Thanks to Tribune Companies, editorial cartooning positions are being eliminated. The LA Times, Baltimore Sun, and Chicago Tribune are some of the bigger names dropping a staff cartoonist and picking up syndicated cartoons.

Well, apparently the cartoonists are not lying down. This link will take you to the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists homepage, specifically to the Black Monday site. There are 102 cartoons here taking on the cheapness of our corporate media culture. It is a great cross section of editorial cartoonists, with a wide range of styles and conepts.

Editorial cartoons in America have been around since the Revolution. We have all see the Join Or Die cartoon Ben Franklin penned for the French-Indian War (reused for the Revolution). They had a particular impact on the fortunes of Boss Tweed. It was the cartoons of Thomas Nash, not the thousands of words written by journalists, which raised public outrage at Tweed. He is famous for saying "I don't care a straw for your newspaper articles, my constituents don't know how to read, but they can't help seeing them damned pictures."

We all love to see what Tom Tomorrow, Ted Rall, Jen Sorensen, and this guy here have to draw every week. Most of these people helped to prop up independent newspapers we all enjoy. And, how many people actually skip the comics page in the newspaper?

While this is a way under the radar with the War On Christmas, it is still signifcant. So, if you have a minute or two, at least go and look at the cartoons.

FEM brought up something I have been looking over for a while. Quotas. She brought up the fact that there were no female writers or creators for Adult Swim. She then challenged the people in charge of Adult Swim to get with the program and hire some. My response to that was posed below. I'll let you industrious people read it.

Quotas had a time and place. I am no longer sure we need to keep dragging them around. They seem to cause as many problems as they solve. Friends of mine keep running into them in work and in play. Minorities that quotas were designed to help out are in places where they can now help out others. Four black men are heading Fortune 500 companies. Female owned companies in 1998 employed about 1 in 5 workers in the U.S. We have had two black Secretaries Of State and several women have also held that position. The Supreme Court has had black men and women on it over the last two decades.

What exactly were quotas created for?

Affirmative action (U.S. English), or positive discrimination (British English), is a policy or a program providing access to systems for people of a minority group who have traditionally been discriminated against, with the aim of creating a more egalitarian society. This consists of access to education, employment, health care, or social welfare.

In employment, affirmative action may also be known as employment equity or preferential hiring. In this context affirmative action requires that institutions increase hiring and promotion of candidates of mandated groups. (Wikipedia)

Affirmative action and quotas seem to have been created to level the playing field. Since we held back minorities for so long, we needed to give them a boost to catch them up to the rest of us. Let them gain access to the institutions that led to the success of so many white people: universities, quality public schools, good jobs, and health care.

When does it stop? It should stop when those same rules start to hobble people from performing routine business tasks without jumping through hoops. Steve Mariucci, the recently fired head coach of the Detroit Lions, we the first choice for coach by Matt Millen. They had worked together. They had a history together. Steve was the man that Matt wanted to run his team. Due to an NFL diversity program, the Lions were fined heavily for not giving minorities interviews. Which, to be fair, the Lions did. But, the interviews went more like "We know who we want, but we are doing this to please the league." Not like the NFL does not have it's fair share of black head coaches. Tony Dungee leading the flawless Colts, Martin Lewis reviving the Bungles to the Bengals, Romeo Crenell trying to rebuild the ailing Browns after helping the Patriots to three Super Bowls.

It should also be reconsidered when it threatens top institutions. The University of Cincinnati has a brilliant architecture program. In the early 90's, they almost lost accreditation. They did not have enough black people in the program to fill the AIA quota for minorities. They kept the program, and then reviewed why they did not have that many black people in the program: they were going to the engineering program. It had nothing to do with not trying to attract minorities; it had everything to do with the people with those skill sets going to where the money is. Which is a good thing. But not so good if you have to fill a quota.

It was built as a scaffold to bring people who traditionally had nothing to a place where they could have something. Now, in greater numbers, they do. Accolades, accomplishments, money, fame. There is even serious talk about having two women running for president in 2008. How long does this scaffold need to be up? When is there enough of a foundation for us to take it down? Are we so focused on the scaffold in front of us, that we are missing the view?

I just kept writing in response to this story, so I decided to turn it into a post.

To begin, anything that is illegal is far more dangerous that the same thing that is legal. Look at prohibition. Alcohol was not causing half the social unrest that illegally trying to distribute alcohol did. In fact, it was such an issue that they made another constitutional amendment to restore people's ability to drink. At that point, people are not only paying more for the privledge, they are taking more risks to get to that taboo substance. People who are getting the alcohol are not getting a good product at all, and I strongly doubt that if they have no moral problem buying a poor product, they have no problem doctoring the product to make it go a little further to make some more profit. It creates a far unhealthier situation for everyone involved.

Whether or not it is legal, people are going to do it. Making it legal can make it safer for all parties. Men (I know there are male prostitutes, but we'll just keep this straightforward, shall we?) do not have to go to seedy locations to find what they are looking for, and women do not have to lurk in dangerous areas, protected by disreputable men, to ply their trade. Women could be required to get regular tests, have greater access to health care, and work in nicer locations. They would have greater legal protection, so they would not have to worry so much about illegal protection. It also may stem the flow of venerial disease. And think about the tax revenues!

