Sunday, March 22, 2015
Saturday, March 21, 2015
Scattershooting things I'm reading
-- 2016 will be the Meerkat election.
-- Yes, domestic violence is an epidemic. Has been for... ever.
I had to take my anti-nausea medication, but I got through the entire article.
-- More photos of our national moral stain are on the way.
There are more than 2000 of these pictures, which means the ones we have seen before amount to less than one-tenth of the total. And that's just the evidence of torture and abuse that was photographically documented.
US war criminals are still on the loose.
-- Bernie Sanders, who will make a "campaign" appearance in Austin on the last day of March, will offer to amend the Republican budget, calling for an income tax surcharge on the wealthiest among us -- millionaires -- in order to finance increases in defense spending and the next military aggression (read: Iran).
So today, or maybe yesterday, is the day that Meerkat officially became the social media tool of the 2016 presidential election. The iPhone application, which allows Twitter users to stream live video footage to their followers, debuted at South By Southwest last week and has now firmly caught on with politicians and political reporters. It's not just the kids. Jeb Bush is meerkating. Dan Balz is meerkating. This is happening.
Dan Pfeiffer, the former senior Obama aide, was in Austin for South By Southwest this year and was quite smitten: "Everywhere I have gone here at South by Southwest... people are talking about Meerkat. And if that same discussion is not happening at every media outlet and presidential campaign around the country, they are making a huge mistake," he wrote on Wednesday. "If 2004 was about Meetup, 2008 was about Facebook, and 2012 was about Twitter, 2016 is going to be about Meerkat (or something just like it)."
-- Yes, domestic violence is an epidemic. Has been for... ever.
The number of American troops killed in Afghanistan and Iraq between 2001 and 2012 was 6,488. The number of American women who were murdered by current or ex male partners during that time was 11,766. That's nearly double the amount of casualties lost during war.
Women are much more likely to be victims of intimate partner violence with 85 percent of domestic abuse victims being women and 15 percent men. Too many women have been held captive by domestic violence -- whether through physical abuse, financial abuse, emotional abuse or a combination of all three.
We are inundated with news stories about domestic violence , from athletes beating their significant others in public elevators or in their own homes to celebrities publicly abusing their girlfriends. This problem is not one that will go away quickly or quietly.
As Domestic Violence Awareness Month comes to an end, discussions about intimate partner abuse and its horrible repercussions should not. In an attempt to illustrate the gravity of abuse all genders (but largely women) face in the U.S., we rounded up 30 statistics on domestic violence.
I had to take my anti-nausea medication, but I got through the entire article.
-- More photos of our national moral stain are on the way.
A federal judge ruled on Friday that the U.S. government must release photographs showing the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and other sites.
Judge Alvin Hellerstein in Manhattan ruled that his order would not take effect for 60 days to give the U.S. Department of Defense time to decide whether to appeal.
The order is a victory for the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a lawsuit against the government in 2004 seeking the release of the photographs.
"The photos are crucial to the public record," ACLU deputy legal director Jameel Jaffer said in a news release. "They're the best evidence of what took place in the military's detention centers, and their disclosure would help the public better understand the implications of some of the Bush administration's policies."
The Department of Defense did not immediately return an email seeking comment.
There are more than 2000 of these pictures, which means the ones we have seen before amount to less than one-tenth of the total. And that's just the evidence of torture and abuse that was photographically documented.
US war criminals are still on the loose.
-- Bernie Sanders, who will make a "campaign" appearance in Austin on the last day of March, will offer to amend the Republican budget, calling for an income tax surcharge on the wealthiest among us -- millionaires -- in order to finance increases in defense spending and the next military aggression (read: Iran).
The “war tax” will be one of the first Sanders will introduce during the vote-a-rama next week. During the back-to-back votes, senators are allowed to submit an unlimited amount of amendments.
“The Republicans took us into protracted wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — and ran up our national debt by trillions because they chose not to pay for those wars. Instead, they put the cost of those wars on our national credit card,” Sanders said in a statement Friday.[...]“Wars are enormously expensive, not only in terms of human life and suffering, but in terms of the budget. If the Republicans want another war in the Mideast, they are going to have to tell the American people how much it will cost them and how it will be paid for,” he said.
