Civil Rights Extend Even To Nutheads
Yet another Seattle Times article about the anti-gay ballot measures that panders to the bigotry of the matter, and this time they do so via the anti-gay activist Peter Sprigg:
Unlike constitutionally protected rights such as voting, issues involving employment and housing really amount to just a clash between employers and landlords wanting to make their own decisions and claims by homosexuals that they are entitled to protection.
Sprigg, of the Family Research Council, said the government should interfere in such cases rarely — when the characteristics of those claiming discrimination involve what he calls the five "I's:" inborn, immutable, involuntary, innocuous and in the Constitution, such as race and gender.
"The choice to engage in homosexual behavior meets none of those criteria," Sprigg said, contending that issues related to homosexuality therefore are not worthy of civil-rights protection. "I see no reason why they should not be subject to a vote."
Uh-huh.
How about protected rights such as your freedom of religion Mr. Sprigg? If Tom Cruise wants to worship at the Church of Scientology, that is entirely his right, even though it is his choice to engage in such a belief, as crazy as it might seem to anyone who is not an L. Ron Hubbard fan. Just as it is your choice to believe what you believe.
The thing is, one's sexuality is not a choice. Just as we neither choose to be a woman or a man but are born into it, we neither choose to be homosexual or heterosexual. Sprigg wishes to assert that which simply is not true, and in so doing, manages to set the agenda. The reporter falls into the trap and makes no effort to present arguments that address this matter, instead focusing on the issues as framed by the likes of Tim Eyman and Sprigg.
Eyman wants you to believe that the law passed by Washington legislators gave gays and lesbians preferential treatment, making them "a special class" of citizen. Only in their wildest dreams could any gay or lesbian American ever consider themselves to be a special class in this land that continues to treat them as second or third class citizens.
State Senator Dan Swecker previously said, "We, the state, are telling people to accept, actually to embrace, something that goes against their religious views."
Tough. Your religious views are not my religious views and I have to deal with them, and accept them every day. You cannot force me or others to choose to live by your religious views, and you cannot discriminate against me or others because of my views or who I am, regardless of how bigoted your religion is.
And while we're talking about this law it is about time somebody talked about the actual law as passed, as opposed to in the terms of the anti-gay crusaders that wish to abolish the safeguards the law finally brings to gays and lesbians.
First of all HB 2661 finally grants equal protection to homosexuals (not more protection as Eyman would have you believe). This is a civil rights law:
The legislature hereby finds and declares that practices of discrimination against any of its inhabitants because of race, creed, color, national origin, families with children, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, age, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a disabled person are a matter of state concern, that such discrimination threatens not only the rights and proper privileges of its inhabitants but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free democratic state.
Eyman and Co will have you believe that this law is only about usurping the rights of employers and landlords. This law is not an assault on the rights of employers and landlords, however the insinuation that that's all it is is certainly an affront on common decency and justice. This law is about "the right to be free from discrimination", "the right to obtain and hold employment without discrimination", "the right to the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges of any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement", "the right to engage in real estate transactions without discrimination", "the right to engage in credit transactions without discrimination", "the right to engage in insurance transactions or transactions with health maintenance organizations without discrimination", "the right to engage in commerce free from any discriminatory boycotts or blacklists" on the basis of one's sexual orientation.
The protections were already there if you were simply a nuthead like Tom Cruise or Mr. Sprigg.
There is no great debate on these issues. There is no controversy about such freedoms and inalienable rights. Yet, in order to defeat this bill, in order to discriminate against our fellow citizens, Tim Eyman and his cohorts, be they Washingtonians or lobbyists from D.C., will try to convince you that hell is about to freeze over or the heavens are about to fall.
Too late - that already happened in 2004.
Jay Inslee Speaks
Lynn Allen has a nice interview with Jay Inslee at Evergreen Politics today. It focuses on energy independence, which is a topic more and more politicians are willing to give serious consideration to, including hopefully Bush, and Inslee has been paying attention to for a while now.