I am sure that most prostitutes have had a rough past. I am sure very few of them are putting themselves through college. And, I am sure there are very few women saying "How I long to be a prostitute! If only it wasn't illegal!" As it was pointed out in the comments, having a rough past does not mean you are headed right to the strip club or the bottom of a bottle. What women who end up as prostitutes really lack is any kind of support system to deal with what has happened to them. That is something the community needs to address. And society needs to stop marginalizing crimes we are not comfortable with. Theft, murder, sure we can help! Rape, molestation, well...we can help...but quietly. We need to make people more are there are places they can turn if this happens to them. It is not the victims fault, but the criminals.

Actually, at no point did I ever think of prostitutes as just people that wanted more sex. I think of them as people who did not have a choice, and went with what they had to do at the time.

I do not subscribe to the thought that by legalizing something, it is an implicit endorsement of his sort of behavior. Alcohol is legal, and I am pretty sure it does not endorse alcoholism. Baseball is legal, but beating the crap out of someone with a baseball bat is not. If you made pot legal today, made it legal and free, I still would not do it.

This is all sorts of a tricky topic. Angles everywhere. But, I think that removing the dangers from these women who are in this unfortunate situation should be our first step. Maybe then they can spend more energy on working on their future than avoiding the law.

e·qual; adj.
-Having the same quantity, measure, or value as another.
-Mathematics. Being the same or identical to in value.
-Having the same privileges, status, or rights: equal before the law.
-Being the same for all members of a group: gave every player an equal chance to win.
-Having the requisite qualities, such as strength or ability, for a task or situation: "Elizabeth found herself quite equal to the scene" (Jane Austen).
-Adequate in extent, amount, or degree.
-Impartial; just; equitable.
T-ranquil; equable.
-Showing or having no variance in proportion, structure, or appearance.

That is how the fine folks at dictionary.com define equal. The one thing I keep coming back to as I continue my exploration of minority relations is that: Where do we define equal? What is the goal for equality?

I think it is a moving goal at best, since we live in a dynamic community. I think that people go out and create things. Other people see it. see what they have, and go "Hey, I want some of that.", then start racing towards it. Culturally, it seems since at least the mid-19th century, white people have been drawn to black culture. Even many of the things that were part of the slave culture, or came out of the slave culture, white people wanted for themselves. In one of the books I read (which is obscure to the point I cannot find a link) claimed that white men, after the Civil War, would set up dances to dance with black women. Black men would be in the bands that played at these dances, and would be none too happy for it. So, they would write songs, taking subtle jabs at the white men. These dances, the author claims, were the beginnings of white peoples love of jazz. Which moved to blues, and then to rock and roll.

Black people saw the freedom and wealth white people had, and started to gravitate towards that. They wanted the cars, the nice houses, the simple rights to go in the front door of a theater, or a restaurant. They wanted the safe communities and jobs that got them to that level, and they wanted education. Real, honest, education. They knew that was the key to it all, and they wanted it. I heard one man say "Do you know what is the greatest act of civil disobedience a black person can commit today? Become educated."

What does all that have to do with anything? That part of equal in a sociological setting is undefinable. People will move, as individuals or groups, towards what they feel is lacking in their own community. If education is lacking, they will move towards the schools. If structure becomes to rigid, they will move towards that which is unstructured.

Highlighted in the definition above are two solid things we should be moving towards. Legally and in the face of opportunity, race and sex should be irrelevant. If there is a chance at something, everyone qualified should be considered. Yeah, there will be biases. We all have them. But, ideally, those should be ignored in the face of opportunity.

Same for legally. A friend of mine, who is black, was great at catching shoplifters at the retail store I worked at. But, he would only follow the younger black people around the store. Whan he was asked, he said that he knew they would be the ones most likely to steal. We all told him the same thing: If you only look for black shoplifters, you will only catch black shoplifters. Same with the law. If you are only looking for blacks commiting crimes, you will only find black criminals. Ken Lay should have been crucified for what he did. But, he is not. Martha Stewart was jailed for doing far less.

We need to stop legally defining what people can and cannot do by race, gender, or sexual orientation. We need to make the commitment to educate everyone equally. We also need to work in all communities on setting these as priorites. Things are getting better all the time, let's not lose sight of that. But for all of us to be equal, we need to be working for a common goal.

(Originally written at Advance To Boardwalk)

I am an English tutor to Korean man. It is really fun, and I get a charge out of helping him learn the English language. One of our lessons this week was about becoming a naturalized citizen. On the opening page was a picture of man being sworn in as a citizen. My student looked at the picture and declared he thought the man was of Korean or Chinese descent. I looked carefully at the picture (which I wish I could show you all). The man looked much closer to South or Central American descent.

This brings me to something I posted about before. Race, and how do we look at it. Where are race relations in this country? What is "racist", and what isn't? This incident got me thinking about how we view the world. By default, we try to relate to the world from a standpoint that is familiar to us. When we are talking to other people, we are going to assume that they are on the same page as we are, and if they are not, we are going to give the person a picture of who we are talking about. Race is a component to that.

Gender is not too much of an issue, since majority of names tend to be gender-specific. On occasion, you run into a Pat, Chris, or Toni. But, using race as a descriptive term is not necessarily racist. Describing an ethnicity is far different that using a racial slur. There is no place for racial slurs in polite conversation. In fact, some slurs have become almost acceptable. I remember at one point if you threw out the word "bitch" or "nigger", that was throwing down the gauntlet. You'd better be ready for a fight. Now, both words seem to have filtered into our vernacular. To be fair, "nigger" seems to have morphed into "nigga", but you get the point.

