Is ANYTHING they do honest?

Seems the Iraqi voter mugging and hugging at the SOTU was a plant.

Every time I think I've become as cynical as possible about these guys, they just push me a little further down the road.

Freedom... or "freedom"?

Along the same lines as my post yesterday about the press 'minders', I saw a good article in Slate this morning about the use of propaganda by the current administration. Bush, Rove, and the GOP strategists behind them have honed their abilities of media management and message control to a fine edge. They have developed the lessons they learned from the Nixon and Reagan administrations into an operational philosophy that has allowed them to exploit every opportunity available to push forward their political agenda.

The question this leads me to is what effect does this strategy have upon the minds of the younger generation, whose formative political development has occurred in our current climate of increasingly limited personal freedoms and "with-us-or-against-us" jingoism?

It just so happens that Bob Herbert started to answer this question in his column today in the NYT (registration required). According to a study cited by Herbert,

"Only about half of America's high school students think newspapers should be allowed to publish freely, without government approval of their stories. And a third say the free speech guarantees of the First Amendment go "too far.""

A result of this sort is highly disturbing, and leads me to believe that the strategy of this administration is doing more harm than any of us might have imagined. For all his talk about "freedom", the Bush administration has continued to imply that, in this country, freedom is dangerous to our... freedom. Examples of the administrations support of "freedom" include "free speech zones" at his rallies, watch lists at presidential appearances, indefinite imprisonment of "enemy combatants" (or even "little old ladies from switzerland") without appeal, arrest threats due to vocal dissent, and threats of FCC action against television stations running ads disagreeable to the RNC.

Pardon me for sounding shrill, but this smacks of the beginnings of an Orwellian government apparatus slowly but surely being constructed right under our noses.

But back to my original point. This is the environment in which the next generation of political minds are growing up. They are clearly being affected by the institutionalization of idea that dissent is unpatriotic, and unquestioning loyalty to our leaders is a qualification for citizenship. It's a world where the truth is relative, and where our goverment "makes its own reality".

It is up to the progressives and the Democratic party to engage this dishonesty head on, and act like a true opposition party. We must continue to filibuster, continue to vocally disagree during the SOTU, and continue to respond tirelessly to the untruths and misinformation with fact, reason, and the knowledge that our forefathers, and founding fathers, would agree and support us in our dissent. It is in those very acts of dissent that we find the true nature of our patriotism.

The Lies Continue

I'm not going to try to tackle the Social Security war from a technical standpoint, but I will post here any thoughts I have, and also point y'all towards the folks who are good at the econ-numbers-mumbo-jumbo. So here's a look at what Bush's proposal might mean to you, and the recent string of SOTU words that should get him in hot water as a liar. Whether it happens or not is up to the pansy-ass SCLM, and how much Reid and Pelosi fight the administration publicly.

It seems to me that the ulterior motive in this whole suggested SS overhaul is for Wall Street and money managers to reap the enormous windfall that goes along with managing the "private accounts". Jesse gets irate about it, too.

They all seem to be covering the bases on this stuff. So I'll just offer it up.

More Tactics

Since I didn't see the SOTU last night, I won't really have a lot to say about it. Rather, I would like to bring you this anecdotal article from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (via Smirking Chimp) that discusses the security for the Innauguration parties and, more significantly, the 'minders' hired to watch over the members of the press covering the events.

But it's not what you think. The minders aren't there to watch over the reporters. Rather, their purpose is a little more insidious.

Their real purpose only occurred to me after I had gone home for the night, when I remembered a brief conversation with a woman I was interviewing. During the middle of our otherwise innocuous encounter, she suddenly noticed the presence of my minder. She stopped talking for a moment, glanced past me and then resumed talking.

It seems to be a fairly strong-arm tactic, even for an administration that controls its message with such precision (see the various permutations of terminology surrounding the SS debate).

Given that the administration has also been paying off journalists to tout their programs, The Ministry of Truth is just around the corner.

And if you've had enough of the righty "pundits" of the SCLM bitching about the Dems responding negatively to the President during the SOTU last night, I offer you this rebuttal, from the Rude Pundit. (via atrios)

Update: more on the history of booing at the SOTU can be found at DailyKos.