Porting Controversy: Corporation and State
Terrific diary entry by Hunter at Daily Kos from yesterday that looks at the Dubai Ports World contract affair in a different light:
What troubles me most, I think, about President George W. Bush's dismissive and Kingly reaction to the ports brouhaha, is its seeming kneejerk, reflexive prejudice towards a national deference to corporate power.
The corporate -- in this case, Dubai Ports World -- is seemingly presumed to have an inherent legitimacy that governments are not. It is assumed trustworthy from the get-go. The deal was presumed to be acceptable because the Corporate, after all, can do no wrong.
But, as others have pointed out, this is a remarkable case, in that Dubai Ports World is a state-owned business. Multinational in character, yes. But state owned. (Question: which of those two opposing concepts are we expected to take as dominant, in this debate? The "multinational" part, yes? Does that not further prove the rather remarkable predisposition to presuming corporate power supersedes the national?)
The result is, for lack of a better word, insipid. Why, precisely, is it acceptable for a foreign government to manage the day-to-day operations of major American ports, but it is not acceptable for America's government to have that duty? We are throwing off the duties of government left and right -- privatizing basic functions of the government, having a fire sale of national resources, even corporatizing central logistical tasks of our own military, actively at war -- but have little issue with foreign government management of those tasks.
It is positively surreal. We are in a position where the Republican obsession towards privatization has created a situation where it is acceptable for a foreign government to control vital economic and national security chokepoints of the nation, but it is not acceptable for the American government to manage those same assets.
This is a very powerful argument, and one that echoes some of my own thinking of these past few days, although Hunter writes his so eloquently. The policies of this administration are so slanted toward Corporatism that they trump all else. Post 9/11 world? That's nice, until it gets in the way of a favored corporation's profits. National security and protecting our ports? We're you saying something, I wasn't paying attention because I was too busy making sweet deals for my oil baron buddies. But add on top of that the fact this particular "private" enterprise is state owned, and that we are therefore in fact saying by approving this deal that a foreign government is to control our ports while our own is not, that is quite astounding.
It is no wonder then that this issue has raised the eyebrows of many Republicans who wonder just how far this administration will go before it turns this nation into the United States of Halliburton. However, the very fact Bush himself, while throwing around the threat of using his very first veto against any attempt to stop the deal, was clueless about it until after it was approved, says so much about who pulls the strings in the White House. One clue: buckshot.
It will be interesting to see if Hunter's thoughts regarding the irony of Bush's stance will come back to bite him in the rear. Surely indications are clear he's reached lame-duck status in this second term far sooner than the two year mark pundits typically say it usually occurs. Question is, will Democrats understand how to use this issue to their advantage, or will they continue to shy away from any controversy that has something to do with national security, regardless of how open the door is for scoring points over the matter?
Letters To and From Reichert
Earlier today I received the following email, seemingly blind copied on a communication to Dave Reichert, Congressman representing the tech savvy 8th District (a seat that even more tech savvy Darcy Burner is seeking to take this November):
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 02:32:03 +0000
From: maryandjoe...@...
Reply-to: maryandjoe...@...
To: REICHERT-WA08@ls1.house.gov
Subject: US Ports Deal
2/21/06
Dear Rep Reichert:
What on earth is going on in our Executive Branch? What the hell is GW thinking with the recommendation of an Arab world company taking over an managing six US ports? Heck, just the image of such a thing is repulsive let alone letting it actually happen. I have heretofore been a supporter of GW, but my enthusiasim for him has wained; and, his arrogance and bully tatctics have tipped me against him in this situation. I heard you had voiced concern over his ploy to get this Port deal passed and that he'd veto any action stating he's trying to get foreign policy establsihed. What the hell happend to thinking about US policy? Press on, Rep Reichert with your efforts to disuade the US from this decision. I've had it with this president...it appears it is time we had someone else in the oval office, Republican or Democrat is not the point, unless we're talking Hillary, in which case let's all run for the hills.
Holy moly, how could we get so far off base?
Joe ......
......
Issaquah, WA .....
maryandjoe...@...
