Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-OR, one more of a long line of liberal politicians talking about how people have a "right" to all sorts of things, claims that Americans have a "right to a policy free of special interest giveaways.", when he, Blumenauer, is speaking for a special interest himself. Then see how Blumenauer turns it all into a fundraising letter so he can support the agendas of special interests that support him. This “everybody has a right” stuff reminds me of all the ads that begin with “You deserve….”. American’s don’t have a RIGHT to anything other than what is guaranteed in the constitution and they don’t “deserve” anything. They have to work for it.
Check out Blumenauer's 6/29/2007 e-newsletter:
Earlier this month I had the opportunity to write for a leading national political blog, Talking Points Memo's Table for One, laying out my case for reforming this year's Farm Bill and offering a Food and Farm Bill of Rights.
Americans have a right to a policy free of special interest giveaways.
American taxpayers have a right to a fiscally responsible policy.
Americans have a right to a policy that serves all farmers.
Americans have a right to a safe and healthful food supply.
American children have a right to good nutrition.
Americans have a right to local supplies of fresh food.
Americans have a right to a policy that promotes energy independence.
Americans have a right to a policy that protects the environment.
Americans have a right to preserve farmland from sprawl.
Americans have a right to a policy that fosters sustainable farming practices.
The initial response to this blog post was both humbling and remarkable. Many of the largest progressive political blogs around the country - including Daily Kos, Eschaton and The Atlantic Online, among others - promoted this effort. In total, hundreds of bloggers and commenters offered their thoughts, ideas and questions about the Food and Farm Bill of. One environmentalist blogger called this "a watershed moment for [agriculture] policy and blogs." The Democratic National Committee even featured the Food and Farm Bill of Rights on both its official blog and on the front page of its Rural Americans page.To build on the initial successes of this effort, I am putting the power of my campaign behind promoting my Food and Farm Bill of Rights and trying to reform this year's Farm Bill so that it reflects the needs of the 21st century rather than the political realities of the 1950s. Over the month, I have advertised across the internet to increase the exposure of my Food and Farm Bill of Rights and get the grassroots involved in the coalition to write a better Farm Bill. And I need your help to sustain this effort. Your contribution of $1000, $100 or $25 today would go a long way in helping me reach out to the grassroots base, whose support is necessary to success in this endeavor. Thank you in advance for your help and support in this matter,
Earl
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Friday, June 29, 2007
NY Times political bias showing through
I was not particularly surprised this morning to see that the New York Times, which at the outset referred glowingly to the immigration proposal as a two-party deal (Senators in Bipartisan Deal on Immigration Bill, NY Times, May 18, 2007) and praised Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy's statesmanship and influence, now highlights that the “Bush immigration bill” has been solidly defeated. In today’s front page story, you didn’t even see that Kennedy played a key role until deep into the story. It reminds me of when Bill Keller, the N.Y. Times' Executive Editor, came to speak in Portland and heralded how his paper had no political agenda and was as balanced as could be. I was tempted to stand up and ask him if he ever read his own paper.
Take a look at the initial part of the NY Times story from today's (June 29) paper and ask yourself if the treatment is balanced:
Immigrant Bill Dies in Senate; Defeat for Bush
Stephen Crowley/The New York Times
By ROBERT PEAR and CARL HULSE
Published: June 29, 2007
WASHINGTON, June 28 — President Bush’s effort to overhaul the nation’s immigration policy, a cornerstone of his domestic agenda, collapsed Thursday in the Senate, with little prospect that it can be revived before Mr. Bush leaves office in 19 months.
The bill called for the biggest changes to immigration law in more than 20 years, offering legal status to millions of illegal immigrants while trying to secure borders. But the Senate, forming blocs that defied party affiliation, could never unite on the main provisions.
Rejecting the president’s last-minute pleas, it voted, 53 to 46, to turn back a motion to end debate and move toward final passage. Supporters fell 14 votes short of the 60 needed to close the debate.
Mr. Bush placed telephone calls to lawmakers throughout the morning. But members of his party abandoned him in droves, with just 12 of the 49 Senate Republicans sticking by him on the important procedural vote that determined the fate of the bill.
Nearly one-third of Senate Democrats voted, in effect, to block action on the bill.