It is hard to say when people throw that detail into a story why they are doing it. Part of it could be giving the story some flavor, or recreate the situation that was occurring for the listener. I tend to lean towards this when people use more politically correct terms. If they are mocking or being flat out racist, you are going to hear it in the story.

In my head this is all still evolving. Somewhere, we became scared to make distinctions. While people are taking greater strides to assert their individuality on a cultural level, we are trying to sanitize this trend linguistically. Being equal does not mean being the same.

Finally!

I think as of last Wednesday, the mainstream media had interviewed every last victim of hurricane Katrina. It took them a few weeks, but they got around to all of them.

It is a good thing that nothing else really important was going on over the last few weeks.

It could not have been easy. For one, the residents of New Orleans are scattered all over the country. I just this afternoon witnessed and argument in Dayton between a woman from New Orleans and one of the locals. And finding all 480,000 had to have been a chore. Then finding the time to interview them all. It is an impressive feat any way in which you measure it. I have never seen such a concentrated effort in all of the media outlets to get to one goal like this. It really is a red letter day for the American media.

I now know more about levee mechanics, environmental studies, New Orleans and Louisiana politics, FEMA, and hurricane science than I ever knew before, or feel I needed to know.

Still, glad nothing at all is going on elsewhere.

Damn, in some ways, it was good to be from Louisiana this weekend. After two weeks of hearing nothing but floods, dislocation, political wrangling and destruction coming out of New Orleans and the Gulf, something good came this weekend.

The Saints and the LSU Tigers both won, both on late, last ditch efforts. Something that people from New Orleans can cheer about happened after two weeks of nothing but bad news.

No, the Saints winning does not remove one drop of water from the flooded city. The Tigers winning did not restore one building or one house. But, for about three hous on Saturday and three hours on Sunday, you could forget what was going on in the city and relax a little. You could forget the confusion about the future and enjoy something that was comfortable about the past. You could watch John Carney kick a field goal with three seconds left, and genuinely have something to cheer about.

If anyone remembers after September 11th, 2001, sports were respectfully held off for a few days. But, when they came back, people showed up. They watched, cheered, booed, and were able to take a break from worrying about terrorists for a few hours, and sometimes that is all you need. People even compared the World Series that year, the Yankees and the Diamondbacks, to the struggle with terrorism, the Yankees being the good guys. Part of the normalcy of sports also comes from the fact that no matter what happened to the city of New York, I will NEVER root for the Yankees.

Sports also offer something that is going to be resolved soon. Saints fans could watch the game and knew, for better or worse, there was going to be a final answer in three hours. People who are familiar with football rooted for the Saints, wanting something good for the city to look at for a few hours. I am hoping that Panther fans were still rooing for their own team, for the sake of normalcy. The actual problems they are facing: homelessness, disease, joblessness, and rebuilding, are ones that could take years, and even then it is uncertain if it will happen.

Hell, sports arenas, familiar landmarks in any city, are being used as makeshift shelters for the displaced and the poor. They are built to service large amounts of people. One of the images that the media kept showing was the crumbling Superdome, something we were all familiar with. Six of the forty Super Bowls were even played there. Two others were played at Tulane.

I am still listening to all of the bad news that keeps streaming out of New Orleans. But, for a few hours yesterday, some good news came to the people of Louisiana.

I am truly and completely horrified by what I am seeing in New Orleans.

And the impact of the hurricane is pretty bad as well.

The week had not even ended before the finger pointing began. Congress had not even sent a penny to the gulf coast before the hacks on the Right and the Left were at each others throats, trying to find some political capital to pull out of the waters of New Orleans. Hell, I am not even sure Katrina had gotten out of the state before the spin started.

What the hell is wrong with us? This is the example we send to the world?

There are tons and tons of people to point fingers at. We could not have gotten to that after we had gotten everyone out of the city, maybe patched the levee, figured out where we stood in this whole mess, THEN moved on to the mudslinging and finger pointing?

The mayor of the city was blaming the federal government the moment the media got there. Should the federal government cut funds for public improvements for the levee? No, especially to fund a miserable war. Did New Orleans suddenly float into a hurricane zone? No, so they have had plenty of time to fix and shore up levees. On that same note, there should have been an evacuation plan for that city YEARS ago, which included the rich and the poor alike. At least the poor. They have fewer resources to get themselves out of the city, and potentially nowhere else to go once their things are destroyed. And I doubt they have homeowners insurance. Or own a home.

As far as the levee being inadequate to hold back a Category 5 hurricane? Since 1928, only three category five hurricanes have been recorded. Of those 23, only 3 have hit the United States, two of which hit Florida. Here is a list of all the recorded category 5's recorded, and where they hit land if they were still a category 5. That is a pretty rare event.

Should the levees been better constructed? Sure they should have. In the 1960's, three category 4 hurricanes came within 10 miles of New Orleans. Camille passed in 1969, and for 36 years, nothing was done to increase their strength. Or if it was, it was not adequately kept up. Poor levee funding is not a new issue, either. To blame the siphoning off of money on the Iraq war is a bit short sighted.

The Administration deserves as much criticism as we can lay on it for a delayed response to ANOTHER catastrophic event, a disorganized and underfunded security department to handle catastrophic events, and going shoe shopping. Does anyone else hear a fiddle?

Yes, we should take the federal government, the state of Louisiana, and city of New Orleans to task on all of the missteps that lead up to this. But not now. Not while bodies are still floating in what was a thriving American city. Not while we are trying to get food and clean water to people in the gulf. Not while hundreds of thousands of people are trying to rebuild a life.

