This post is really for all the Democrats out there. Independents (or as we call them in CO Unaffiliated), Progressive, Liberals or other folks are welcome to read and comment, of course, but it is pointed toward those that identify themselves as Democrats. Markos Moulitsas the redoubtable Kos himself has pushed the idea of electing better Democrats as a part of his mission. It is a good mission to the Dog’s way of thinking but the better Dems has to not only extend to those we elect, it has to extend to those of us in the Party as well.
Category: Meta
Mar 23 2009
All Ur Poneys Are Belong to Us!
Oh hai, mai name iz Cookie.
I haz successfully led a Revolushun at da blog affeckshunitly known as “Da grate Orange Satan.” Us pooties haz proven we can take over da Rec List at will.
Mar 11 2009
The people on the other side of the screen
I ran into someone a few days ago who prefers the name-calling style of communication. As these things frequently unfold, the name-calling escalated when it could have just as easily have been derailed by a simple apology…or even just by leaving the conversation…rather than an obstinate and seemingly never-ending defense of the behavior.
Eventually, the person wrote the following, which is the inspiration for this essay.
I don’t [think] you should be getting so bent out of shape because of words typed up by some random people you don’t know. I think you should take a step back and get some perspective if you really have such a hard time dealing with the ramblings of anonymous goobers on the internet.
I do not consider the people I meet on the Internet to be “random people I don’t know.” I call them my friends. That’s probably why behavior on the Internet means more to me than him.
Feb 24 2009
Why I deleted Jawad Diary
In the Jawad case, bush team filed a motion to stay habeas shortly before Obama was sworn in as president.
The ACLU, defense counsel for Jawad, filed its response on in mid February or this month.
There were two reasons i thought that the Obama DOJ had once again accepted or adopted Bush’s position on this issue.
(1) The ACLU issued a press release saying that despite Obama’s EO stopping military commission proceedings, “the government is moving forward.” I interpreted government as Obama not bush, given the earlier reference to Obama in the same sentence:
ACLU Opposes Justice Department Efforts To Throw Out Case Challenging Illegal Detention Of Guantánamo Prisoner Mohammed Jawad (2/18/2009)
Despite President Obama’s executive order halting military commission proceedings, the government is moving forward with a last-minute effort by the Bush administration to deny Jawad his right to challenge his detention in federal court until after the commissions case against him is complete.
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/d…
(2) In the ACLU brief filed in February 2009 or same date as the press release, the ACLU says it asked the government to withdraw its motion, but the government refused, saying that it was still working out the process for these cases. I interpreted this as obama DOJ because Bush is gone. (footnote 8)
“Mr. Jawad’s counsel have twice asked the government to withdraw the Motion. The government’s lawyers have refused. As the basis for their refusal, counsel for the government cite “the process of assessing how it should proceed in these cases.” Email Exchange, Frakt
Decl. Ex. D. But that is not the basis for the government’s Motion before this Court, and the government has not moved to modify the Motion. The Court should not entertain this post-hoc justification if it is raised by the government. Cf. Goldring v. District of Columbia, 416 F.3d 70,
77 n.4 (D.C.Cir. 2005) (argument raised for first time in reply brief is untimely (citation omitted)); Ark Las Vegas Rest. Corp. v. NLRB, 334 F.3d 99, 108 n.4 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (same). In any event, there is no justification for additional delay. While the new administration may have the best intentions in reviewing Guantanamo detentions and seeking to avoid the many and grievous mistakes of its predecessor, the law applicable to the government’s alleged basis for Mr.
Jawad’s detention has not changed, nor have the facts in his case. There is no other historical context of which counsel are aware in which the executive branch took upon itself-and asked the judiciary to approve-the authority to declare a constitutional “time out” to decide how the executive wished to proceed, whether with a civilian criminal trial, a military trial or some unspecified third option, while it continued to detain prisoners. To permit this kind of delay
would, effectively, permit the government to detain by fiat, not by law, and thus evade the Suspension Clause.”
Someone raised a question in the DK posting comments of how did we know this was the position of the Obama DOJ accepting once again the Bush position stated in papers filed by Bush.
I said i would doublecheck, intending to dig out from my notes the links i had for media articles on this case. What i found is the media articles were just reposting the ACLU press release.
Thus, I did not have the confirmation i thought i had, and so i deleted the diary.
I will be calling the ACLU tomorrow and hopefully i can reach one of the attorneys on this case to confirm.
When i do, i will repost.
sorry, for posting and deleting here too.
Jan 16 2009
Martin Luther King Jr. Part I
A short summary.
I’m a great admirer of Dr. King and his methods of direct action and community organizing. If he were alive today would be his 79th birthday. In celebration of his life and work I’m putting together a brief outline of some of his involvement in the Civil Rights Movement.
