if you don't believe me) to show the difficulty of buying shoes. I usually spend about three hours, seven or eight stores and end up with a pair of sneakers or sandals with an adjustable strap across the top of the foot. The sneakers have soft tops and don't put pressure on the fusion. Sandals are for casual summer wear.
The shoes the doctors recommend start at $250 a pair and are not covered by work comp, (but work comp is willing to pay me $230 a week, which I use for rent, food and gas. All my other bills obviously fell by the wayside and I'm still trying to get the money together to declare bankruptcy), they still look like sneakers and none of them are appropriate for dress wear. You know, the stuff you are supposed to wear when you go to an important function or, in my case, job interviews. I have been told to my face that my footwear is not appropriate for work. Or interviews. Isn't that special, to say nothing of embarrassing. When I was in the Army, my platoon sergeant used to try and match the shine on his jump boots with mine. Now I wish long dresses were in again so I can hide my shoes.
Previous to this injury I had my own personal chef business. I was only doing the weekend work for Aidell's to try and get my foot in the door (Rachael Ray and Martha Stewart started somewhere) and to earn a little extra money for my 50th birthday. Well, my personal chef business is history, all the money I spent training, buying extra equipment, designing and running my own web page has been wasted. For my birthday I was poor and in pain and the birthday this coming Monday doesn't look much better and in many ways worse because now I have no savings at all. Cooking holiday dinners (something I've done for most of my life) for family and friends practically destroys me. I have to take way too many breaks which makes dinner later than usual and the next two days I lay around taking aspirin, icing the knee and toe and moaning in pain.
Speaking of pain, let me reiterate this one more time since the doctors seem to have a hard time reading a chart or listening when they ask you what your allergies are. I am ALLERGIC to NSAIDS (they affect my breathing adversely), I am also ALLERGIC to morphine codeine, tylenol, hydrocodone, oxycodone, fentanyl, tramadol (Ultram), talwin, and amesec, to name a few. I don't make a big fuss about my pain because there isn't anything other than demerol that works on me and I would prefer to save that for something like a car accident or other major trauma. So no, low dose NSAIDs and opioids aren't an option.
After the tsunami in the Indian Ocean I wondered if I would be able to run fast in an emergency. Due to the size of my breasts, this was impossible so I opted to have them reduced. While now it doesn't hurt my chest to run, I still can't move in a hurry because I can no longer push off with the injured foot. As a matter of fact, anything that requires stretching the leg and pointing the toe causes painful cramps and spasms in the calf and directly behind the knee. None of this was an issue before my accident. By the way, have you spoken with my former supervisor who saw me within 30 minutes of the accident and can testify that the knee was swollen, purple and immobile? Or that I used to move quite quickly while at work?
When work comp decided not to approve acupuncture as a modality, it put me out of business. Yes, I am an Acupuncturist and used to be licensed by the State of California. At one time it was determined that acupuncturists weren't capable of running a case appropriately. Well, I was the primary care on a few cases and believe me, I ran a much tighter ship than the one I've been sinking on for the last two years. Pain was assessed every time, you guys didn't do that for me for six months and then again briefly during the QME. My "treatment" consisted of being told to go home and stay off it to see if it would get better. Period. Well, it didn't and it got progressively worse. If proper procedures had been followed there would have been a record of my pain, what made it worse, what made it better. But none of those questions were asked of me. Six months after the accident the foot was authorized for surgery and Dr. N and I discussed that wearing the walking boot while healing from the foot surgery would aggravate my knee but it had to be done. From that point on, the knee became worse and nothing was done until the following May, nine months later. When I asked for physical therapy to help rebuild the calf muscle after being in a cast for several months, Dr. J wasn't that helpful, didn't think I needed it even though the right calf was just a stick and the left calf was muscular. I finally got physical therapy which consisted of telling me to ride a bike, spread my toes and lift my heel off the floor ten times a day. Whoop de doo.