(Again, originally written at Advance To Boardwalk)

First, I do feel really sorry for all of the people in New Orleans, Biloxi, and Alabama. For anyone who can go help, donate money, time, anything to those people. They lost their cities. According to New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin, the city is closed to commerce for months and a full investigation of why the levees broke will start. It will take years to get the city back to where it was as a city, and years beyond that to adjust to the new reality of that region. People there not only have to worry about their homes, possessions, and lack of jobs, but dysentery, cholera, mosquitoes, and typhoid. Oh yeah, and they have no clean food, water, no power, and a toxic stew running through their city.

I really have no desire to hear the rest of the country complain about $3 a gallon gas. Where would you rather be right now: watching a little closer where you drive, or knowing that your life is now under 10 feet of water? Right, I'll pay the extra money.

That, however, is not what caught my eye. This is. What is being suggested is that one of the problems in our country is the fact that white people exist. Being a white male, I have a problem with this.

Great strides in racial and sexual equality have been made over the last forty years. Are we there yet, in terms of a happy and equal people? Nope, not yet. But, we are making progress. For some reason, slow progress is no longer seen as acceptable in our society, but I digress.

How can you make a stand that white people are the sole problem that keeps all the races from being equal? Here is one example he uses:

I'm in line at a store, unavoidably eavesdropping on two white men in front of me, as one tells the other about a construction job he was on. He says: "There was this guy and three Mexicans standing next to the truck."

Now, you all have an image of what the person in the example is talking about. How else do you describe them? Spanish-Americans? Mexican-Americans? Maybe you just say for guys, but that really leaves a little bit out of the story. Especially if the fact three of the men have an ethnicity.

Are we still at the point that describing an ethnicity is an issue? Why is there an issue of black, white, Hispanic, oriental, or any other such phrase? Part of the argument seems to be saying that by describing people other than as American somehow infers segregation. That we, as white people, somehow assume that we get privledges that other races do not get. This is true in some ways, but not as overwhelming as some may think. There is an "Old Boys Network", and white males have benefited more than other people from it. However, we have also been doing it for longer. You think that Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Alberto Gonzales, Condi Rice, Katharine Harris, Hillary Clinton, and others have not benefited?

If you keep looking to use race politics, it will continue to stay on the table. White people are not the problem, as much as black people, Hispanic people, and all other people are not the problem. It is the fact that each of these people has a different idea of what it means to be "equal". Yeah, much of the power is in white people's hands, but that power is diminishing. Things are shifting. Just because it is not an instantaneous event does not mean it is not happening.

White people are not the problem. And not only white people have to be looked at to solve it.

(This was originally written at my blog, Advance To Boardwalk.)

How can you not love him?

Pat Robertson, host of the 700 Club, Christian pundit extraordinaire, advocated the assassination of President Hugo CHavez of Venezuela.

Now, I do not read the Bible as much as I should (or at all), but I do know "Thou shalt not kill" is in there somewhere.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Tuesday that Robertson has the right of any private citizen to say whatever he wants, but added that the broadcaster's remarks "do not represent the views of the United States."

The Bush Administration did not run as far and as fast as they could from this statement, nor did they categorically deny any ties to this lunatic. They simply said "Well, this is America, and he can say what he wants."

Cindy Sheehan got a bigger reaction for just wanting answers for why her son died.

Well, I did meet with Cindy Sheehan," Bush said Tuesday. "I strongly support her right to protest. There's a lot of people protesting. And there's a lot of points of view about the Iraq war."

He added: "She expressed her opinion. I disagree with it."

We all know, that if someone like Michael Moore or Al Franken, even jokingly, said anything remotely close to that, the Right would be standing on every rooftop in the country, shouting down the left and all of their vileness for suggesting something like that.

Even worse, what if someone in Iran, Syria, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, or any other unstable country would have said something like that? We would be lined up at the border in a matter of hours, telling them to take it back or we were going to invade them, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.

Wait, is that too far? Only on the left it is...

Now, just so we all know, here is a chart of where we get our oil from. Venezuela is pretty high on the list. The sell us a ton of oil. I am thinking this is not a country we should be pissing off. That, and I am sure if they could get the money from another country (China maybe? Russia?), they would gladly not deal with us. In spite of Robertson thinking that we wouldn't miss an oil shipment.

And, how did the Venezuelans feel?

Venezuela's vice president reacted with outrage to a call by television evangelist Pat Robertson for the U.S. to assassinate President Hugo Chavez, and two U.S. senators called the remarks ``irresponsible'' and ``incredibly stupid.''

``It's the height of hypocrisy for the U.S. to continue talking about the war against terrorism when at the same time you have someone making obvious terrorist declarations in the heart of the country,'' Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said at a news conference in Caracas.

Well, since we have established that pre-emptive war against terrorists is acceptible if the country invading feels threatened...

I would just start stocking up on supplies if I were you.

I am not going point-by-point, but randomly responding as I think things up.

What are you saying? That we stray off topic at times?

In point 6, you mention pulling out of Saudi Arabia. I am not sure we are going to see that while we are under the neo-Con watch, because that could be percieved as "giving in to terrah-ists". One of bin-Lade's demands was to remove our military presence from Iraq, so I doubt we would ever do anything he has asked, even if it is sensible.

I agree that we need other faces in there other than Americans and British. The bulk of those people should come from the Middle East. They, more than anyone, need to live with a new Iraq in a direct way. Do we think Iran, Syria, and Suadi Arabia are really going to come to the table with us and negotiate, after the way we have treated them all this time?