So I was scratching my head wondering why I received this email, until I received the following email:
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:46:38 -0500
From: "Reichert, Representative"
Reply-to: "Reichert, Representative"
To: REICHERT-WA08@ls1.house.gov
Subject: Reichert Apologizes for Newsletter List Error
Today, we realized that due to an internal technical mistake, two e-mails sent to an unattended e-mail address were inadvertently sent to my newsletter list. I apologize for this mistake and for any unintended messages that may have reached your inbox. We have fixed the problem. I also want to assure you that your e-mail address isn’t public information and that it has not been shared by this office, nor will it be.
Thank you for your understanding and I again apologize for any inconvenience it has caused you.
Sincerely,
Dave Reichert
Member of Congress
Doh!
However, I only received one of the supposed two emails, and it was sent to REICHERT-WA08@ls1.house.gov, the same address in Reichert's "To:" field of his email.
No wonder Reichert is so slow at responding to emails when an email address he gives out in his own correspondence is an "unattended e-mail address".
And did they really fix the problem, perhaps by redirecting email to the unattended REICHERT-WA08@ls1.house.gov address, or is that now an email address that they're monitoring now?
Feel free to send Reichert an email to find out!
Accidental Park
This is wrong!
Construction crews have enclosed Occidental Park in Pioneer Square with metal fencing, signifying the city's intent to move forward with a contentious renovation project, including cutting down 17 trees.
The City of Seattle is making a big mistake. They intend to "renovate" Occidental Park in Pioneer Square, but in the process they are railroading the process to swat away a court challenge by local business owners.
And those business owners have a point. They've established a Web site at http://www.ohnoyoudont.net/ at which they argue that the new park space will not deal with the real problem of the park of drugs and homeless people.
The city's argument regarding the trees, "that the canopy of leaves becomes so thick that it's hard to stay warm in the park, even in summer, and that's it's also very dark" is just ridiculous. This is the Pacific Northwest. Get out of the city a bit and remind yourself of one of the reasons why this area is so beautiful: the trees. These London plane trees provide shade, but they also create a rare green space in a city full of concrete. And the reason why one doesn't stay warm in this park also has to do with the fact this is the Pacific Northwest, where it rarely ever gets warm, and when it does, it is nice to have place for us local weather wimps to sit in the shade.
Occidental Park doesn't need chess tables and a bocce ball court. Go to San Francisco and see how much this deals with the homeless problem on Market Street - it doesn't. Nobody is going to play bocce ball in downtown Seattle. The court/pit will simply take up space and gather garbage and refuse.
As for the concession building, why don't we simply call it what it is likely to be: a future Starbucks.
This whole project, at $1.2 million just reeks of avoiding the real problems in Seattle, and this park, and sacrificing 17 trees in the process, while disregarding a lawsuit that seeks to forestall their destruction, does nothing to solve the problems, and smacks of arrogance and callousness.
Hey Tim! Washington Won't Discriminate
The Seattle Times reports that a new group called Washington Won't Discriminate has formed to combat Tim Eyman's bigoted and discriminatory initiative and referendum measures.
The article shows just how much Tim Eyman's framing of the issues has been adopted by the press.
Eyman argues that for an issue as controversial as gay rights, voters — not lawmakers in Olympia — should get the final say.
This is not a controversial issue - it is an issue of non-discrimination, and that should never be considered controversial.
"There's going to be a big, healthy debate on it," he said. "When the dust settles and the decision is made, it should be the voters who make the decision on an issue as big as this one."
How many times must I as a voter do so? I already did so when I voted for my state legislators who represent me in Olympia. They've been sent there to do the daily work of legislating. That's how this country is organized. Our government is a representative system. The legislators have been hearing what their constituents wanted regarding this issue and they voted.
As for a healthy debate, I hardly expect Tim Eyman's friends will be engaging in a healthy debate given the bigotry they displayed after the bill passed.
In addition, Eyman is pushing an initiative that would remove "sexual orientation" from the law and prohibit state government from requiring quotas or other preferential treatment for any person or group "based on sexual orientation or sexual preference."
This is the most egregious of fallacies the press keeps aping. The gay rights law is not about preferential treatment as Eyman would like you to believe. It is not about requiring quotas as Eyman would like you to believe. It is about equal protection, and non-discrimination for gays and lesbians.