DeLay-ing Tactics

Well, I'm sure that the newly appointed members of the ethics committee - two of whom have made significant contributions to Tom DeLay's legal defense fund - will be totally unbiased in their review of DeLay's sleazeball and potentially illegal actions. Good thing they got rid of that loud mouth critic, Joel Hefley (R - Colo.). I guess being a Republican doesn't help you if you speak out against corruption in your own party.


And the purge continues.

Fair and Balanced

In the spirit of open discussion and a free exchange of ideas, as well as keeping an open mind (the very definition of being liberal*), I am adding conservative blogs to our 'Links' section. As our 'Links' section grows, we'll keep adding to the list from across the blogosphere. Keep in mind, I disagree with many of the thoughts expressed on the more conservative sites, but how are we as a country going to come together if we ignore the other half's existence?

Political discourse doesn't exist in a void. And debate isn't preaching to the choir and mindlessly agreeing with someone whose already playing for your team. Beyond the rhetoric, beyond the partisanship, beyond the spin zone, there's common ground, common values, and common goals. Working together doesn't mean: "My way or the highway." It means trying to reach a meaningful compromise and moving forward toward the future in a spirit of real unity, even as we approach problems from different angles. In the end, we are a diverse nation, strong in our individual beliefs and firm in our resolve to do what we think is best for this country. Patriotism doesn't belong to one party and dissent isn't a systemic flaw. In fact, it's very American.

*lib·er·al
adj.
Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

Phil Speaketh

Six more weeks of winter, everyone. So lace 'em up.

And while we're on the topic of 'torture'...

...it's worthwhile to note that policy disputes over indefinite detentions, torture, the definition of torture, and everything related-to-torture is causing a greater and greater amount of confusion as to just what the hell is going on with the Global War on Terrorism.

When you're at war with extreme fundamentalists, it's usually a good idea to have a pretty consistent policy that stands in direct opposition to anything for which the terrorists stand. Blurring the lines - in any way - between what they do and what we do only weakens our cause and fails to live up to our own noble ideals of truth, justice, and the American way.

Kennedy Takes a Swing

I'm not going to write extensively on it, but I urge everyone stopping by to take a look at this post over at DailyKos regarding a letter released by Sen. Kennedy today in opposition to the Gonzales confirmation for Attorney General.

Simply put, a "no" vote is a vote against torture.

A "yes" vote is a vocal support of torture.

Anyway, it's a fantastic breakdown of Kennedy's "smoking gun", and well worth a look.

And if you really get fired up, give your Senators a call to tell them how you feel about the Gonzales promotion.

Who's Equal?

Via Jesse at Pandagon, we have this great little tidbit out of Virginia, where the legislature has just passed a bill allowing the creation of anti-gay marriage license plates. Apparently, the license plates will say "Traditional Marriage" across the bottom, with a couple gold rings and a heart, or something equally as cheesy.

I don't think I even need to begin to explain why this is so wrong, in so many ways. Not only has VA already passed a law banning the recognition of gay marriage, civil unions, domestic parterships and, just for good measure, any other "contract or other arrangement" that gay or lesbian couples might conceive of entering into, but they also decide to promote this inequality with a proud little "I'm a Homophobic Heterosexual" license plate, just so they can make sure they can publicly identify the gay lovers from the gay haters.

Now, I have nothing against vanity, "for a cause" license plates. In fact, I have a Red Sox/Jimmy Fund plate like this on my vehicle right now. Usually, these plates support a charitable organization that the driver of the vehicle identifies with and wants to promote. In my case, it's funding cancer research for little kids. There's a whole slew of other choices, at least in Massachusetts, and all of them can be considered worthwhile.

When a state legislature in the United States, the land of equality, votes to support a license plate that tacitly condones the marginalization and forced inequality of an entire segment of the population, however, there's something seriously wrong with the direction in which this country is heading. I won't get cute and spin this out to it's most ridiculous extreme, like anti-interracial marriage plates, or anti-women voting plates, but it's easy to place these new VA plates in the same category.