After the oil-for-food scandal, are people going to trust the UN anymore than they are going to trust Haliburton to handle Iraqi oil?

We really are stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one, and for the most part the issue is how the war was intitally sold. We were told that it was going to be easy in, easy out. Well, it was easy in, but not so much easy out. We are there for a good long time, without aid from most of the world. Mainly because we pissed them all off.

One thing we really need to do, and I am not sure we are able to do, is not put the military in charge of rebuilding this country, but diplomats and sociologists. At least people who understand the region better, who have studied it, and know how things are done. Iraq is a completely different place, with a completely different set of values. Like them or hate them, we really have no right adding to the struggle by making them take up our own values. Yes, it does reek that women do not have all the rights that women here have, and there are territorial issues with the Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites, but are they something that needs to be addressed as constitutional issues?

Our constitution does not have anything to do with territorial issues. And it took us about 140 years and a Civil War before all citizens had the costitutional right to vote. That may be something we can work on after the fact, but are we going to wait around in Iraq for even half as long until all people have the right to vote? Th US was able to build a new country out of nothing. This time, we are building a country out of parts that we may not agree with, and do not fit into our framework. Modifications need to be made.

I agree with Todd that we are going to have to include all of the ethnic sects in the discussion of a new government in Iraq. The UN members should be consulted, but special weight needs to be given to people in the region. Once again, they have to live with these new neighbors. And once we can get these people to the table, I think we need to step back and moderate debates.

Todd made some great points. I think we are going to have to compromise much more to make both sides happy. But, we have to make a commitment to get out of there in a beneficial manner. Not just pull up stakes and move to the next oil rich threat to democracy.

So, I am sitting around with too much time on my hands, and a thought plows in: Why do people have such strong opinions about Hillary Clinton? Love her or hate her, there does not seem to be anyone that is "Hillary? Eh...not too sure..."

So, I went through my mental rolodex, and though of other powerful women in recent history. Margaret Thatcher was the first one I cane up with to really compare her to. Being such a staunch ally of Reagan, I am sure she engendered the same feelings. Powerful women, for some reason, seem to do that.

So, I went to BrainyQuote (a marvelous quote page, if you are looking for it), and found quotes from both women, mixed them up, and looked at what came out. I mixed up quotes from both ladies, and dropped them here:


1. You don't tell deliberate lies, but sometimes you have to be evasive.


2. I believe in a zone of privacy.


3. Unless we change our ways and our direction, our greatness as a nation will soon be a footnote in the history books, a distant memory of an offshore island, lost in the mists of time like Camelot, remembered kindly for its noble past.


4. The challenges of change are always hard. It is important that we begin to unpack those challenges that confront this nation and realize that we each have a role that requires us to change and become more responsible for shaping our own future.


5. There are still people in my party who believe in consensus politics. I regard them as Quislings, as traitors... I mean it.


6. You show people what you're willing to fight for when you fight your friends.


7. Democratic nations must try to find ways to starve the terrorist and the hijacker of the oxygen of publicity on which they depend.


8. Every nation has to either be with us, or against us. Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price.

Yes, these are just a small spattering. If you dig deeper, you start to see that "The Iron Lady" we completely against anything that resembled socialism, feminism, or groups of people acting for a cause. Hillary is far more committed to empowering women and communities, but also being evasive and secretive(or is that just being a politician?). Both women seem to enjoy being women, and just how that affects the people around them.

This, like I said, is all cursory, and I could be completely off base. In politics, as long as the strong people are in your tent, it is okay for them to be strong. If they are outside your tent, they are horrible people, and we should do all we can to make sure they are toppled. Like Lyndon B. Johnson said, "It's probably better to have (her) inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in."


For the record, quotes 1,3,5,and 7 are from Maggie. 2,4,6, and 8 are from Hillary.

I was able (due to a quirk of working fate) to go to the Cindy Sheehan Vigil in Dayton, OH. I would like to thank Steve Fryburg for setting the whole thing up, apparently at the spur of the moment. I would also like to thank the Therapy Cafe, lovely little bar that I hope gets a hge bump of business from hosting this event. It really is lovely.

It was amazing to see all the different people that came out for this event, bringing their own candles, hand-made signs, and MoveOn.org signs that were printed. There was a lovely piece of artwork showing all of the fallen soldiers in the war. I went by myself, but net quite a few people I was able to share all of my candles with. And a few friends I was not expecting.

The recepion we recieved was overwhelmingly positive. There was only one car that drove by and told us we "were all ******* wrong", but most of the cars honked in support as they drove by, a few of them even pulling over and coming to chat with us.

A few things for all of you other people that may be going to your first vigil:

-Wear comfortable shoes. You are going to be doing a good deal of standing, and there may not be any empty pots to sit on if your feet get tired.

-Candles are not a good idea, unless you have a tall cup to catch the wax in, and to protect the flame. Tea lights or votives in festive clear glasses are the best idea. And tea lights are pretty cheap.

-Bring a few extra dollars. Little scamps selling candy (which you have to buy to support their cause, too) and other goodies will be available, and small bills are handy to have. Oh, and Therapy Cafe had tasty, reasonably priced beverages. Dollars helped.

-Relax, talk to people, and have a good time. You learn things. Like the Republican governor of Ohio was indicted today on four counts of ethics violations for failing to report gifts to cronies. I know him best for being the governor who ran a billboard campaign promoting literacy. A billboard campaign. For literacy. Think about it.