The wingnuts will argue that this law opens the door for abuse. In fact it does the exact opposite. It closes the door to abuse that gays and lesbians consistently are subject to for no fault other than that they are gay or lesbian. This is the 21st Century people! Wake up! Being gay or lesbian is not a choice, it is who you are, and the only choice gays or lesbians ever have is to accept or deny their true person. On the hand, one's religious belief is a choice and we provide non-discrimination protection to people based on whether they worship at the Greater Evangelistic Cathedral Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ of the Apostolic Faith Inc. or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster!
So go check out the Washington Won't Discriminate site, and contribute to their cause to stamp out bigotry and hatred and discrimination against men and women in Washington state simply because they are gay or lesbian.
Announcing New PNW Topic Hotlist Features
I've been meaning to get time to do this for a long while, but this week, somehow, I finally got around to it...
Announcing... the PNW Topic Hotlist "All You Can Eat" version! (and admit it, who can resist an all you can eat anything?)
You may have noticed (or not - it is very new) a "View More Entries..." link at the end of a topic's list of entries in the PNW Topic Hotlist in my sidebar (also available at better progressive blogs in the Pacific NW). Well, like a door to a seemingly nondescript English telephone booth, this link opens up to a page where you can view every currently active entry for every currently active topic, as opposed to a reduced number, randomly displayed to fit the limited confines of a blog's sidebar.
The entries are listed latest first for each topic. The topics can be collapsed and expanded as in the sidebar lists, but also all together with one click. This makes viewing the content quicker and more convenient. Most people displaying the Hotlist have selected to show none of a blog entry's text in their sidebar, or just a small amount. This view displays a longer version, also available to sidebar users, but again understandably a little much for the small space of a sidebar.
As you will quickly see, while you can view at most 10 entries per topic in the sidebar version, and many have chosen to display fewer, this page displays all the entries for a topic, and thus it will be common to see as many as 30, 40 or 50 for the more written about topics.
In addition to the PNW Topic Hotlist content I've listed the Hotlist blogroll - those blogs that are being aggregated for display in the Hotlist. This helps give a sense of the breadth and depth of the Hotlist content. I've also been tossing around the idea of making this blogroll something anyone can add to their sidebar. Technically it would be very simple - the question is whether it would be popular enough to bother. Comments welcome.
While this new page can be accessed from the "View More Entries..." link in sidebar Hotlist displays, it can also be accessed directly at http://www.topichotlist.com/th/topichotlist.shtml. Feel free to bookmark the page and to use it regularly as yet another means to stay abreast of what progressives in the Pacific NW are writing about. A future likely enhancement will be the addition of a "new" indicator so that you can see what's new since you last viewed it. Such a feature would likely have to use browser cookies, so those that don't have an appetite for them won't benefit, but for most it would probably be useful.
So take a look, kick the tires, and let me know what you think!
Update: I mentioned above that a future enhancement will be a "new" indicator to see what's been added since your last visit, and the feature has now been added. You won't see anything the first time, but when you come back, if there is new content, it should be flagged.
Eyman Signature Drive Begins
Tim Eyman's paid initiative signature gatherers (handsomely paid I might add at $0.75 per "John Hancock") are apparently now getting out and about looking for suckers who may not remember the outcome of the I-912 campaign looking to repeal the gas tax funding for the Transportation Bill of 2005 (the repeal initiative was massively rejected). This time around they want to do away with a different $2.5 billion in revenue intended to fund much of the same highway safety and improvement projects that I-912 was going to jeopardize, and that voters said "no" to in droves and all across the state.
Permanent Defense, a group that keeps tabs on Tim Eyman's legislating-from-his-bedroom tactics, is looking for people to help them track the signature gathering activities. If you see someone doing so make note of their location and when you made the observation and report it at this page.
It is important that the signature gathering process be monitored to ensure the process is being followed to the letter of the law, and to ensure that people signing are familiar with all the facts when they do so.