You want a war, Louie? Your credit is declined. Cash in advance.
-- A Wisconsin federal judge has overturned the law there that requires doctors performing abortions to have hospital admitting privileges. You may recall that in Texas, it's law now and remains so by virtue of the 5th Circuit. So we have another American freedom -- that of a woman's right to choose whether or not she will give birth -- on its way, eventually, to the Supreme Court.
AMERICA FUCK YEAH! doesn't just apply to guns, after all.
Thursday, March 19, 2015
The other Garcia running for mayor
Chuy, in Chicago. From the evening of February 24th, after he made the runoff against the incumbent, Rahm Emanuel.
When Garcia's campaign manager was asked how his candidate could be outspent 12-1 and still force a runoff, he replied, "Money can't buy you love."
During his first term as Chicago mayor, Emanuel privatized some public schools and closed others, went hammer-and-tong after teachers, appointed his cronies to boards and commissions, and essentially declared war on all things -- people and ideas -- progressive. This is his history: while he was chief of staff in Obama's White House, Emanuel was credited ("discredited" is a better word, IMO) with killing the public option for healthcare reform.
As a city alderman, Jesus "Chuy" Garcia fought so hard against Chicago's machine politics that then-Mayor Richard M. Daley made kicking him off the city council a top political priority. The same sort of thing -- making enemies of powerful interests -- happened when he served in Springfield, IL as a state senator. As a Cook County commissioner, he helped balance their mess of a budget while lowering taxes. He has aligned himself with those who hold to account the 1% and the corporations who buy our politicians and muck up our political system.
On both sides of the aisle.
Night before last, on St. Paddy's, the two men had a debate. This account makes it seem as if the moderator -- a fixture in Chicago journalism -- was the winner.
Sounds like it was great fun. It's still steeply uphill for the challenger, though.
Go finish up; it's well-written.
There are so many parallels to Houston's Garcia, and so many polar opposites between the two that it's hard to measure them with modern technology. One example: Chuy is running against those terrible red-light cameras -- a Republican peeve a few years ago in H-Town, you will recall -- the removal of which would blow an even bigger hole in Chicago's budget than they already have.
Let's establish that Rahmbo, an internationally renowned asshole, is likely to return to office. A vote for Emanuel would represent not just a vote for crony capitalistic scorched-earth politicos, but a vote for continuing and extending the CIA-modeled police state tactics that have been revealed in the Windy City, and on display in too many other municipal police departments around the country.
Update: Another Garcia from Chicago, cartoonist Eric J.
A narrow loss for Emanuel would represent a nascent progressive revolution of sorts. And the media would rush to project ramifications large and small for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
So let's at least hope that our mayoral tilt is as fun as the one they're having in That Toddlin' Town. And finally, let's watch closely to see if the Bayou City's Garcia can be as successful -- so far -- as Chicago's. Maybe even return to his Democratic roots a little (if he can't actually be progressive, in other words) for the sake of politics and elections. Wouldn't that be something to see.
We the people have spoken. Not the people with the money and the power and the connections. Not the giant corporations.
The big-money special interests. The hedge funds...who poured tens of millions of dollars into the mayor's campaign. They've had their say for too long. But today, the rest of us had something to say.
We've got six weeks of hard work ahead of us -- and believe me, these big-money interests are going to throw everything they got at us. They run this town and they're not gonna give up easy. But we're gonna fight...we're gonna win.
When Garcia's campaign manager was asked how his candidate could be outspent 12-1 and still force a runoff, he replied, "Money can't buy you love."
During his first term as Chicago mayor, Emanuel privatized some public schools and closed others, went hammer-and-tong after teachers, appointed his cronies to boards and commissions, and essentially declared war on all things -- people and ideas -- progressive. This is his history: while he was chief of staff in Obama's White House, Emanuel was credited ("discredited" is a better word, IMO) with killing the public option for healthcare reform.