I finally saved up enough money to buy a bike and rode it faithfully because Dr. P said it would help build up my quads and that would take pressure off my knee. The knee felt pretty good (I was up to almost 20 miles a day), but I started to develop problems with the foot. I told Dr. P in August that I was having trouble and he told me to continue riding and to come back in a month. By the end of September the toe was constantly swollen. The beginning of October he expressed surprise that I had a fusion and told me to quit riding the bike because how one puts pressure on the pedal was exactly where the fusion was and that I should take up the elliptical machine instead. I joined the YMCA at the cost of $52 per month, had a personal trainer work out a program to strengthen my legs as Dr. P suggested and I still have pain. But now I can no longer afford to attend the gym and buying a home system is completely out of the question.
I quit riding the bike but the toe was still swollen and numb. On October 10, 2007 my foot slipped off the brake and back onto the accelerator while I was parking and the police determined the swelling in my right foot to be the cause of the car accident. This accident totaled my car and caused me to jump through several hoops for the Department of Motor Vehicles in order to get my license back. It took almost three weeks to get an appointment with my work comp doctor and by then I had been taking aspirin four times a day and icing the foot to get the swelling down. It looked pretty normal by then, but the damage to my life and my car was done. Now instead of driving the just paid off car that got 35mpg, I drive an eight year older car that gets 18 mpg and my car insurance has doubled.
I used to make several thousand dollars a month, now I make less than one. Instead of giving me a lump sum, you want to stretch it out so that it is basically useless to me, other than to keep my head barely above water, until I have used up the $3K that you think destroying my life was worth. Then I am on my own, for the rest of my life. In pain and with difficulty walking. Problems I did not have before the accident. I can't go back to being a massage therapist because I can't push off with my right foot, it's painful and then my knee buckles. I can't go back to practicing acupuncture because I don't have the money for the license fees (now that acupuncture is accepted by work comp again) or the continuing education credits that are required.
This small, part-time job and the ensuing accident have had seriously negative consequences for my life. Everything that I have been trained to do ($100K for the AP degree), my hobby of cooking that I was turning into a profession and now the ability to find a job that will allow me to survive in today's economy, are further out of reach than they were when I was twelve. I'd like to say thank you, but I usually require a kiss when I'm being... shafted.
Oh, and by the way, Dr. B spent 19 minutes with me as actual face time, not the hour that he says. It took me longer to get back and forth to the X-Ray place than he spent talking, or more importantly, listening to me. If I could afford a lawyer, they would be the one writing this letter and handling this case from this point on.
Debsweb and Big Brass Blog
The cuts in Schwarzenegger's budget are big, but they're not the whole story; the rest is borrowing:
Despite deep cuts in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposal to bridge the state's $14.5 billion deficit, nearly half of his budget-balancing plan involves borrowing money, deferring debt payments and counting future tax revenue, according to a report released Monday by the nonpartisan legislative analyst's office....Let's be clear about this: when Schwarzenegger says he isn't raising taxes, he's lying. He's incurring expenses that will have to be repaid eventually; instead of raising rich people's taxes now, he's raising somebody's taxes later.
Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill questioned the shifting of revenues from one fiscal year to another.
"In our initial review, we have not yet been able to determine whether this proposal is a reasonable change in accounting practices or merely a convenient way to generate a one-time revenue bump," she wrote in her 23-page report released Monday.
And that includes parks; medical care for the poor, elderly, and disabled; schools and community colleges; and even the once-sacrosanct correctional industry:
Schwarzenegger's planned trims include the elimination of $4.8 billion from public schools over the next 1 1/2 years and a reduction of prison imates by 35,000, including the early release of 22,000 inmates over the next two years. The budget would also cut prison staff by 6,000, including the layoffs of 2,000 prison guards....Under his budget, 48 of the state's 280 parks would be affected: 43 parks would be temporarily shut down - among them nine in the Bay Area....Schwarzenegger...also is ready to cut as much as $1 billion from Medi-Cal, the state's medical service program for the poor, elderly and disabled.Sure, those things are important...but Governor Schwarzenegger has his eye on the real priority:
"I have made it very clear we cannot tax our way out of this problem," Schwarzenegger said. "There's no reason to tax anyone because our system doesn't work."So says the guy who responded to previous budget crises by issuing bonds--in other words, shifting the burden to somebody else, later. The guy who manufactured these crises in the first place by ruling out any tax increases.
Here's some good news for a change: despite the use of deceptive tactics by signature gatherers, the free-electoral-votes-for-Republicans initiative has failed to qualify for the June 2008 California ballot. That almost certainly means it won't be in effect for the next presidential election.
