Political Activism, Animal Rights, Civil Rights, Climate Change, Diversity, Economic Reform, Education Reform, Election Reform, Energy Independence, Fair Trade, Freedom of Speech, GLBT Equality, Grassroots Organizing, Global Warming, Healthcare Reform, HIV/AIDS Assistance, Human Rights, Philosophy, Political Reform, Poverty Assistance, Renewable Energy, Socialism, Societal Changes, Theology, Vegetarianism.
Groups/Activities:
Young Democrats of Nevada from 2005-2006. Ohio Young Democrats, Young Democrats of America, College Democrats, HRC, ACLU, PETA, and dozens of others.
Online Activism- Progressive Activism on Myspace and other social networking websites.
Favorite Things:
I like politics not for its partisan nature, but because there is the possibility for change.
I like activism, because without it nothing would ever change.
Want to know more about me? Please visit my page, and check out my online group Concerned Citizens for Cultural Change.
Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/elicious
Group: http://groups.myspace.com/TheC4Group
Political Blog of today's most important issues for America's youth.
Some of you may know that I posted a very detailed article about CNN's clear bias in favor of a certain candidate for President. Unfortunately today when I came to check the blog, my post had been deleted. I was not endorsing any candidate for President, and layed out the clear facts as I saw them in this case. It was a thoughtful article which considered both sides of the Debate. My vantage point as an outsider with information from sources in Nevada. I also included the vantage point of someone inside of the process, for fairness. I left the reader to decide which side was correct.
I gave my assessment of the Main Stream Media's coronation of a certain candidate. Now I have had my post deleted by the staff here at Campus Progress. I ask a simple question, WHY? I was not endorsing a particular candidate nor was I endorsing a particular political party. I was discussing a current event. The CNN Nevada Democratic Debate. I am disappointed that Campus Progress would take such an action, and I am led to believe that it was due to the criticism's I have layed out, instead of a violation of the terms of use. So again, I would like an explaination of why this action was taken to censor my post on Campus Progress.
During last night's debate, Sen. Hillary Clinton was asked about whether she would read a book to 2nd Grade Children about same-sex couples. In her reply she said something which caught my attention, and when I re-watched the debate I heard exactly what she was saying.
Clinton said: "I think that obviously it is better to try to work with your children, to help your children with the many differences that are in the world, and to really respect other people and the choices that other people make, and that goes far beyond sexual orientation."
Was Hillary Clinton implying that sexual orientation is a choice, and therefore is something that can be changed? Perhaps she mispoke, but the comment was certainly not taken out of context, so what exactly did she mean when she said that we should "respect other people and the choices that other people make" in regard to sexual orientation?
Yesterday a student at the University of Florida was tased at a John Kerry speaking event after he asked a series of long winded questions. The student asked Senator Kerry some annoying questions, but after he refused to give up the microphone, he was then placed under arrest, and dragged off screaming by the police. After being forced to the ground in view of dozens of cameras and spectators he was then shocked with 20,000 volts of a taser gun. This may not have been John Kerry’s fault as he was heard, saying, “let me answer the question”, and didn’t ask for police intervention, but somehow the police got the idea that they needed to step in to stop the student from speaking. As shocking as the video of the entire incident is, this is just one in a series of incidents of police using excessive force and of censorship of freedom of speech. Earlier this year a student in California who refused to show his school ID because he felt it was a violation of his rights at the school Library was handcuffed and repeatedly tased until he was unable to walk. Read More »
Today I witnessed a funeral for a fallen soldier from my hometown killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq. It was the first time that someone from my hometown or area has been killed in Iraq. I lived just a few miles down from him and his family. Lt. Chris Rutherford’s life was cut tragically short by the senseless violence in Iraq. He was only 25 years old, a Marietta College graduate, a son, and a friend to many. They had to have the funeral at his high school a few miles from my home because of the outpouring of support from all his family, friends and neighbors of the close-knit community of Newport and Marietta where he grew up. It was incredible to watch as thousands of people came out of their houses and lined the 22 miles of road that passes by my house to lay him to rest, waving flags and messages of support. His casket and the family were taken by military escort to the burial site; a sheriff helicopter led the way, with police, fire, and thousands of Harley riders who followed them. I watched as the family was escorted by the police, I will never forget the look on his mothers face as she looked at me and my family as we stood by the side of the road in support. It was heartbreaking to see the sadness, and at the same time the honor and gratitude they showed.
With only six months before the first Caucus in Iowa, the race for the Democratic and Republican nomination is in full swing, but there could be one more name added to the list of potential candidates, a third party candidate. Could a third party Independent candidate really sweep in and bring an end to the two-party domination of politics as we know it?