As a city alderman, Jesus "Chuy" Garcia fought so hard against Chicago's machine politics that then-Mayor Richard M. Daley made kicking him off the city council a top political priority. The same sort of thing -- making enemies of powerful interests -- happened when he served in Springfield, IL as a state senator. As a Cook County commissioner, he helped balance their mess of a budget while lowering taxes. He has aligned himself with those who hold to account the 1% and the corporations who buy our politicians and muck up our political system.
On both sides of the aisle.
Night before last, on St. Paddy's, the two men had a debate. This account makes it seem as if the moderator -- a fixture in Chicago journalism -- was the winner.
Without any doubt, the winner of the first one-on-one debate between Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and his challenger, Cook County Commissioner Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, was its oh-no-you-don’t moderator, Carol Marin. Setting aside the near-historic sight of a 66-year-old woman on television, the TV and print news veteran won the night by brooking a minimum of blah-blah, and jumping in front of various filibusters: “Let’s go back four years,’’ Emanuel began, when asked how to close the Chicago Public Schools’ billion-dollar deficit. “No, let’s not,’’ Marin said crisply.
As she isn’t on the ballot, though, in the city’s April 7 mayoral runoff, voters must choose between an insurgent who’s been cast as such a sweet guy he might have a marshmallow center, and a famously profane incumbent who has lost support over crime, school closings, and revenue-producing red-light traffic cameras.
Sounds like it was great fun. It's still steeply uphill for the challenger, though.
The fact that there even is a runoff has humbled Emanuel and embarrassed the president he served as chief of staff in their own town. It has excited those Chicagoans who’d love to see the city elect its first Hispanic mayor, and secretly pleased even some who see Garcia’s run as quixotic, but aren’t what you’d call heartbroken to watch their sometimes abrasive mayor have to work for his reelection against an opponent with a fraction of the funds and name recognition.
A recent Chicago Tribune poll showed Emanuel leading his challenger, 51 to 37, but Garcia supporters are hoping that turnout by those too turned-off to come out for the original vote on Feb. 24, when few thought Garcia had a chance, will swing the runoff his way. If yard signs are any indication, Garcia will do well in the president’s old neighborhood, Hyde Park.
Go finish up; it's well-written.
There are so many parallels to Houston's Garcia, and so many polar opposites between the two that it's hard to measure them with modern technology. One example: Chuy is running against those terrible red-light cameras -- a Republican peeve a few years ago in H-Town, you will recall -- the removal of which would blow an even bigger hole in Chicago's budget than they already have.
Let's establish that Rahmbo, an internationally renowned asshole, is likely to return to office. A vote for Emanuel would represent not just a vote for crony capitalistic scorched-earth politicos, but a vote for continuing and extending the CIA-modeled police state tactics that have been revealed in the Windy City, and on display in too many other municipal police departments around the country.
Update: Another Garcia from Chicago, cartoonist Eric J.
A narrow loss for Emanuel would represent a nascent progressive revolution of sorts. And the media would rush to project ramifications large and small for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
So let's at least hope that our mayoral tilt is as fun as the one they're having in That Toddlin' Town. And finally, let's watch closely to see if the Bayou City's Garcia can be as successful -- so far -- as Chicago's. Maybe even return to his Democratic roots a little (if he can't actually be progressive, in other words) for the sake of politics and elections. Wouldn't that be something to see.
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
An open letter to, and some questions for, Adrian Garcia
Congratulations on your (alleged) decision to run for mayor of Houston. And hey, sorry about posting that false start a month ago. Once you do declare, I know that many will cheer, and some will complain; I will do neither. I have not made up my mind who I might vote for and support, but I am fairly certain today that it will not be you in the general election this fall. No hard feelings, best of luck in your bid for office.
As a public service to inform the 10-15% of Houston voters who will be participating in November's municipal elections, I respectfully request your response to the following questions. You may comment here or e-mail me; I would ask that your responses be in writing and on the record. At this time it is unnecessary for you or one of your advisers to call me, as I have a hearing impediment that has rendered telephone call conversations all but worthless. (That hopefully changes in the near future, but for the present time I'm in read-only mode.)
You may respond on your own timetable, as I understand and appreciate the fact that you must resign your position as Sheriff of Harris County once you officially announce your mayoral campaign, and that conversations about that might force your resignation sooner than you would wish. The ramifications of giving up your office to seek another is its own story, which isn't necessary to discuss at this time. But speaking of that...