Attacking Hearts
Following Cheney's hunting incident in which he shot lawyer Harry Whittington, we now learn that Whittington has suffered a "silent heart attack".
Is that what they call a heart attack the White House doesn't want you to know about?
Furthermore, is there any doubt that should Whittington's condition become critical that all measures will be taken, regardless of religious or ethical beliefs, to keep him alive, whether that be as a comatose vegetable, in order to avoid Cheney being accused of having killed a man, accidentally or not?
Just wondering.
Hopefully this Valentine's Day Dick Cheney is seeking a less dangerous way to his wife's heart.
No Dicking Around
I guess guns don't kill people - Cheney kills people.
Thank God For Sex
So proclaims a flyer recently delivered to my mailbox from the Eastlake Community Church, holding services at Kirkland Jr. High.
Fascinating. Supposedly they've got "great music" for those wanting to rock out or party all night long I'm sure. It's apparently a place you can "have a blast", perhaps really blow up some things. They've even got "short services" for the short attention spans we know Americans to have.
This is a church that is "brand new" and "just like you", whatever that means. Just as I've never had myself compared to a church, I've never heard of a church being compared to me.
But first and foremost, this is a hip place where you can learn all about sex, or at least praise the Lord for it. Those two on the bed in the flyer look like they're just about ready to get it on. Maybe they'll be some real show and tell going on at this church.
On the flip side of the flyer we can read some testimonials. One guy loved it because he could wear whatever he wanted! Enough of that having to wear a stuffy suit and tie protocol. A lady proclaims that her kids "had a blast!". Finally, there is a note from Pastor Ryan (that's his first name - no idea what his last name is), who invites us to "test drive" his church, "no church experience required". Ryan is sporting a casual striped shirt with rolled up sleeves. Looks a bit like local wingnut blogger Stefan Sharkansky.
Last summer my cousin was talking about her conversion from a Muslim to a Catholic. She described her church in the outskirts of London as being much like the one this flyer attempts to describe: youthful, hip, short on the old protocols and fast paced and exciting. And it is not surprising that churches have looked at such makeovers to compete with other forms of "entertainment".
For my part I can't help but view all of this as a terribly dishonest brand of marketing. Using a line like "Thank God For Sex" to attract people into a church that does not support a woman's right to choose an abortion is beyond the pale.
Olympic Truce Or Olympic Truth
Every Olympics the organizers call for an Olympic truce, during which time the people of the world will hopefully lay down their arms and watch a little television.
Or something like that. We can try to imagine such a world, but apologies to John Lennon, it is hard to do.
This Olympics, like the last in Athens in 2004, is being held under the backdrop of a probably never ending war against "terror", and the real war in Iraq. While Israel has athletes at the Turin games, and Iran sent a skier, the Middle East is poorly represented (yeah, yeah, too warm to develop winter sport athletes you say). Nevertheless, you'd have thought we'd have trained a couple of Iraqis just to make a show for democracy in Italy, but things are obviously not in good enough shape in Iraq, despite Bush's suggestions things are getting better, to have produced a downhill skier that might complete the course in four minutes as opposed to two. Next time perhaps.
So will we get a truce? That remains to be seen. Unfortunately, the sad truth is that few in many of the countries in turmoil have access to a television, or one with reliable power to begin with.
Microsoft: They Keep Growing And Growing
Microsoft announced today they're speeding up campus expansion plans in Redmond.
This is literally huge for the Eastside area, and Redmond in particular, but it will introduce additional traffic nightmares for the 520 corridors. There needs to be a long term transportation plan that Microsoft helps make a reality to deal with the side effects on the roads. Don't get me wrong, the economic boom is a great thing for the area, but it needs to happen in tandem with a transportation infrastructure plan that can absorb the growth - and building wider roadways is not the only solution that must be proposed.
For details on the announcement go here.
Networks Lap Up Entwistle Story - Bury Real News
They've found another diversion. His name is Neil Entwistle.
CNN, Headline News, MSNBC, FOX News.
They're all reporting on the next sensational case that is the most important news since the beginning of time - a man accused of murdering his wife and their baby.