(Yes, I know it 'died' before and then came back. Now the deadline has passed, and they didn't make it.)
[Hat tip: Hendrik Hertzberg.]
And yes, I do mean that literally--the guy behind the give-some-extra-electoral-votes-to-the-Republicans initiative really is a butt-munch:
Until this week, Missouri attorney Charles "Chep" Hurth III was best known for a headline-grabbing incident a decade ago in which he bit a young female law student on the butt in a bar.The Presidential Election Reform Act is the one that would award California's electoral votes according to the majority in each congressional district. In 2004, it would have given Bush an additional 22 electoral votes--"more than the number awarded in Illinois (21), Pennsylvania (21) or Ohio (20)", as the Chron helpfully points out.
Now Hurth, the city attorney for New Haven, Mo. (population 1,800), is the agent for a deep-pocketed group that donated $175,000 to fund a Republican-backed effort that would reshape the landscape of presidential politics in California....
Hurth is the registered agent for Take Initiative America, a tax-exempt group formed Sept. 10, 2007, according to the organization's incorporation documents. A day later, the group made its hefty donation to fund petition-gathering that would get the so-called Presidential Election Reform Act on the June ballot.
The donation was the only reported contribution to the ballot-measure campaign, according to financial documents released earlier this week.
Hurth, then [in 1990] a third-year law student at St. Louis University, was taken to court by a young woman who said he grabbed her in a bar and bit her on the buttocks so hard she required medical attention - then laughed and high-fived his friends.What a world-class charmer.
Hurth testified that he had told her she should take it as a compliment.
For Governor: Angelides. Wouldn't it be nice to have a governor who isn't a complete embarrassment? Who, in fact, cares (and has spent a lot of time thinking) about solving the state's problems? Who is motivated by a sense of social justice?
Ah, well...a man can dream.
Now, the propositions:
Kevin Drum writes (somewhat belatedly) about the dire impact of Proposition 90. Besides failing to mention its backing, though, he also makes the mistake (IMO) of describing it as an anti-Kelo measure with a regulatory 'takings' provision tacked on. In reality, I think it's the other way around. Howie Rich may well believe eminent domain is wrong, but the 'takings' measure is the one that makes him and his contributors richer. The anti-Kelo part gets top billing not because it's the raison d'etre but because it's the bait with which they hope to hook Californians into hogtying their own government.
Because in its own right, the concept of regulatory 'takings' is simply absurd. The idea is that government regulations that limit what you can do with your property reduce the value of that property. The obvious problem is that this value is entirely speculative. Maybe--maybe--you could build a shopping mall on your land if the government didn't prevent you. That's assuming a whole lot of things that might or might not happen, though...and even if it could have been built, there's no guarantee you wouldn't lose your shirt. All investment is speculative. What the 'takings' ideologues want is concrete compensation for imaginary lost profit.
And consider the timing: if it passes in California, it does so just as the real estate bubble is bursting. I don't think they planned it that way, but it sure would work out nicely for a lot of people who own a lot of property that's losing a lot of value.
[That's all, folks]
The worst thing on this year's California ballot is Proposition 90.1 It's a bait-and-switch kind of deal: the bait is limiting local governments' ability to use eminent domain to benefit private businesses (very popular after the Kelo decision); the switch is a requirement that government reimburse landowners for any regulation that diminishes the economic value of their property. The latter provision would cripple environmental and land-use regulation at the local (and probably state) level.
So who's behind this?
According to an article in Thursday's Chronicle, Proposition 90 is 92% funded by a network of groups controlled by Howie Rich, a wealthy Libertarian real-estate investor in New York.
It's fairly clear that the groups, which shuffle money back and forth among themselves, are set up in order to hide the source of donations. Rich says his donors want anonymity because they fear government retribution, but it seems more likely that voter retribution is the real fear. There also appears to be some astroturfing going on; Rich tries to spin them as sustained by thousands of small donations, but won't disclose any donor lists to verify the claim.
Proposition 90 is currently ahead in the polls--among people who are aware of it, which at this point is something like 28%. Unless a lot more people learn what it really means, and who's behind it, a single property-rights fundamentalist from the opposite coast will succeed in destroying California's ability to govern ourselves.