-- May I ask how you will support your family while you run for mayor? Giving up your day job isn't so difficult for your extravagantly wealthy competitors for mayor; those that aren't wildly rich can continue with their law firms or engineering firms or brokerage firms in a reduced capacity, and little or no reduced compensation.
That's not the case with you, unless there's something I don't know. As far as I can tell, you're a working Joe much like 99% of Houston's residents. As an HPD beat cop, city councilman, and now the county's top law enforcement officer -- jobs that pay well, but don't exactly put you on Easy Street -- it looks like you've been making ends meet, maybe a little better. But can you afford not having a paycheck for six or seven months? Also regarding money, you're not going into the contest with a large campaign warchest, and absolutely not in comparison to others already hosting lavish fundraisers and the like. So by all appearances you'll be running a fairly populist campaign, at least as compared to half a dozen other mayoral hopefuls. That's something I admire and have respect for, if you know anything about what I have written here over the past decade.
If you're not going to be "funemployed" while you bid for chief at City Hall, do you have a job lined up? Is someone going to hire you -- I'll speculate "security consultant" at 10-12K monthly -- that expects some return on their investment if you get elected mayor? And perhaps most importantly: do you think it's appropriate for you to disclose to the voters any or all of these details?
-- May I ask about your political affiliation? I realize you have been elected as a Democrat a couple of times now, and am also quite familiar with the non-partisan nature of Houston municipal elections and the perils of "jungle" elections. Your previous statements -- the ones where you refer to yourself as 'getting more conservative as you have gotten older' -- coupled with your support of the now-defunct Secure Communities program (much more of a Republican priority than a Democratic one) would suggest that if you still consider yourself a Democrat, you appear to be a very, very conservative one, sort of in the mold of one of your loudest supporters and Rick Perry's attorney of record, Tony Buzbee. By the way: is Buzbee still a Democrat or has he become a Republican? Or, as with so many other Houston One-Percenters... does he work and play on both sides of the street?
-- What is your plan associated with the expectation that Latinos will need to turn out in historic numbers to elect you, as you said a few months ago? I realize it's the goal, and every effort will be expended to do that, but why do you think you'll be able to re-write the record books in this regard? What makes you more special than, say, Tony Sanchez in 2002, or Maria Luisa Alvarado in 2006, or Linda Chavez-Thompson in 2010, or Leticia Van de Putte in 2014? Lots of Democratic hopes and dreams have been dashed on the shoals of 'increased Latino voter turnout' for many years now. Even Ruy Teixeira, who co-authored that 2004 book that said it was all but inevitable -- and then offered another promising tea leaf again in 2013, while diversifying his "diversity" message to economic issues -- was, like all Democrats, forced to eat a large serving of crow while sitting in the wreckage of 2014.
Every Democrat in Texas, and maybe the nation, would like to know what the secret is for increasing Latino turnout beyond having a Latino surname. (And nobody wants to hire Marc Campos just to learn if he is full of shit about knowing the secret, or not.)
So precisely what -- or as close to 'precise' as you are comfortable revealing -- are you planning to do in order to make history?
I'm sure I'll have more questions once you declare, but one thing I won't do much of is criticize your decision to hand the sheriff's office back to a Republican, or point out some of the office's shortcomings or deficiencies under your administration. There will be plenty of others who will choose to do that. I'll also not harp on your lack of college degree. I have blogged in the recent past that was a deal-breaker for me, just as it would be if I were a Republican considering a vote for Scott Walker. But I'm going to mute that criticism, even though there are many reasons why conservatives hate college and Democrats value education, as the Texas Lege is demonstrating once again.
In the meantime, I will wait patiently for your responses, to me personally or to the Houston electorate generally. Again, good luck to you with your campaign.
As a public service to inform the 10-15% of Houston voters who will be participating in November's municipal elections, I respectfully request your response to the following questions. You may comment here or e-mail me; I would ask that your responses be in writing and on the record. At this time it is unnecessary for you or one of your advisers to call me, as I have a hearing impediment that has rendered telephone call conversations all but worthless. (That hopefully changes in the near future, but for the present time I'm in read-only mode.)