It was fun. If I can find pictures. I'll post them.

Hello, my name is Richard DeCeet. We here at GOPTech are revolutionizing the world as you know it. We can help people se the world in the way you want them to see it. At our labs in Cincinnati, OH, we are making the world safer for our brand of information. For just $7 trillion dollars, you too can but this level of technology to work for your company:

Using our Media Filter, you can take potentially damaging revelations, such as your Architect leaking sensitive information about CIA operatives, putting you in a position of either firing him or backing down on your word, and turn it into a moderate Supreme Court nomination that no one knows how to react to! It works on foreign documents, too! You can also reverse it's polarity and cause links to appear between people and events that were never linked before!

With our Armed Services Inverter, you can take people that have served their nation in foreign wars, and turn them into traitorous dogs! In fact, the longer they were in a foreign combat zone, the worse of a traitor they were!

With the Sheehan Optical Bender, you can turn any one of your upper managers invisible! The Optical Bender creates a wall between your organization and the source of a potential problem. Not only can you not see it, it cannot see you!

In fact, all of our products are geared to get you the results you want, without any of the annoying consequences you would expect from such actions. We can defend you from media scrutiny, public distain, and in some cases, reality itself! Call today for our catalogue! And thanks for listening!

While we are all working on our 44 points and we are all wrapping up this little social experiment, I first want to take the time to thank CampusProgress for giving me a place to raise my voice a little, be exposed to what a really big movement is doing, and seeing what else I can do. I also want to thank everyone who wrote articles, responded to articles, and generally improved the level of debate in the community.

Thus, here are 44 Things I Learned This Summer (in no order):

1. I am not half as politically active as I thought I was. I read and understand a lot, but I need to be more active.

2. There are so many issues for progressives to tackle. We need to start focusing on key issues, and put more energy there.

3. Small groups of people can have large impacts on the world.

4. Republicans fight dirty. I knew that, but I never really realized HOW dirty.

5. Sean Hannity is the last hope for freedom.

6. Ann Coulter attracts way too much of our attention. We know she is a loon. Why does anything she say surprise us?

7. Eric Alterman is a brilliant writer. I wish I had more time to read his work.

8. I do not have half as much free time as I thought I did. If I did, I would have been able to be more active (see point 1).

9. Small companies are the future of the country. Any great innovation has usually come from a hungry, small company.

10. Small companies are also incredibly hard to run. They have hold up a higher portion of the tax burden, and are competing with companies that can get better prices in bulk.

11. Small corporations that become large corporations tend to pull up the ladder after them when they get large.

12. That being said, Wal-Mart is pure, unadulterated evil.

13. Servers that do not claim tips are bad, but corporations that are "bought" by companies in the Caymen Islands to avoid paying U.S. taxes are legal.

14. The middle ground of this country is becoming a desolate wasteland. Politically and economically.

15. If we keep shredding the middle class, we are going to force this country to collapse in an economic ball of flames. The middle class tends to work in the factories, create the goods, and support the needy more than any other class.

16. At best, minimum wage has never hit the poverty line. In the 60's it came close, but never really hit it. We need not only a better minimum wage, but one indexed to either inflation or cost of living. That way, we do not have to argue every 5 or so years to raise it.

17. High fructose corn syrup is not good for you. And it is in EVERYTHING. Kinda like Kevin Bacon.

18. Group blogs rock. Something new almost every day.

19. People take a "out-of-sight, out-of-mind" approach to environmental toxins. If people could see all the crap that was in our environment, and how even small amounts can affect us, they would be much more leery about relaxing environmental standards.

20. I am a big fan of the New World Order in the NHL. People are moving all over the place, and the really skilled players are no longer concentrated on a few teams. The salary cap seems like it is fair, and the new rules are going to speed up the game.

21. That being said, we did not need to lose a season to get this done. Why Bettman and Goodenow were not fired the day after this deal was inked is beyond me.

22. The EPA has an acceptible level of radioactive materials allowed in water.

23. Look at 22 again. That should have bothered you more than it did.

24. Ask people at Yucca Mountain, Three Mile Island, and Cherynoble if nuclear power is environmentally safe. It is not, and there is no argument that can convince me otherwise. Toledo, OH was 1/2" away from a meltdown. And storage costs are never factored in.

25. If we spend more money on nuclear power, why not spend the same money on improving solar, wind, and hydroelectric power? All of which we have an abundance of. If we run out of sun, water, or wind, fuel is the least of our concerns.

26. Biodiesel is another great solution. Instead of paying farmers not to grow crops, why not pay them to grow grops for our cars?

27. We do need more space exploration. Many incredible inventions (Tang among them) have come from our space program. And, who knows what wonders lie within our own solar system?

28. Actually, lets just increase that to scientific research. The only way to find new things is to get into the game. Microwave ovens, penicillin, and many other things have been found by random chance while pursuing other goals.

29. Intelligent design requires a belief in some higher power. Period. There cannot be a design without a designer.

30. Arguing that something that cannot become simpler also cannot become more complex is insane. (I heard this argument to defend intelligent design)

31. Volunteering to help people from other countries learn English is incredibly rewarding. You have no idea how much effort they put into learning English. I had a woman walk two miles because her car broke down to make her appointment.

32. Batman Begins is the best movie I have seen this summer. But, I am a big dork, and I like things like that.

33. Fixing cities should be on everyones list. Cities are no longer firendly for people to live in, and I am not just talking about crime rates. There is little retail to attract people to live there, and their sprawl is making us more dependent on our cars. Which makes us more dependent on oil.