In the same edition of the Chronicle, there was also the heartening news that Eastshore State Park, a dream of East Bay environmentalists for 30 years, is finally becoming a reality. 30 years ago there was nearly no public access to the Bay between Emeryville and Richmond, and dozens of developments were planned for the waterfront; now, an 8.5 mile stretch of shoreline is protected as parkland. It took a lot of public action and intense negotiating over the years to make this happen. Without the leverage of land-use regulations, it would have been impossible.
If Proposition 90 had been in effect 30 years ago, there would be no Eastshore State Park. If it passes, nothing like it will be possible in the future. The story of one crucial victory serves as a timely reminder of what's at stake in this election.
1This is not to slight the second-worst proposition on the ballot. Also, the whole governor Schwarzenegger thing--I still cringe when I hear that.
[That's all, folks]
Opponents of gay marriage come up with all sorts of elaborate rationalizations for their position, but in the end they're all based on the same maddeningly circular logic: it isn't allowed because it isn't allowed. That's pretty much what the California Court of Appeals said in yesterday's opinion upholding marriage discrimination.
As I understand it, the majority opinion is based on three separate determinations: that the fundamental right to marry is not at issue; that distinctions based on sexual orientation are not a 'suspect classification' requiring a 'strict scrutiny' standard; and that the law has, or could have, a 'rational basis' (the looser standard applied if it isn't a 'suspect classification'). The second is a little complicated; even though common sense would say that sexual orientation is obviously a suspect classification, there appear to be conflicting precedents. The first seems absurd on its face; marriage is a fundamental right (as the Supreme Court has found), and the law at issue makes it impossible for a whole class of people to exercise that right. The third strikes me as a variant of the basic anti-equality tautology: the fact that marriage has always been defined as a man and a woman is in itself a rational basis for keeping it that way. (On this point, the majority simply defines away discrimination, and thus avoids having to justify discrimination.)
In the end, I think this decision is more caution (or cowardice if you prefer) than malice; much of the majority's argument is that the rational basis standard gives extraordinary leeway to the legislature. (I would be more comforted by this argument if more conservative courts showed comparable restraint.) I think Justice Kline's rejoinder is devastating to this rationale...but then, I agree with him anyway. Take it for whatever it's worth.
It goes to the state Supreme Court now; I'm not optimistic. On the other hand, as Justice Kline says, the opponents are clearly on the wrong side of history.
[That's all, folks]
It's a long one, but well worth reading in its entirety. Here's Justice J. Anthony Kline, dissenting from a California appeals court opinion upholding the state’s prohibition on gay marriage:
To say that that the inalienable right to marry the person of one’s choice is not a fundamental constitutional right, and therefore may be restricted by the state without a showing of compelling need, is as terrible a backward step as was the unfortunate and now overruled opinion in Bowers, supra, 478 U.S. 186. Ignoring the qualities attached to marriage by the Supreme Court, and defining it instead by who it excludes, demeans the institution of marriage and diminishes the humanity of the gay men and lesbians who wish to marry a loved one of their choice. We are told by the Supreme Court of the United States that the right to marry— which is among “the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men” (Loving, supra, 388 U.S. at p. 12)—cannot be taken from deadbeat dads, spousal abusers, and other condemned criminals because their characteristics do not render them unable to partake of the attributes of marriage that render the right to marry a fundamental constitutional right. Gay men and lesbians are no less capable of enjoying and benefiting from the constitutionally significant aspects of marriage. Homosexual couples are as able as heterosexual couples to love and commit themselves to one another, to responsibly raise children, and to define for themselves and to express to the world the authenticity of their relationship. So too are they as able as other couples to benefit from the spiritual, religious, and emotional experience marriage best provides, and as deserving of the official respect and numerous other benefits the state confers upon the marital relationship. My colleagues do not say otherwise (nor does the state), but the restriction they uphold does, because it sends the unmistakable message that, unlike all other citizens, to whom marriage is made easily available, “gay people are not genuinely capable of the unitive good of interpersonal joy and commitment.” (Eskridge, 51 Equality Practice: Civil Unions and the Future of Gay Rights (2002) pp. 237-238.) Judicial opinions upholding blanket denial of the right of gay men and lesbians to enter society’s most fundamental and sacred institution are as incompatible with liberty and equality, and as inhumane, as the many opinions that upheld denial of that right to interracial couples. Like them, such opinions will not stand the test of time.[That's all, folks]
Yesterday's Chronicle ran a story on an unique immigration protest: five motorcyclists who call themselves the Paul Revere Riders, crossing the country to sound the alarm about illegal immigrants. Here's a representative sample:
"One if by land, two if by sea, three if from Mexico," declares their Web site -- comparing illegal migrants from Mexico to British redcoats of two centuries ago.The story quotes exactly five people: the leader, and four of the anti-immigration protestors. All had positive things to say about the ride, and about the anti-immigration cause. Nobody was quoted with anything critical to say. A story on a politically charged protest ends up coming off as a human interest story.