The vote followed an outpouring of criticism from conservatives and others who called it a form of amnesty for lawbreakers.
The outcome was a bitter disappointment for Mr. Bush and other supporters of a comprehensive approach, including Hispanic and church groups and employers who had been seeking greater access to foreign workers.
Supporters and opponents said the measure was dead for the remainder of the Bush administration, though conceivably individual pieces might be revived.
The vote reflected the degree to which Congress and the nation are polarized over immigration. The emotional end to what had been an emotional debate was evident, with a few senior staff members who had invested months in writing the bill near tears.
“The bill now dies,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, who helped write the measure.
The outcome also underscored the challenge that Mr. Bush faces in exerting authority and enacting an agenda as members of his party increasingly break with him and Democrats no longer fear him. Having already given up on other ambitious second-term plans like overhauling Social Security, the administration has little prospect of winning any big new legislative achievements in its final months.
The collapse also highlighted the difficulties that the new Democratic leadership in Congress has had in showing that it can address the big problems facing the nation. In this case, Democratic leaders asserted that the failure of the immigration bill reflected on Mr. Bush, and not on their party.
Take a look at the initial part of the NY Times story from today's (June 29) paper and ask yourself if the treatment is balanced:
Immigrant Bill Dies in Senate; Defeat for Bush
Stephen Crowley/The New York Times
By ROBERT PEAR and CARL HULSE
Published: June 29, 2007
WASHINGTON, June 28 — President Bush’s effort to overhaul the nation’s immigration policy, a cornerstone of his domestic agenda, collapsed Thursday in the Senate, with little prospect that it can be revived before Mr. Bush leaves office in 19 months.
The bill called for the biggest changes to immigration law in more than 20 years, offering legal status to millions of illegal immigrants while trying to secure borders. But the Senate, forming blocs that defied party affiliation, could never unite on the main provisions.
Rejecting the president’s last-minute pleas, it voted, 53 to 46, to turn back a motion to end debate and move toward final passage. Supporters fell 14 votes short of the 60 needed to close the debate.
Mr. Bush placed telephone calls to lawmakers throughout the morning. But members of his party abandoned him in droves, with just 12 of the 49 Senate Republicans sticking by him on the important procedural vote that determined the fate of the bill.
Nearly one-third of Senate Democrats voted, in effect, to block action on the bill.
The vote followed an outpouring of criticism from conservatives and others who called it a form of amnesty for lawbreakers.
The outcome was a bitter disappointment for Mr. Bush and other supporters of a comprehensive approach, including Hispanic and church groups and employers who had been seeking greater access to foreign workers.
Supporters and opponents said the measure was dead for the remainder of the Bush administration, though conceivably individual pieces might be revived.
The vote reflected the degree to which Congress and the nation are polarized over immigration. The emotional end to what had been an emotional debate was evident, with a few senior staff members who had invested months in writing the bill near tears.
“The bill now dies,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, who helped write the measure.
The outcome also underscored the challenge that Mr. Bush faces in exerting authority and enacting an agenda as members of his party increasingly break with him and Democrats no longer fear him. Having already given up on other ambitious second-term plans like overhauling Social Security, the administration has little prospect of winning any big new legislative achievements in its final months.
The collapse also highlighted the difficulties that the new Democratic leadership in Congress has had in showing that it can address the big problems facing the nation. In this case, Democratic leaders asserted that the failure of the immigration bill reflected on Mr. Bush, and not on their party.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Give me a break!
John Leo
Let the Segregation CommenceSeparatist graduations proliferate at UCLA.13 June 2007
Commencement weekend is hard to plan at the University of California, Los Angeles. The university now has so many separate identity-group graduations that scheduling them not to conflict with one another is a challenge. The women’s studies graduation and the Chicana/Chicano studies graduation are both set for 10 AM Saturday. The broader Hispanic graduation, “Raza,” is in near-conflict with the black graduation, which starts just an hour later.
Planning was easier before a new crop of ethnic groups pushed for inclusion. Students of Asian heritage were once content with the Asian–Pacific Islanders ceremony. But now there are separate Filipino and Vietnamese commencements, and some talk of a Cambodian one in the future. Years ago, UCLA sponsored an Iranian graduation, but the school’s commencement office couldn’t tell me if the event was still around. The entire Middle East may yet be a fertile source for UCLA commencements.