My primary source is going to be the Wikipedia, not because it’s especially good or complete, but simply because I think it’s instructive to see how this pivotal and relatively recent period in American History is treated by their procedures and writers (for a slightly longer discussion of my feelings about Wikipedia read here).
Brief as my treatment is, it’s slightly longer than I can comfortably fit in a single diary so I’m going to split it up into several sections, all of which I hope to publish by the official celebration of his birthday the 19th. I do have some regularly scheduled diaries that will interrupt the series on Friday and Sunday.
Jan 12 2009
So have you heard about Soaplox recently?
Thought you might like the most recent update from Open Left (who are co-ordinating).
You Are Saving Soapblox!
by: Chris Bowers
Fri Jan 09, 2009 at 18:41
The efforts of the netroots over the last six years have been a remarkable testament to what a group of dedicated grassroots activists can do. Right now, it is hard not to feel excited, and hopeful for the future. We have the organizing energy. We have the growing numbers. We are making change happen, and turning the country bluer. The remarkable efforts of this community over the past week are just another example. In a time of great need for 100 progressive blogs around the country, you are coming through. Again, thanks to all, and let’s keep it going!
Jan 12 2009
Quote for Discussion: Facing our Failure
I, too, am glad-elated, really-that Bush’s absurd, colossally tragic reign is nearing an end. But that doesn’t change the fact that we failed. We all failed. Congress failed, the courts failed, and the American people failed. We have suffered through two terms of plainly illegitimate, nakedly contemptuous tyranny in a country that was designed to facilitate overthrowing tyrants, and we failed to do so.
I have no doubt that Obama, as disappointing as he will no doubt turn out to be, is a vast improvement over the past eight years, and may even be the best president of my lifetime-a dubious achievement at best. But it’s not enough to look forward and move on. If anything is to be learned from the Bush disaster, it’s important to look back, and to understand how terrible our failure has been.
As citizens, our expectations have fallen far and fast. When Nixon ignored a subpoena, the nation was outraged. Even Republican congressmen were vocally outraged, and Nixon was forced to resign to avoid impeachment. When Nixon tried to fire a special prosecutor, his Attorney General resigned. Then his Deputy Attorney General resigned. When Reagan lied to the people about crimes far worse than Nixon’s, it was a scandal, but our expectations had already been dramatically lowered. There were hearings, but no impeachment. A few years later, a Republican congress abused the impeachment process as an instrument of prudery, in an act of supreme political perversion…
…All of this could have and should have been avoided, if the congress or the American people had any sense of duty, or responsibility, or really any sense at all. The fact that Bush, Cheney, and the rest will walk out of the White House and back into lives of decadent opulence and ballooning bank accounts is a shame, a damn shame of historic proportions. And the shame is ours. Bush is the worst outlaw ever to occupy the White House, and it is not enough that he simply leave. The message we have sent to power-mad, totalitarian presidents of the future is clear: Do whatever you want; we will do nothing to stop you. The press will do everything in its power to gloss over your worst excesses, and marginalize your critics, and when the public finally catches on, the press will simply ignore you in favor of optimistic coverage of your possible successors. At least that’s how it works for Republicans.
Bush lied about Iraq; it’s nothing if not clear at this point. And what the hell did we do about it? Bush failed miserably in New Orleans, dashing the image of Republican competence. But what did we do about it? Even now, as Bush’s economic team fools us into pouring an insane, gargantuan amount of money into the largest banks in the world, pulling a classic scare-and-switch tactic we should all be familiar with by now, nobody even murmurs about holding him accountable. As we all hold our breath and wait for Obama to take office, we allow the most craven, criminal administration in American history to keep right on pillaging our laws, our money, and our collective sense of decency right to the end. We, as a nation, are a miserable failure.
-Allan Uthman, The Great Shame
Jan 01 2009
On Borrowed Time
On Borrowed Time is a 1939 film about the role death plays in life, and how we cannot live without it. Set in a more innocent time in small-town America, the film stars Lionel Barrymore, Beulah Bondi and Cedric Hardwicke.
Lionel Barrymore plays Julian Northrup, a wheelchair-bound man, who with his wife Nellie, played by Beulah Bondi, are raising their orphaned grandson, Pud. Another central character is Gramps’s beloved old apple tree. By making a wish, Gramps has made the tree able to hold anyone who climbs.
One day the fedora-wearing Mr. Brink (the personification of death, played by Cedric Hardwicke), who has recently taken Pud’s parents in an auto wreck, comes for Gramps. Not knowing who he’s talking to, a crotchety old Gramps orders Death off the property. Later, Mr. Brink takes Nellie, and then returns again for Gramps. Now realizing who Mr. Brink is and determined not to die, Gramps tricks Death up into the old apple tree where he must remain until Gramps lets him down. While stuck in the tree, he can’t take Gramps or anyone else, for that matter.