34. To get low prices, we are shipping jobs to China. We are buying billions in dollars of product from China. What do you think they are going to do with all of this capital and labor we are sending to them?

35. Back to rehabilitating cities: the biggest environmental cost of buildings? Their construction. Adaptive reuse of buildings is something the architectural community should start focusing on and promoting.

36. We have the cheapest gas on the planet. We burn the most of it as well. In Europe, they have higher taxes on gas, and it goes into their public transportation system. What the hell is wrong with that model?

37. Honestly, I never thought I was going to make it this far.

38. We need to be more careful as to what we put into our bodies. Obesity and related illnesses are rapidly overtaking smoking illnesses as the biggest killer in the country.

39. How do we curb this? Encouraging exercize is a start. But, taxing the hell out of soft drinks, chips, candy, and other junk food is a good way to go as well. The smokers are starting to feel the pinch of high taxes on their smokes.

40. Women are abused far too much in the world. And, there are far too few protections for them, too few places for them to go, and too much blame placed on them for what happened. People who abuse women are in no way, shape, or form victims. They are criminals, and should be put away for it.

41. Physics is not nearly as awful as I thought it was going to be. Calculus, however, is.

42. Comedians I enjoyed this summer: Todd Lynn, Ty Barnett, Vince Morris, and Johnny Walker. Comedians I did not like: Charlie Murphy and Dustin Diamond.

43. Even horrible people like Bill Frist can come down on the side of the angels every now and then.

44. We have come a long way, and we still have a long way to go. But, it will be a wonderful journey.

Thank you all for reading, thank you all for working so hard to create a better country, and keep at it.

Okay, people. I have been desparately trying to keep up with the threads that weave this fine place together. They all slipped out of my fingers, so I am going on a limb. I could be way off base, and you can feel free to slap me back to reality, but I am getting this out.

I noticed a few threads which really emphasize civility when dealing with our opponents. While that is an incredibly lovely and Utopian thought, reality tends to frown on such actions.

All debates should start off in a civil manner. Diplomacy is the best way, bar none, to adequately and successfully solve a dispute. As the dispute evolves, there has to come a time when you know that if you give another inch, it is over, and you can go home. You lost.

Well before this point, you should be looking over your shoulder, saying "You know, if this goes too much further, no good will come of it." It is at that point you have to go from civil debate to all out survival mode. No holds barred, knock down, drag out, he-sends-one-of-yours-to-the-hospital-you-send-one-of-his-to-the-morgue fighting.

We are getting way too close to that point, if we have not already passed it. Some thoughts on why:

-The Right has claimed the moral high ground. Such notables, as Bush, Cheney, Rice, De Lay, Frist, Santorum, et. al., while flinging around hate speech and securing funds from questionable people, have claimed they are our moral leaders. And we have allowed it to happen.

-The Right dominates the media. Like it or not, they do. We do not have the guns to take on Rush, Sean, Ann, Savage, and their lot. They are getting passes on torture and illegal activities that if Clinton had done, his body would STILL be hanging out for the crows to pick at. Why does the Right get free passes? Well...

-Who is afraid of the Left? Seriously, what the hell are we going to do? When Clinton was knee-deep in it, the media was like Haliburton on an oil field. The Downing Street Memos, Rove, no WMD's, 9/11, the lack of investigation into 9/11, nothing had stuck to Bush. He keeps throwing CIA directors in harms way. The Right is not afraid to drop the hammer on people that piss them off. The Left may not be either, but we are doing nothing to show it.

These are just a few things that make me wonder what it is going to take to make us go into attack mode. In my opinion, Kerry lost because the Right was so relentless on the attack, we could not get a shot in. I don't care if John Kerry was doing KP his whole time in Viet Nam, there is no reason that he should have lost that issue to someone guarding local Alabama bars.

We have to get on the attack, and soon. We have to stop the Right from countering our issues with smearing character. We have to figure out a way to stop getting rolled and go after these people.

Since I have taken a three week break, I have had much to think about. O'Connor retiring, Rove dissembling, London being attacked, all sorts of interesting news. However, this New York Times article really is what caught my eye.

Costco, it seems, is doing everything wrong. They have a bigger market share than Sam's Club in the same category. Their stocks are going up while Wal-Mart's (Sam's big brother) is going down. Their employees pay less that other retail employees for benefits (8% as opposed to 25%), and they earn, on average, $17 an hour (almost twice the average for a Sam's Club employee). They allow unions and offer quality products with lower profit margins.

This, Wall Street contends, is somehow wrong. I swear I took a three week break and missed a meeting.

At what point did giving your employees above average wages and affordable benefits become a bad thing? When did the Wal-Mart "screw them all and let the market sort it out" philosophy become the gold standard for how to run a business? I am fairly sure that when companies began, the idea was not to satisfy a board of directors, but the people that were doing the shopping in the store. When profits rise or when wages stay stagnant, it seems to have the same effect on the media.

Wall Street has far too much influence on how people percieve the economy. For them to say that Costco could make the sharholders happier if they passed some of the costs of benefits onto their employees seems a little backwards. Shareholders seem to be the last people a company should be pleasing. Consumers first, then employees, then shareholders.

One analyst, Bill Dreher of Deutsche Bank, complained last year that at Costco "it's better to be an employee or a customer than a shareholder."

Isn't that how it should be?