Not all ethnic and racial graduations are well attended. The 2003 figures at UCLA showed that while 300 of 855 Hispanic students attended, only 170 out of 1,874 Asian-Americans did.
Some students are presumably eligible for four or five graduations. A gay student with a Native American father and a Filipino mother could attend the Asian, Filipino, and American Indian ceremonies, plus the mainstream graduation and the Lavender Graduation for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered students.
Graduates usually wear identity-group markers—a Filipino stole or a Vietnamese sash, for instance, or a rainbow tassel at the Lavender event. Promoters of ethnic and racial graduations often talk about the strong sense of community that they favor. But it is a sense of community based on blood, a dubious and historically dangerous organizing principle.
The organizers also sometimes argue that identity-group graduations make sense for practical reasons. They say that about 3,000 graduating seniors show up for UCLA’s “regular” graduation, making it a massive and impersonal event. At the more intimate identity-group events, foreign-born parents and relatives hear much of the ceremony in their native tongues. The Filipino event is so small—about 100 students— that each grad gets to speak for 30 seconds.
But the core reason for separatist graduations is the obvious one: on campus, assimilation is a hostile force, the domestic version of American imperialism. On many campuses, identity-group training begins with separate freshman orientation programs for nonwhites, who arrive earlier and are encouraged to bond before the first Caucasian freshmen arrive. Some schools have separate orientations for gays as well. Administrations tend to foster separatism by arguing that bias is everywhere, justifying double standards that favor identity groups.
Four years ago Ward Connerly, then a regent of the University of California, tried to pass a resolution to stop funding of ethnic graduations and gay freshman orientations. He changed his mind and asked to withdraw his proposal, but the regents wanted to vote on it and defeated it in committee 6–3.
No major objections to ethnic graduations have emerged since. As in so many areas of American life, the preposterous is now normal.
City Journal, Spring 2007, Vol. 17, #2
Let the Segregation CommenceSeparatist graduations proliferate at UCLA.13 June 2007
Commencement weekend is hard to plan at the University of California, Los Angeles. The university now has so many separate identity-group graduations that scheduling them not to conflict with one another is a challenge. The women’s studies graduation and the Chicana/Chicano studies graduation are both set for 10 AM Saturday. The broader Hispanic graduation, “Raza,” is in near-conflict with the black graduation, which starts just an hour later.
Planning was easier before a new crop of ethnic groups pushed for inclusion. Students of Asian heritage were once content with the Asian–Pacific Islanders ceremony. But now there are separate Filipino and Vietnamese commencements, and some talk of a Cambodian one in the future. Years ago, UCLA sponsored an Iranian graduation, but the school’s commencement office couldn’t tell me if the event was still around. The entire Middle East may yet be a fertile source for UCLA commencements.
Not all ethnic and racial graduations are well attended. The 2003 figures at UCLA showed that while 300 of 855 Hispanic students attended, only 170 out of 1,874 Asian-Americans did.
Some students are presumably eligible for four or five graduations. A gay student with a Native American father and a Filipino mother could attend the Asian, Filipino, and American Indian ceremonies, plus the mainstream graduation and the Lavender Graduation for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered students.
Graduates usually wear identity-group markers—a Filipino stole or a Vietnamese sash, for instance, or a rainbow tassel at the Lavender event. Promoters of ethnic and racial graduations often talk about the strong sense of community that they favor. But it is a sense of community based on blood, a dubious and historically dangerous organizing principle.
The organizers also sometimes argue that identity-group graduations make sense for practical reasons. They say that about 3,000 graduating seniors show up for UCLA’s “regular” graduation, making it a massive and impersonal event. At the more intimate identity-group events, foreign-born parents and relatives hear much of the ceremony in their native tongues. The Filipino event is so small—about 100 students— that each grad gets to speak for 30 seconds.
But the core reason for separatist graduations is the obvious one: on campus, assimilation is a hostile force, the domestic version of American imperialism. On many campuses, identity-group training begins with separate freshman orientation programs for nonwhites, who arrive earlier and are encouraged to bond before the first Caucasian freshmen arrive. Some schools have separate orientations for gays as well. Administrations tend to foster separatism by arguing that bias is everywhere, justifying double standards that favor identity groups.