You may respond on your own timetable, as I understand and appreciate the fact that you must resign your position as Sheriff of Harris County once you officially announce your mayoral campaign, and that conversations about that might force your resignation sooner than you would wish. The ramifications of giving up your office to seek another is its own story, which isn't necessary to discuss at this time. But speaking of that...
-- May I ask how you will support your family while you run for mayor? Giving up your day job isn't so difficult for your extravagantly wealthy competitors for mayor; those that aren't wildly rich can continue with their law firms or engineering firms or brokerage firms in a reduced capacity, and little or no reduced compensation.
That's not the case with you, unless there's something I don't know. As far as I can tell, you're a working Joe much like 99% of Houston's residents. As an HPD beat cop, city councilman, and now the county's top law enforcement officer -- jobs that pay well, but don't exactly put you on Easy Street -- it looks like you've been making ends meet, maybe a little better. But can you afford not having a paycheck for six or seven months? Also regarding money, you're not going into the contest with a large campaign warchest, and absolutely not in comparison to others already hosting lavish fundraisers and the like. So by all appearances you'll be running a fairly populist campaign, at least as compared to half a dozen other mayoral hopefuls. That's something I admire and have respect for, if you know anything about what I have written here over the past decade.
If you're not going to be "funemployed" while you bid for chief at City Hall, do you have a job lined up? Is someone going to hire you -- I'll speculate "security consultant" at 10-12K monthly -- that expects some return on their investment if you get elected mayor? And perhaps most importantly: do you think it's appropriate for you to disclose to the voters any or all of these details?
-- May I ask about your political affiliation? I realize you have been elected as a Democrat a couple of times now, and am also quite familiar with the non-partisan nature of Houston municipal elections and the perils of "jungle" elections. Your previous statements -- the ones where you refer to yourself as 'getting more conservative as you have gotten older' -- coupled with your support of the now-defunct Secure Communities program (much more of a Republican priority than a Democratic one) would suggest that if you still consider yourself a Democrat, you appear to be a very, very conservative one, sort of in the mold of one of your loudest supporters and Rick Perry's attorney of record, Tony Buzbee. By the way: is Buzbee still a Democrat or has he become a Republican? Or, as with so many other Houston One-Percenters... does he work and play on both sides of the street?
-- What is your plan associated with the expectation that Latinos will need to turn out in historic numbers to elect you, as you said a few months ago? I realize it's the goal, and every effort will be expended to do that, but why do you think you'll be able to re-write the record books in this regard? What makes you more special than, say, Tony Sanchez in 2002, or Maria Luisa Alvarado in 2006, or Linda Chavez-Thompson in 2010, or Leticia Van de Putte in 2014? Lots of Democratic hopes and dreams have been dashed on the shoals of 'increased Latino voter turnout' for many years now. Even Ruy Teixeira, who co-authored that 2004 book that said it was all but inevitable -- and then offered another promising tea leaf again in 2013, while diversifying his "diversity" message to economic issues -- was, like all Democrats, forced to eat a large serving of crow while sitting in the wreckage of 2014.
Every Democrat in Texas, and maybe the nation, would like to know what the secret is for increasing Latino turnout beyond having a Latino surname. (And nobody wants to hire Marc Campos just to learn if he is full of shit about knowing the secret, or not.)
So precisely what -- or as close to 'precise' as you are comfortable revealing -- are you planning to do in order to make history?
I'm sure I'll have more questions once you declare, but one thing I won't do much of is criticize your decision to hand the sheriff's office back to a Republican, or point out some of the office's shortcomings or deficiencies under your administration. There will be plenty of others who will choose to do that. I'll also not harp on your lack of college degree. I have blogged in the recent past that was a deal-breaker for me, just as it would be if I were a Republican considering a vote for Scott Walker. But I'm going to mute that criticism, even though there are many reasons why conservatives hate college and Democrats value education, as the Texas Lege is demonstrating once again.
In the meantime, I will wait patiently for your responses, to me personally or to the Houston electorate generally. Again, good luck to you with your campaign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)