Wal-Mart has become the beacon to which all bile against capitalism is drawn. Not like it is undeserved, either. It does treat its people pretty miserably. Jre has a great post on punitive damages given to Wal-Mart for discriminating against the disabled. They do not offer Plan B contraception, more commonly known as the Morning After Pill, at all. They have fought environmental laws, unions, decency, good taste, and American jobs with an almost fanatical zeal. In 12 states, Wal Mart has the most employed people on wefare. In Georgia, they're also highest on the welfare rolls by percentage of employees. They were even busted on violating child labor laws, illegal worker laws, and sexual discrimination.

I say we let them.

Let them make the world aware that profits come before people at Wal-Mart. That they will dictate morality through their choice of product. That they care nothing for the jobs they are killing, the land they are gobbling up, or the people that come to their stores. Hell, if they do not care for their workers, why care for the customers? They make it clear they can barely tolerate their suppliers, enforcing contracts even if if causes the company to go out of business.

We cannot fight them and win in the courts, the Congress, or on the streets. The only place we can beat Wal-Mart (or any corporation or policy that we do not approve of) is by taking our business elsewhere. It is the only thing corporations understand, and will listen to. Our dollars going elsewhere is the only thing that would make Wal-Mart change. Our protests to keep them from developing in new places is the only thing they understand. As soon as their business starts to fall, I guarantee they will listen to the people. They do not sell things on such a high profit margin they can afford to lose so many customers.

At this point, I know I am preaching to the choir.

But, we are the ones who have to get the word out. We have to educate people not to buy at Wal-Mart (or any place you are against) for good reasons, reasons they will understand. "It's evil", while touching, is not a good argument. "It allows crimes in their parking lots, it kills the local economy, it drags down American workers." are all much better, and tell a story why not to buy there. I have convinced a few people not to buy there for those reason. I do not buy there for those reasons. We just have to recruit people.

If people still want to go there and buy things, let them. Just make sure they know what it is costing them.

Yet, I have so much going on in my head.

Today, while picking up my Fantastic Four comics (only 1 more week until the movie comes out, kiddies!), we started to chat about the Iraqi war. It was two liberals and one conservative. Now, at no point did the conservative whine that he was out numbered, and at no point did we liberals gleefully torment him about what a mess this damn thing is, and how his boy botched it all up.

We had a really good conversation.

The conservative was telling us a tale about Viet Nam. He supported the war as it was being fought. He felt that America was right to go to war to save democracy from the commies, and we were fighting the good fight. That is, until he started to talk to people that had been there, and did more research on the war. It turns out that that was a badly fought war in a foreign country that had no relevance to the security of the American people. Who knew?

He supported the President when we went to war with Afghanistan. Now, while I really do not see any good use for war, I do see a justification to strike back when we are struck in such a cowardly manner. While I did not think striking out so blindly was a good idea, I do think the decisive action was.

This moves us to Iraq. We found many similarities between Iraq and Viet Nam. We found more differences. Iraq was a war of two things: familiarity and location. Bush did not have to sell us too hard (obviously) on the fact that Saddam was a bad guy, and needed to be removed from power. Nor did he have to sell the fact that it could be a quick and decisive war we could easily win. It also had the bonus of being a central location to many other oil rich...ummm...hostile countries that harbored terroists. The biggest similarity we found was the lack of planning and commitment to troops and victory we have.

Either we need more troops on the ground there to really take care of this business and let the Iraqi people take care of themselves, or we need to pull out gradually and admit this was not a good idea. We need a PLAN. That means a time table or exit strategy. Some way to say "These are our goals." We did not have them the day we started fighting in Iraq, and we still do not have them now. We had them in Afghanistan, and really have not accomplished them. The Taliban is still lurking, bin Laden is still around, and people are still being stoned to death. I am not sure what is so anathema to having a plan that the Bush team is avoiding it, but it is not a good idea to continue down this path. Until we have a clear goal, we canto do nothing to start marching in the direction of that goal.

Oh, and it was a very pleasant conversation. Liberals and conservatives can co-exist and find common grounds. It is just all the fringe wackos who we have to worry about.

Q: What is the difference between legal and illegal drugs?

A: We know the negative side effects of illegal drugs.

According to this article, the University of Toronto found that up to 106,000 deaths each year are caused by prescription drugs. The FDA reported well under that figure, but we all know that. How would it look if a federal agency gave an accurate account of something this dangerous? Why, their funding would dry up overnight!

All this searching came from an article I read on Tom Tomorow's page. If you do not read it, go there now. There is nothing here that will be said that is more important than what that man is doing. He wrote a bit about thimerosal, a mercury-based derivative used to preserve vaccines in multidose vials.

A MERCURY-BASED deivative. In vaccines. That go in people. Read it a few times. Chew on it.

It was on the market since the 1930's with little fanfare. It was only recently that mercury was discovered to have negative effects on human physiology, and it was pulled from the market in 2001. Well, the American market. We'll still sell it to third world countries. Not like THEY will every know.

It only became an issue when we started giving our children more vaccinations. One or two was not going to kill them. Twenty-two, each one with a kiss of thimerosal, was going to start causing serious health issues. Autism was the biggest effect. But, according to a study done by the Institute of Medicine, there was no link between therimosal and autism. It was a poorly done study, and they had to redo it.

Really, I have more to say about this. It involves a little more research, but the end result should be rolicking. As rolicking as lying to the Amrican public about a health risk could be. I just wanted to get ome of it out of my system