Four years ago Ward Connerly, then a regent of the University of California, tried to pass a resolution to stop funding of ethnic graduations and gay freshman orientations. He changed his mind and asked to withdraw his proposal, but the regents wanted to vote on it and defeated it in committee 6–3.
No major objections to ethnic graduations have emerged since. As in so many areas of American life, the preposterous is now normal.
City Journal, Spring 2007, Vol. 17, #2
Origin of blog name
Truth is so slippery
I keep falling down on it
It runs through my fingers like grease.
When I think I've got it,
it's gone.
I define my relationship,
it changes.
If my friend has been consistent
in his actions for twenty years
inevitably he will alter
as I dare to predict him.
The River runs south
till you jump in,
then it turns north,
takes you with it.
Hard, that cold lesson.
Author: Brenda Shaw
Truth is so slippery
I keep falling down on it
It runs through my fingers like grease.
When I think I've got it,
it's gone.
I define my relationship,
it changes.
If my friend has been consistent
in his actions for twenty years
inevitably he will alter
as I dare to predict him.
The River runs south
till you jump in,
then it turns north,
takes you with it.
Hard, that cold lesson.
Author: Brenda Shaw
Some thoughts to occupy you.
Under the 400+ page immigration bill that is supposed tomake things better (not sure for who):
-illegal aliens would be eligible for in-state tuition at all state universities
The Senate bill incorporates the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act). The DREAM Act effectively repeals a 1996 federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1623) that prohibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens. Ten states are currently defying this federal law. Section 616 would allow these and all other states to offer in-state tuition rates to any illegal alien who obtains the Z visa and attends college.
When the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the proposal last week, many were still not clear about its details because it was still largely made up of oral agreements. But once the 471-page bill was produced and distributed late last week, conservatives were alarmed by some of the provisions. None so much as the proposal to make illegal aliens eligible for in-state tuition costs. "This means that while American citizens from Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Massachusetts have to pay out-of-state tuition rates if they send their kids to the University of Virginia or the University of Alabama, people who have illegally immigrated into the country do not," Mr. Sessions said. "How much sense does that make, to have people here illegally and they have more benefits than those who are here legally?"
-Even if you’d been caught and thrown out of the US, an illegal alien would be eligible to stay
Title VI's amnesty extends even to fugitives who have been ordered deported by an immigration judge but chose to ignore their removal orders. More than 636,000 absconders are now present in the country, having defied the law twice: once when they broke U.S. immigration laws and again when they ignored the orders of the immigration courts.The Senate's bill allows the government to grant Z visas to absconders. Though the bill appears to deny the visa to absconders in Section 601(d)(1)(B), Section 601(d)(1)(I) allows U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials to give an absconder the Z visa anyway if the absconder can demonstrate that departure from the United States "would result in extreme hardship to the alien or the alien's spouse, parent or child."
-illegals would be eligible for the earned income tax credit (so if they are low-wage, you and I would give them money so they could pay to get U.S. citizenship)
The current version of the immigration bill, backed by the White House and a bipartisan group of senators, would let holders of temporary work visas be eligible for the tax credit if their income was low enough to qualify.
Under the 400+ page immigration bill that is supposed tomake things better (not sure for who):
-illegal aliens would be eligible for in-state tuition at all state universities
The Senate bill incorporates the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act). The DREAM Act effectively repeals a 1996 federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1623) that prohibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens. Ten states are currently defying this federal law. Section 616 would allow these and all other states to offer in-state tuition rates to any illegal alien who obtains the Z visa and attends college.
When the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the proposal last week, many were still not clear about its details because it was still largely made up of oral agreements. But once the 471-page bill was produced and distributed late last week, conservatives were alarmed by some of the provisions. None so much as the proposal to make illegal aliens eligible for in-state tuition costs. "This means that while American citizens from Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Massachusetts have to pay out-of-state tuition rates if they send their kids to the University of Virginia or the University of Alabama, people who have illegally immigrated into the country do not," Mr. Sessions said. "How much sense does that make, to have people here illegally and they have more benefits than those who are here legally?"