This will become this year's Peterson case that paralyzed "news" networks in 2003 and 2004, or at least it is a fair bet they pray it will.
However, hopefully the ability of the Blogosphere to frame what the real news is has a chance this year to marginalize the networks if they persist in reporting on sensationalized stories that affect one family, as opposed to the issues affecting our whole nation and the world. Issues like our nation's national debt and rising deficits, the ongoing problem of poverty, racism and bigotry in our country, a government intent on spying and lying, our growing energy problems, our health care system, or aging population, our alienated youth, rampant crime in the GOP led Congress, world wide health and poverty, continued unrest and instability in the Middle East, flaring Muslim passions about Western insensitivity, flaring Western passions against Muslim violence, Iranian development of a nuclear bomb, North Korean development of a nuclear threat, avian flu, mad cow, global warming, shrinking rain forests, extinction of species, and on, and on, and on.
We must do our part to keep these issues in the forefront and the Entwistle stories in the tabloids and off network news.
Cantwell on MSNBC at 7pm PT Tonight
Short notice, but if you read this in time, here's a message from the Cantwell campaign...
Today, Thursday, February 9th at 7:00 p.m. PT Senator Cantwell will be on MSNBC's Scarborough Country.
As the Senate Democrats' point person on energy issues, Cantwell will discuss her efforts to make America energy independent by 2020.
Before her appearance, Senator Cantwell will have asked the Bush Administration's Energy Secretary about the cuts in key renewable energy programs in his budget that he released on Monday. She will also discuss her efforts to pass gas anti-price gouging bills.
Voters Support Tax Levies
Republicans would tell you that taxes are evil, and GOP legislators will rarely vote for a tax, unless it benefits their rich friends.
However, if you review the returns from today's special election in King County, the voters appear to paint a different picture regarding taxes, and our support for them. Almost every proposed school district levy is passing with the minimum required percentage of yes votes.
This tells us that voters support schools, but it also tells us that they recognize the need for taxes to do so because money for such things doesn't grow on trees. And where are these taxes going to be added? To our property taxes. That's right, the same property taxes that we're to believe citizens - parents of school age children - are up in arms about governments raising.
Recall this was one of Tim Eyman's other causes, capping property tax increases. Eyman saw this cash cow initiative opportunity and like candy from heaven, voters couldn't resist voting for an initiative that seemed to be all roses and springtime meadow scented wonderfulness.
Except, the truth is Eyman's anti-property tax initiatives, while lining his pockets, offered voters a thorny future. Local governments faced with lost revenues have had to struggle to raise the funds needed for essential services, or unfunded federal mandates, of which Bush's government has created a ton.
These early election results appear to be proof that, in King County at least, schools are important enough to pay for out of our property tax dollars. Supporting schools and education for our future wage earners this way is our patriotic duty. The same such support by our parents and grandparents is what helped provide the educational opportunities that we ourselves have benefitted from. Let's hope voters remember these lessons the next time Tim Eyman and his snakeskin oil salesmen come asking for signatures for their next harebrained anti-tax scheme.
Vote!
Today various special elections are being held around the country.
If you've got a pulse then vote!
Voting is what democracy is all about, so do your part and make your voice and vote count.
Only 1000 More Days
In 1000 more days we will have elected a new President!
On November 4th, 2008 (go ahead, make an a note of it in your calendar), George W. Bush, the worst and most damaging President this nation has ever had, will be watching as the citizens of American vote for his successor.
We therefore have 1000 days in which to convince millions of people who voted for Bush in 2004, or did not vote at all, that they should vote for change and, most likely, the Democratic candidate, whomever he or she may be.
It is probably too late for the infrastructure to be put in place for a viable third party candidate, which is a great shame as many months ago I was explaining that if 2.5 million supporters saved only $1 each, per week, since the last election, we could have amassed $162.5 million by now. By the next election that could have been $500 million.