It's important these days to take a good, hard, and personal, look at what will most assuredly become the next large civil rights battle this country will face. Equal rights for gays and lesbians - including the right to marriage - is something I'm proud to stand up for, and I'm proud that my state has done the same. It's incredibly scary for me, even as a heterosexual, to see what is happening to a considerable minority of our citizens, whether it's through tacit prejudice or this and other overt promotions of inequality. Put yourself in their shoes as sons, daughters, parents, friends, neigbors, voters, taxpayers, community activists and yes, even soldiers in Iraq, who, no matter what they do, are considered unequal in the eyes of the law. And, standing in their shoes, imagine seeing your fellow citizens declaring boldly, for everyone behind them at the stop light to see, that they think that marginalization should continue because they can't wrap their heads around the fact that, sometimes, definitions have to change.

Hump Day

Happy Groundhog Day! Here's what's going on this morning.

Meanwhile, Michael Chertoff is about to be confirmed to head up the Dept. of Homeland Security. Most people agree that he's a highly qualified choice and will be a staunch defender of the ol' Homeland - or, the US of A, as I like to call her. Homeland just sounds so...Nazi-esque. Here's the part of the article that disturbs me, however:

Despite the questions, Chertoff is likely to be confirmed because Republicans
control the Senate.

When did debate and background checks become a mere formality for a rubber-stamp approval process for partisan loyalists? Isn't the point of a confirmation hearing to ensure that qualified candidates for the position (one would assume they're qualified or they shouldn't be up for the job in the first place) don't have any troubling bits of background or conflicts of interest? Isn't the point of a confirmation hearing to make sure we actually do get the best person for the job? Now, Chertoff is a perfect example of a qualified candidate who looks to be a solid pick, but who has a few unanswered questions that need answering.

In the ideal world, Senators (from both sides of the aisle) would use the confirmation hearing as a chance to clear up these questions, clarify Chertoff's positions, and ultimately decide whether he will be the best choice for the job of securing America. We're not talking about a sales job here - we're talking about National Security. And, in my opinion, when it comes to national security, you can't be too careful, even with the most seemingly qualified individual.

Now, Chertoff has a broad range of support from Democrats and Republicans alike. I would hope that - if he is confirmed - he is confirmed because he is the best person for the job. Not because "the Republicans control the Senate."

The Doctor Is In

It looks as if Dean will, indeed, win the chairmanship of the DNC when the vote comes up in a couple weeks. I definitely support his candidacy for the position and hope that he focuses on an aspect of the party that seems to have been neglected in the last 12 years or so: the field team.

Unless you're the Yankees, you can't build a successful major league team without a deep farm system. The farm system is where you cultivate the talent that will keep your team competitive in the years ahead, when current stars reach the end of their careers. So it is with politics, as well, and it's an area the Dems really need to focus on if they want to be successful in the future.

When I was working on the Kerry campaign, something that really struck me was the lack of top-down support of local and lower office candidates within the Democratic party. As a party, we need to have a strong farm system. A system for grooming the higher level candidates of the next generation, and a system that gives the Dems some authority on the community and county level.

I recall a trip I took to the county voting services office with the lead attorney for Kerry in my area. Our goal was to test the punch-card machines and head off any potential chad-related problems before they happened on November 2. What struck me was the lack of any Democrats holding key positions in any of the elected county offices relating to voting and counting the vote. The GOP had them locked up tight, and we had a fight to make sure that there was bipartisan oversight of the counting and sorting process once the votes were delivered to the headquarters.

Dean needs to stress the development of the grassroots of the party in the way that he did when he was running for President. There are so many places in this country that have strong, but dormant, blue streaks, just waiting to be woken up by some individual attention from the party. I saw this with my own eyes in numerous areas of my county during the election. In places that Gore had not bothered to look in 2000, we found thousands of votes and an upswelling of support. We need to contest every state in national elections, and fight for votes everywhere. To concede entire states as lost, in the way we have been as a party, is folly, and it isn't the way to re-establish a Democratic majority.

Stretching the Legs

Ah, that's more like it.

Now, all I'm lacking is something incredibly profound to say. That'll come later.

Feeling Blue

Being Blue doesn't mean we have to sit around and mope. This blog is the first step toward action. Ideally, this will become an idea space, where like-minded blue and red staters can share their thoughts and views on how to move forward.

Here's looking to a brighter tomorrow.