-Even if you’d been caught and thrown out of the US, an illegal alien would be eligible to stay
Title VI's amnesty extends even to fugitives who have been ordered deported by an immigration judge but chose to ignore their removal orders. More than 636,000 absconders are now present in the country, having defied the law twice: once when they broke U.S. immigration laws and again when they ignored the orders of the immigration courts.The Senate's bill allows the government to grant Z visas to absconders. Though the bill appears to deny the visa to absconders in Section 601(d)(1)(B), Section 601(d)(1)(I) allows U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials to give an absconder the Z visa anyway if the absconder can demonstrate that departure from the United States "would result in extreme hardship to the alien or the alien's spouse, parent or child."
-illegals would be eligible for the earned income tax credit (so if they are low-wage, you and I would give them money so they could pay to get U.S. citizenship)
The current version of the immigration bill, backed by the White House and a bipartisan group of senators, would let holders of temporary work visas be eligible for the tax credit if their income was low enough to qualify.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Islamic charitable giving
Ethnographers at Intel Corporation in Oregon are doing some fascinating research. A set of podcasts by the researchers were just posted on an Oregon State University podcast site, including a fascinating discussion of "Islamic Charitable Institutions" by Hsain Ilahiane, Associate Professor of Anthropology at Iowa State University and Visiting Faculty, People & Practices Research, Intel Corporation. Access the podcast at http://podcast.oregonstate.edu/
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Obama and the taxpayer
If you like taxpayer (that means you) subsidies, Obama has already proposed:
-A plan to provide universal, cheaper health-care coverage, partly financed by tax increases on the wealthy (As yes, that great bottomless pit, the wealthy), joining the ranks of those willing to embrace a once-toxic political cause.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118043982572317027.html?mod=djemTAR
-Having the federal government (in other words, the taxpayer) pick up the tab to modernize the U.S. auto industry and for the health care benefits of the retirees of struggling American auto companies.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/us/politics/08obama.html?ex=1180670400&en=6a414dd4200e6cba&ei=5070
(excerpts from NY Times story:
-As a carrot to the industry, Mr. Obama would provide up to $3 billion to Detroit auto companies and their suppliers to retool factories to produce more fuel-efficient vehicles.
-If the companies invest in these vehicles, Mr. Obama also would offer the Detroit companies assistance in dealing with their burden of paying for current and retired workers’ health care expenses, estimated at $1,500 per vehicle.
-Having the federal government (in other words, the taxpayer again) pick up the tab for heavy subsidies of the liquid coal industry, even though it would actually ADD to greenhouse gases. (though the subsidy would benefit some businesses in his state eager to tap into the federal goodie bowl)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/business/29coal.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
(Excerpt from NY Times story: Environmental groups are adamantly opposed, warning that coal-based diesel fuels would at best do little to slow global warming and at worst would produce almost twice as much of the greenhouse gases tied to global warming as petroleum.)
-A plan to provide universal, cheaper health-care coverage, partly financed by tax increases on the wealthy (As yes, that great bottomless pit, the wealthy), joining the ranks of those willing to embrace a once-toxic political cause.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118043982572317027.html?mod=djemTAR
-Having the federal government (in other words, the taxpayer) pick up the tab to modernize the U.S. auto industry and for the health care benefits of the retirees of struggling American auto companies.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/us/politics/08obama.html?ex=1180670400&en=6a414dd4200e6cba&ei=5070
(excerpts from NY Times story:
-As a carrot to the industry, Mr. Obama would provide up to $3 billion to Detroit auto companies and their suppliers to retool factories to produce more fuel-efficient vehicles.
-If the companies invest in these vehicles, Mr. Obama also would offer the Detroit companies assistance in dealing with their burden of paying for current and retired workers’ health care expenses, estimated at $1,500 per vehicle.
-Having the federal government (in other words, the taxpayer again) pick up the tab for heavy subsidies of the liquid coal industry, even though it would actually ADD to greenhouse gases. (though the subsidy would benefit some businesses in his state eager to tap into the federal goodie bowl)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/business/29coal.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
(Excerpt from NY Times story: Environmental groups are adamantly opposed, warning that coal-based diesel fuels would at best do little to slow global warming and at worst would produce almost twice as much of the greenhouse gases tied to global warming as petroleum.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)