"The idea is to get enough people enough excited about their country to take action," said leader Frosty Wooldridge when the group arrived in Los Gatos Tuesday evening. "Paul Revere in April of 1775 was the great communicator. He rode and spread the word and actually beat the British. We're trying to spread the word through our neighbors and through the Internet.
"We've seen people march for anarchy, march for Mexico, march for illegality," said Wooldridge, who hopes legal immigration will be reduced dramatically and illegal entries stopped altogether. "It's time we as Americans stand up."
Multi-culturalism scorched the streets of Paris! Multi-culturalism burns and kills in France, Holland, Belgium, Germany and Britain. Recent violence corroborates that disparate cultures cannot exist together....Americans roll over and sleep as the Muslim and Mexican invasion accelerates in the United States.Or this:
Jay Leno is one of the few left in LA who speaks English. High school race riots in LA are common. Blacks and Mexicans coexist with razor sharp tension. Educational standards degrade into meaninglessness in California schools faster than you can flip a burger. Crime grows by the day as Mexicans imbed further into the systems faster than laws can imprison them.Or this:
Southern France is now known as Northern Nigeria. Over five million Muslims own Southern France. They are not French, don’t speak French, and don’t respect France as French....[The French] will either lose their country and language, or wall off southern France to the immigrants to save themselves.Or this:
Have you noticed dozens of languages being spoken by citizens and illegal aliens in America? Do you feel the disrespect and the separation? Do you feel violated? ...Do you feel like your country is being stolen from you along with your language?Or this:
Political correctness is killing America. Our leaders wielding the mighty ax of political correctness will be shown in the history books to have murdered the United States of America. Its blood will drain out of its citizens as an advancing horde of illegal alien migrants kills America’s ability to function....Bob from New Jersey said, “What did generations of my family fight and die for in wars? Get the illegals out, close the borders and move them into internment camps until we get things sorted."Wooldridge's writings are filled with this sort of xenophobic racism. Like the Minutemen, Wooldridge is in the business of mainstreaming hate.
Still having a very hard time focusing on this. All the really interesting races are in other congressional districts (the special election for Cunningham's seat, the primaries in Pombo's district), and I really have no idea whom I'm voting for locally. So my apologies for not having much of anything to say on the topic.
For those of you who are following the elections, though, there's Calitics, the most comprehensive and in-depth blog coverage of California politics. Go there and read up before you vote; you'll be glad you did.
[That's all, folks]
We Californians have an election coming up next Tuesday, and I know I've been falling down on the job of covering it. In truth, I've had a very hard time focusing on them. Still, I know literally dozens of people...well, figuratively dozens of people are waiting breathlessly for the official If I Ran the Zoo endorsements. So here goes.
Proposition 81: Yes. This is a $600 million bond issue to match local funding to build libraries. This seems like a no-brainer to me. One enduring legacy of the poisonous Proposition 13 is that local libraries have been eviscerated. The ideal of free access to information for everyone is essential to a democratic society.
And if that's not enough, look at the opposition. Sample sentence from the argument against: "We should not spend $9 billion a year on welfare for illegal aliens, and then borrow money for libraries." Also, the argument against is signed by the thoroughly odious Lew Uhler (more here).
Proposition 82: Yes. This one imposes a small tax on the highest income brackets, and uses the proceeds to provide preschool for everyone. This is a little trickier; I am all in favor of universal preschool, but I think there are some flaws in this one. The Chronicle endorsement is for a no vote, and while some of their points are silly or trivial (e.g., they have a problem with taxing the wealthy to provide benefits for all--huh?), but they do make some good points: the bulk of the benefit will go to middle-class parents who already pay for preschool; the requirement that preschool teachers be certified could aggravate an existing teacher shortage; if revenue falls short, tuition could be charged. Still, on balance, I think it's well worth doing.