Who would we elect if we had the choice? I'm not thinking a unelectable Libertarian or Green party alternative. I'm thinking a candidate that is more in tune with the majority of Americans, representing the center of the political spectrum. Since the GOP is becoming an extreme right party, and the Democratic party has not been willing to embrace the center, we need a candidate that will. Maybe it is someone like Drew Kopf who wrote to me recently and is also keeping count of the number of days until the next election and offers his view of an alternative choice. With no disrespect to Drew, hopefully it is someone more electable. Certainly with $500 million, any campaign on such a budget could realistically compete with the Republicans and Democrats. And with a pledge of $1 per week, that's money that would hardly be hard for supporters to come up with, and it could be done without resorting to taking money from any special interest group. It would be a true grassroots campaign!
Think about it, if not for 2008, then for 2012.
Meanwhile, the countdown continues. Not so long ago it was 1458 days. We must continue to fight for the soul of America that has been broken and beaten by the Republican party that is rotten at the core, and rotting this nation from within and without. We must support and help elect candidates that can oust GOP incumbents or keep new Republicans out of office. We must win the battles at the ballot and keep on defeating those that want to make this nation more bigoted, less secure, more in debt, less caring, more of a police state, less competitive, and more of a religious throcracy.
In 1000 days we will have the chance to say "No More!" to the neo-cons and the Bush cronies. It may seem like a long time, but it will be upon us before you know it.
Eyman Abuses Initiative Process
Jerry Cornfield has an article for the The Herald that exposes Tim Eyman's initiative factory shenanigans for what they are: abuses of the initiative system.
Cornfield points out that each initiative filed receives the benefit of the same resources provided to our lawmakers in Olympia:
Each time Eyman pays the $5 fee required to file an initiative, his measure receives the same treatment as any law introduced by a legislator.
That means, for example, the same legal minds that last year helped lawmakers draft wording to boost vehicle weight fees are this year assisting Eyman to craft an initiative to roll back the same fees.
More is involved. The men and women involved in editing, typing, proofreading, retyping and publishing last year's law are editing, typing, proofreading and retyping Eyman's initiative.
State law requires this. Because citizens are granted power to write legislation, they deserve equal access to resources to do it.
Thus, every initiative and referendum receives complete, impartial and free assistance from the Code Reviser's Office. These folks routinely turn a citizen's desire and rhetoric into intent and legalese capable of surviving a challenge should it pass.
A person could drop off a one-line initiative to reverse the order of lights in traffic signals so green is on top, and personnel in the Code Reviser's Office would dutifully and cordially prepare a ballot-ready measure.
Yet Tim Eyman has taken advantage of this freely provided service to completely and utterly abuse the system:
Since April, he has filed 21 initiatives, though he has yet to circulate petitions to gather signatures for any of them.
Eight of the initiatives deal with requiring car tabs to remain at a flat $30. He filed the first on April 13. Subsequently, he filed nearly identical measures on April 27, May 17, Sept. 14, Dec. 14, two on Jan. 9 and the most recent on Jan. 17.
He has filed four initiatives to open carpool lanes in off-peak hours, and four more to give voters a say on tax hikes.
That's simply pathetic. Pick an initiative Tim and be done with it! The Code Reviser's Office is not your organization's personal assistant. You are eating up taxpayer resources with your frivolous filings, and you are harming citizens in the process. Your bigoted anti-gay hate initiative will cause the recently signed into law civil rights legislation to be postponed until after Washingtonians have been able to vote your shameful measure into oblivion. For citizens who have had to wait decades for equal protections under the law, that's like spitting in their face asking them to wait another six months.
As Jerry Cornfield points out:
lawmakers' hands are tied. Legislating any curbs would be viewed as vindictive and would be likely to fail.
Their best option may end up being an initiative.
Well perhaps it is time for Goldy to file a serious initiative this time in order to do so.
Prove You're Not Gay Tim
The right wing loves to make point after point where if you cannot prove an assertion is wrong then the assertion must be true.
Well more than one can play at that game, and it appears that a number of folks are picking up on the tactic to dish out as good as we've been getting for the past five years.
The target: Tim Eyman.
The assertion: Tim Eyman is gay.
The underlying message: Prove to us he isn't.
The debate is already on at blatherwatch, HorsesAss.org and Hominid Views, and surely to be picked up by others.