Today the House passed a resolution to give the citizens of the District of Columbia the right to elect a voting member in the House of Representatives. The bill would also give Utah an additonal at-large House seat, which was denied after the 2000 Census failed to count the several thousand Mormon Missionaries serving abroad. If it is approved and signed by the President, the bill would for the first time, give Citizens of the Democratic leaning District of Columbia a voting member in Congress, and give Republican leaning Utah an extra seat increasing the size of the House of Representatives from 435 to 437.
The bill was first introduced in March, but Democrats withdrew the bill after an attempt by Republicans to add an amendment which would have lifted a ban on simiautomatic handguns in the District of Columbia. The bill was re-introduced this week with rules to prevent Republicans from using parliamentary proceedure to hold the bill hostage at gunpoint (figuratively speaking).
After much wrangling and arguing over Constitutional issues centering around Washington D.C.'s status as a federal district rather than a state, the bill passed 241-177. These Constitutional arguements have some measure of validity. It is possible that the bill may end up in the Judicial system should it be passed by the Senate and signed by the President. Its passage in the Senate is uncertain, and already Republican leader Mitch McConnell has stated that he will use the filibuster to block its passage in the Senate. President Bush meanwhile has stated that if the bill arrives on his desk he will Veto it (along with nearly a dozen other pending bills).
This week’s events over the racist and sexist remarks made by Don Imus about the Rutgers female basketball team were very unfortunate and made clear that we still have a very long way to go before we eliminate discrimination in all its forms. In many ways the Imus incident also highlighted the progress made on racial and women’s issues in America. It speaks to our culture that MSNBC and CBS were so overwhelmed by the response from the American people that they chose to cancel the Imus program. It was a big win for civil rights and women’s rights, but the Imus remark uncovered the deep-rooted stereotypes about African Americans and women that continue in our society. Read More »
In January, President Bush told Congress and the American people that he would be temporarily sending 21,500 troops to Iraq to end a sectarian civil war being fought by the Sunni and Shiites. We later found out that the number of troops in the so called "surge" was actually much higher than announced by Bush. President Bush failed to mention that the 21,500 troops only included the number of combat troops to be deployed to Iraq, not the additional support troops that would need to be sent. We have also now learned that this “temporary” “surge” of troops would last for an undetermined length of time.
The President said he would take “every proposal” from the Iraq Study Group’s Report “seriously”, but one has to question how “seriously” he really took the recommendations. The bipartisan Iraq Study Group Report provided a detailed framework for moving forward in Iraq and included a plan to redeploy our troops from Iraq by March of 2008. Chairman James Baker warned Bush not to treat the report like “a fruit salad” and cherry picking only a few of the recommendations, because the report was designed as a “comprehensive strategy”. Instead of cherry picking the report, President Bush chose instead to throw the entire Iraq Study Group Report out the window.
Over the past few years I have become more aware of the fact that the whole election process in the United States is in need of serious reform. I have been supportive of efforts to make Election Day a National Holiday because I think everyone should be given time off to vote! It’s our Constitutional right to choose who we want representing us, especially in Presidential Elections. Many people say that voting for President is the most personal vote you'll ever cast, and I totally agree. So how is it that in a great nation such as ours, millions are disenfranchised in the nominating process, and as we witnessed in 2000, we can elect a President who was not chosen by the majority of Americans. Whether you're a Democrat, Republican or neither, the fact that a President can be elected without winning the majority of the votes of the American people seems undemocratic and at the very least unfair. That is why I feel we should abolish the Electoral College, and support direct election of the President. Some say that if something isn't broken, you shouldn't fix it. The current Presidential Nominating system is broken, and time to fix it is now. Read More »
“Potentially Devastating”, that’s how Rich Umbdenstock president of the American Hospital Association describes the President’s Budget Proposal in a recent interview. Medicare and Medicaid finds itself under attack as the President sets out his agenda of budget priorities. The President spoke of the need to improve the healthcare system in his State of the Union address, but again his words are nothing more than the same tired rhetoric. In typical Bush style, the things he says and the things he does appear to be two separate things altogether. Read More »
As I predicted earlier this month, Sen. Joe Lieberman has all but abandoned the Democratic Party.
Lieberman was on FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace on Sunday, and discussed his support for the President's plan to escalate the war in Iraq. When asked if there were any Democrats running in 2008 that Lieberman would support Lieberman made his intentions known.
"Are there any Democrats who don't appear to be running at this point? Look, I've had a very political couple of years in Connecticut, and I'm stepping back for a while to concentrate on being the best senator I can be for my state and my country."