I'll get to the candidates in a couple of days...certainly by a week from Friday or so.
[That's all, folks]
Mojave National Preserve
Originally uploaded by davduf.
Sometimes I feel like I'm just reading the same damn story over and over. Big giveaway to the energy companies? Indifference to environmental protection? Another threat to our public lands? Check, check, and check:
Under orders from Congress to move quickly, the Department of Energy and Bureau of Land Management will approve thousands of miles of new power line and pipeline corridors on federal lands across the West in the next 14 months. The energy easements are likely to cross national parks, forests and military bases as well as other public land.Okay...so what exactly is an "energy corridor"?
Environmentalists and land managers worry about the risk of pipeline explosions and permanent scarring of habitat and scenery from pylons and trenches....But industry lobbyists and congressional policymakers said expedited approvals for new corridors were vital to ensuring that adequate power from coal beds, oil fields and wind farms in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho reached the booming population centers of the Southwest....
ExxonMobil, Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas and Electric and others have proposed corridors in the state across Death Valley, Joshua Tree and Lassen Volcanic national parks as well as the Mojave National Preserve, several military bases, Anza-Borrego Desert State Park and seven national forests....[emphasis added]
Although power lines appear to sail through the air, every 160-foot-tall pylon is built on a concrete pad with a spur road connecting to a longer maintenance road, creating an artificial barrier across the fragile desert floor. Wilshire said bulldozing trenches for pipelines had similar effects.And are they going to choose these routes through an open process with public input at every stage? Or behind closed doors, presenting the result as a fait accompli with only a token 'public comment' period as a fig leaf?
Department of Energy officials declined to provide an internal working map of which corridors were under consideration, saying it would be released only after environmental review. At that point, a map will be released showing possible routes, including those recommended by the department, and the public will have a chance to comment.And are they carefully considering the impact of each proposed corridor?
"We don't want to confuse the public," said David Meyer of the department's Office of Electricity Deliverability and Energy Reliability. [emphasis added]
Environmentalists and some federal scientists say the huge number of potential new corridors and accelerated timeline are a recipe for ecological devastation. They note that the government's hurried environmental review of the proposed corridors, to be completed by year's end, will miss key breeding seasons of affected fauna.Okay...but surely the states have a say in this, right?
"That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. They want to get by with a lot of sloppy, dirty work," said Howard Wilshire, a retired U.S. Geological Survey scientist who for 20 years studied human effects on public lands.
He said that with an environmental study of the arid Southwest scheduled for the hot summer months, many species would not be documented because plants will have died back and animals will be underground. Wilshire said his studies and others on the effects of roads, power lines and other linear development across the Mojave found that endangered species such as the desert tortoise were killed during construction, and that the projects permanently fragmented and eroded critical habitat.
"They've taken away our sovereignty," said John Geesman, who sits on the California Energy Commission. "We're looking down the barrel of a gun."....Okay, one last stupid question: if this is such a bad idea, who's behind it?
Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who wants corridors built in his state, said he didn't like the federal government usurping state authority. He said western states had worked for years to map future lines.
He said he would sue if necessary, depending on which corridors were picked.
Acting at the behest of the nation's largest utilities, Congress in its 2005 Energy Policy Act gave federal agencies until August 2007 to review and adopt major energy corridors across 11 states....I don't know what to say about this stuff anymore. They're talking about causing permanent damage to national parks just to save a few bucks for the energy companies...and it doesn't even surprise me. Call your representative. Write your senator. Tell them to stop this crazy land grab. It won't help, but do it anyway.
Geesman said it was unclear who would ultimately pay for the new utility lines, and the public might have to pay the tab, through construction subsidies or bill increases. Utilities prefer public land because access across it is free or cheap, requiring modest lease payments at most, and poses fewer problems than securing rights from multiple private properties, he said.
I swear this is the last--okay, the penultimate--batch of holiday snaps (from my weekend in Mendocino) that I'll inflict on y'all. Pictures below the fold...
[That's all, folks]