Meanwhile, Pud’s aunt (his mother’s sister), has designs on Pud and especially the money left him by his parents, and Gramps spends much time fighting off her efforts. Gramps is also fighting efforts to have him committed to the insane asylum for claiming that Death is trapped in his apple tree. He proves that no one can die until he allows Death down from the tree by shooting the man who has come to take him to the asylum – the man lives, when he should have died.
Gramps’s doctor is now a believer, but he tries to convince Gramps to let Death down so people who are suffering can find release. Gramps refuses – he has to remain alive to take care of Pud and keep the wicked aunt away from him. But Mr. Brink manages to coax Pud to climb the fence Gramps had built around the tree to protect people from Death – any person or animal who touches the tree dies. Pud balances on the top of the fence and then falls, crippling himself for life. Distraught, Gramps takes the boy out to the tree and begs Death to take them both, which he does – and both Gramps and Pud find they can walk again.
The final scene has them joyfully walking together up a beautiful country lane, listening to Grandma calling to them from beyond a brilliant light.
——————————————————————————–
As a child, I saw this movie on TV sometime during the late 50s; and I have never forgotten it.
Dec 25 2008
Three Essays A Day
I’ve noticed some people are using up their Essay limit and I suspect they have more to say. As a group we want to encourage participation and freedom of expression. We’re a progressive blog, not a partisan one.
So we’ve increased the daily essay limit to three.
This is vitually unlimited opportunity to be silly and serious. I hope spaming will be minimal.
Merry eksmas!
Dec 07 2008
(LA-04) [big orange] political posers should feel pain and shame
(This is Cross-posted from Daily Kos; I thought some people here might be interested in it. It’s got more than the Recommended Daily Allowance of meta. I didn’t bother rewriting it here; I think y’all can figure out that I’m not talking about this site. If that really bothers people, please let me know and I’ll keep it in mind when I think about cross-posting.)
Every once in a while in my more than three years here I have felt the need to compose a rant against my fellow members of this site that will pretty much ensure I don’t get invited to any good cocktail parties. Never more so than tonight.
This, at its best — including leading up to last month — has been a site of political actors. Leading up to tonight, it was a site of political observers. A site not of people trying to change the system, but of posers who want to chatter on about change.
If Paul Carmouche loses in LA-04 — and I doubt that either provisional ballots nor a recount will reverse a 356-vote, .038% margin, unless it turns out that the last few come-from-behind votes were obtained by fraud — then it was entirely foreseeable and entirely preventable.
We simply had to choose to act. We chose not to act. We should be ashamed.
We seem to have forgotten what this site is about.
Dec 02 2008
Sorry for my absence
folks, I have been out of here for some months. We are still moving to South America, This month I hope, but we’ve been fighting health issues, tax issues, and, of course money issues. More below the fold…
Dec 01 2008
Pragmatism does not mean paralysis
(Cross posted from Daily Kos, published last Wednesday. I made just a few modifications for this site and no doubt missed others.)
It has been a while since last I posted. ek — the wily ek — convinced me to come here and post this. I thought that it might be provocative despite being meant with affection, but he thought it would be worth your collective time.
It’s a good time to note, by the way, why I haven’t been here much. It’s the same reason I’m not on Open Left, Boo Trib, and countless other progressive blogs: I have simply found that for whatever reason I operate best when I limit myself to one blog; it lets me keep up with the conversations I start. If I switch around, I write diaries and comments that I won’t follow up on for hours, days, weeks, months…. It feels to me as if I’m being rude. So, given my limitation, which I’m glad that others do not share, I contribute only on El Permsimmon Grande, although I’m always (well, almost always) happy to see my Docudharmatic friends there.
Best holiday wishes to you all and I hope that you are happy and hopeful — even if hesitant in ways — over the political transition now underway. I’ll try to come around more and prove myself a liar in the preceding paragraph. If I don’t, feel free to hound me; apparently it works. (And also feel free to port anything I write to here.)
Two years ago on DKos, in the wake of the 2006 election, came a rumbling on the right column of the front page that led to a series of withering assaults on Markos and some of the contributing editors. Two years ago tomorrow, in fact, saw publication of a great example that will give those who were not yet here a sense of the arguments then taking place on the site: “Calling Bullshit on America,” by OPOL. He and I “shared words” in the comments section of that diary and many others; it’s funnier now that we are friends. His diaries — while still pungent and potent — have ratcheted down a little and I have come to better appreciate his talents.
The fight back then was between Pragmatists and Purists. I was one of the loudest Pragmatists commenting on the site. I’m still a pragmatist. And here, today, we hear shouting once again from the right side of the page towards many CEs and others who dare criticize Obama’s choices — and again I find myself disagreeing with my fellow diarists.
I disagree because I don’t think that their position is pragmatic at all.