As Goldy indicates on the first Podcasting Liberally podcast last week, the fact that one would even take offense or feel undermined by such an assertion is exactly why protections for gays and lesbians are necessary in our society. The fact is I couldn't give a rats (or horses) ass if Tim Eyman is gay. However, the problem is that to many, especially those that he expects will sign his petitions to get his bigoted anti-gay measures on the November ballot, and those he hopes will vote for them at that time, Tim Eyman being gay is a big deal.
So this is a matter Tim Eyman can clear up for us once and for all. Prove to us you're not gay Tim - that's all you need to do - otherwise if you don't then we'll all know you are.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course.
Balancing The Power Of Free Speech
Are some things off limits to political cartoons?
If I'd asked this question before the recent brouhaha regarding the now famous Danish cartoons controversy I think that many would have a different answer than they would now, and perhaps for entirely opposite reasons.
Some who might have said yes, may have decided now that in fact, no, political cartoons are a form of free speech and should be allowed the freedom to choose their subject matter and their message.
Some who might have said no, may now believe that the controversy is a good reason why there should be limits.
Then there are surely those that have only had their original opinion further solidified by the the events of recent days.
My personal response to the question above is that it depends. It depends on the magazine, newspaper, Web site, whatever, that the cartoons are printed in or on. I believe that there is a standard for mainstream media, or traditional media, and a different standard for alternative or marginal media. This is because each is expressing an opinion that represents either a mainstream segment of a population, or a small radical minority viewpoint, and I think that makes a world of difference.
Danish paper Jyllands-Posten that carried the original cartoons back in late September, isn't some small, little read rag, it is the country's largest daily newspaper. As such, it should be sensitive to what is generally accepted in the political cartoon world. Political figures have always been fair game. Religious figures have been treated more carefully.
The other newspapers around the world have chosen to show their solidarity with the Danish paper, including a Jordanian paper as the BBC reports:
Jordanian independent tabloid al-Shihan reprinted three of the cartoons on Thursday, saying people should know what they were protesting about, AFP news agency reports.
"Muslims of the world be reasonable," wrote editor Jihad Momani.
"What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony in Amman?"
The article in al-Shihan also included a list of Danish products.
However, while the call is for Muslims of the world to be reasonable, there is also a need for the press to be as well. A set of similar cartoons lampooning Jesus Christ and the Christian God would surely be received with criticism by easily offended Christians as well. Political cartoons making fun of Jews would be sure to ignite passions in Israel. And given this sensitivity on the part of the faithful, there should be some sensitivity on the part of the publishers, understanding that the size of their readerships means the opinions or messages that they print are not only read by many, but are seen to represent the opinions of many.
But there is also a valid argument to be made that if the message, as controversial as it is, represents a readership, regardless of the size of it, then that message should not be restrained. Not expressing the message would be to repress freedom of thought, and freedom of the press.
The mainstream media does not only report on the news, but presents commentary, and that commentary should not be restricted by concerns of offending one group or another.
Certainly, at the same time, the response in the Muslim world to the cartoons can be said to have been out of proportion with the offense. I would ask why hasn't there been a similar outrage against kidnappings and beheadings? Why hasn't there been a similar outrage against suicide bombers detonating their explosive payload within the holy confines of a mosque during a funeral, or at a wedding party?
It has even been claimed that the whole affair regarding these cartoons was actually exacerbated by Muslims looking to take advantage of the issue to stir up the passions of Middle Easterners, by presenting additional fabricated cartoons that were not in the Jyllands-Posten newspaper.
But then, as Ian at World View succinctly explains, the issue was further blown up by a Norwegian Christian rag called Magazinet that wrote about this, and then of course the solidarity play of other mainstream newspapers.
Is there a middle ground?
Absolutely. We've lived with it for years, but passions are flaring and as Ian correctly opines it is time for us to end it now - at least for this episode of "You Can't Take My Freedom Of Speech Away From Me", also known as "Don't Blasphemy My Religion".
Eyman's Bigoted Stance Shows His True Colors
<< On The Road To 2008 Home