"I'm also an Independent-Democrat now, and I'm going to do what most Independents and a lot of Democrats and Republicans in America do, which is to take a look at all the candidates and then in the end, regardless of party, decide who I think will be best for the future of our country."
"So I'm open to supporting a Democrat, Republican or even an Independent, if there's a strong one. Stay tuned." Read More »
Last night, President Bush delivered his second to last State of the Union address to a public clamoring for a new direction on foreign and energy policy. Bush's State of the Union address included a stunning admission for the first time that global warming is a problem. The President's very last phrase concerning his energy proposal stated that his proposals "will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change." Even though his statement was at the very bottom of his list and stopped short of saying the words "global warming", it was an important recognition from an administration reluctant to embrace scientific consensus. Read More »
There has been much talk lately about Barack Obama's colorful biography.
Conservative pundits have taken it upon themselves to spread some malicious rumors about both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Fox News has spent the entire week discussing the Insight Magazine article which implies that Sen. Hillary Clinton was spreading information that Barack Obama "spent at least four years in a so-called Madrassa or Muslim seminary, in Indonesia." Fox News has asserted that individuals close to Senator Clinton provided details of Obama's Muslim upbringing. Of course none of the television hosts cited any specific evidence that Hillary was in any way responsible for the madrassa story.
There is quite a bit of misinformation being circulated by right-wing ideologues, and in particular Fox News Channel.
A madrasah is defined very simply as a school used for teaching Islamic theology, religious law, world history and language. Despite common assuptions, madrasahs are not schools for teaching hatred of the west, or training schools for terrorist. Some extremist Wahhabi elements have used madrasahs for that purpose in places such as Pakistan, but it is not the true purpose of a madrasah.
On the issue of Obama's honesty about his past, Obama has been honest about his past. The fact that Obama went to a Muslim school has been known for at least 12 years since he published his first book, "Dreams from my Father". He has not tried to hide this information at all. The pundits at Fox News have attempted to portray him as being dishonest about his past. In fact it is Fox News and others who are dishonest by using uncooberated information about his early education in Indonesia. There is no evidence that Obama actually went to a madrasah, only that he attended a Muslim school.
Obama has been very clear about his childhood. In his own book "Dreams from my Father" (p.142) Obama stated that at the age of 6 he moved to Jakarta, Indonesia with his mother and step-father.
"In Indonesia, I'd spent 2 years at a Muslim school, 2 years at a Catholic school. In the Muslim school, the teacher wrote to tell mother I made faces during Koranic studies. In the Catholic school, when it came time to pray, I'd pretend to close my eyes, then peek around the room."
He then moved to live with his grandparents in the United States at age 10.
Again, there is no controversy here, this is old news. "Dreams from my Father" was written 12 years ago. Obama has discussed at length his Muslim father and his upbringing in Indonesia. This is the biggest non-story I have ever seen.
It has become crystal clear after today that the voters of Connecticut, have essentially thrown the U.S. Senate back to the Republicans. Last nights speech by President Bush was shocking not only for his plan to escalate the war in Iraq and possibly attacking Iran; it was shocking that the President named only one lawmaker in his speech, and that was Sen. Joe Lieberman. Sen. Lieberman is the only "democrat" to support escalating the war, and has been pushing for action in Iran as well.
As I reported yesterday nearly a dozen Republican Senators have spoken out against the escalation of the Iraq war. And yet despite opposition from President Bush's own party, Sen. Joe Lieberman is in lock step with the Administration on the Iraq war, and the middle east policy. Read More »
President Bush will announce that he will be escalating the Iraq war by adding over 21,500 new troops to act as referees in the Civil War there. There is fierce opposition to the plan from Democrats including Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. Sen. Kennedy introduced legislation yesterday to block funding for additional troops unless President Bush answers Congress' questions about the purpose of the proposed troop increase. Its unclear what effect if any this will really have; other than a purely symbolic message that they do not want an escalation of the war, and want the President to return to Congress on matters of war.
What is clear is that support is slipping for the war, and especially for a "surge". What is most surprising is that there are many high ranking Republicans among those who are not supportive of a "surge". At least a dozen Senators have joined with Senate Democrats in opposition to an escalation.
The Democrats may ask for a vote on a non-binding resolution rebuking the Presidents plan. Included on the list, are several Republican Senators on the Foreign Relations Committee. Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana, Sen. John Warner of Virginia Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi, Sen. John Sununu of New Hampshire, Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, and Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio have all indicated that they do not fully support the planned increase.
What is so "ironic" about this opposition is that at least half of the Senators are also up for re-election in 2008. Sen. Collins, Coleman, Hagel, Smith, Sununu, Warner, are all up for re-election in 2008. Sen. Smith, Coleman and Sununu are all in Blue states, and their opposition to the troop increase may be key to their re-election.
So do these Senators really oppose the Bush plan for escalation or are they just voting on this "non-binding" resolution for pure political purposes. Will these same Senators also vote for the Kennedy measure which backs up words with actions? That will be the real test of their sincerity.. We'll have to wait and see.
Here is an interesting scoop, it seems that someone has reserved a possible Obama 2008 website address. BarackObama2008.com will land you right to the DNC webpage. Interesting.. So Is Barack Obama ready to run for President? If I were to shake the Magic 8 Ball, it would say "All Signs Point to Yes".
If Barack Obama decides to run, what will he bring to the table that would be different than the others, besides charisma? And can he actually win? Read More »
Washington D.C. may get voting representation in Congress if Democrats take up the issue when Congress reconvenes. A deal between D.C. and Utah would increase the membership of the House from 435 to 437, giving Republican stronghold Utah and Democratic leaning DC both a voting House seat. But is this a step in the right direction, or is it simply creating a separate but equal status for D.C.?
By giving D.C. residents a vote in the House, but denying them equal representation in the Senate, we may be putting a band aid over the problem, without addressing the issue of equal representation. Granted the Senate is reserved for the States because of the language used in the Constitution, and would require a Constitutional Amendment to give D.C. representation in both Chambers; however, that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to give equal representation to all tax-paying citizens.
The bottom line is that political maneuvering is trumping equal representation. To appease the Republicans, the Democrats will no doubt push this bill through as a means to show that they care about the rights of the people, and will use this as a triumphant moment in bipartisanship. Bla Bla Bla.. Over 600,000 tax paying citizens will still be disenfranchised second class Americans at the end of the day, so why bother to take a step in the right direction if you're not willing to support full equality.
Its Official folks, Pat Robertson is a nutcase! He is making some new predictions for the new year.
He is talking to God and God is talking back! Robertson said God told him about "mass killing" in the New Year.
"The Lord didn't say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that."
He claims possibly millions of people will be affected by the attack, which should take place sometime after September.
This should go well with the plague he predicted for Dover Pa, after they voted against intelligent design, the hurricanes for all the sinners in Florida and the stroke suffered by Ariel Sharon!
They just need to take ol' Pat in for a check up from the neck up, cause he is not all there. He makes these crazy statements on TV, and while it's humorous to the skeptical, the real believers end up building bomb shelters in their basements..
It was like a scene straight out of the Wizard of Oz. Tornadoes, melting ice shelves and disappearing Polar Bears, Oh My!! Bush was not only dodging the whirlwind of questions about his "new" Iraq plan or lack thereof, but an actual whirlwind. The tornado that chased Bush into retreat may have been a metaphor for what lies ahead for him when he announces his "new" Iraq strategy. If today's tornado was any indication, we look to be headed towards disaster in Iraq in 2007.
Then there's the stunning news today that large sections of polar ice are melting and breaking apart, which incidentally is the reason the Bush administration gave for moving to list Polar Bears as a "threatened" species. This marks the first definitive occasion the Bush administration has acknowledged global warming. If the Polar Bears haven't convinced Bush that the global warming threat is real, certainly a freak December tornado in your backyard would.
Hmm.. If he only had a brain, a heart, and some courage..
Was it a day of joy or a day of sober realization today as the New Jersey legislature passed a bill to allow civil unions in the garden state?
I suspect it was a little of both. For the many LGBT families in New Jersey, the news that Civil Union legislation passed the Legislature gives some reassurance that at least some measure of legal rights and protections will be afforded to GLBT families; however by denying full marriage rights, it simply leaves the impression that LGBT families aren't good enough to be on par with the rest of society. It is a sober reminder that while New Jersey and some other states are moving in the right direction, discrimination is none the less the result of a separate institution for the scores of committed same-sex couples in New Jersey. "Separate but equal" has been proven time again to be separate but most definitely NOT equal. It reminds us again of a time when people were forced to sit at the back of bus for something they unequivocally could not change.
The New Jersey Legislature did the bare minimum required by law; they took the easy way out, afraid that by standing up against discrimination they would suffer at the hands of the electorate. What ever happened to rationality in America? Why are we (collectively) so afraid of change, of moving forward, and of supporting the greater good? Perhaps it's only a generational issue which will pass in time. I can only hope that future generations can look back at this period in time and say, "I can't believe that people were discriminated against simply because of who they loved." There is much work to be done if we are to ever get to that point in time.
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
Posts
!
