Political Pussies

So the hardy souls over at the US Senate are going to approve a minimum wage bill with *gasp* tax breaks. Small business tax breaks, BushCo tax breaks and the Democrats think it's a good thing because it will pass. Did anybody bother to see who it is that BushCo calls small business? Not a damn chance, it sounds sooooo nice. Most of BushCo's beneficiaries are rich people running S-Corp tax dodges that have not squat to do with Mom & Pop businesses. Do you really think that 41 Republicans give a fat rat's ass about Mom & Pop? In this life time?

There is such a thing as compromise and there is such a thing as rolling over, giving tax breaks to those who've benefited from the Republican agenda of screw the worker is ROLLING OVER. If you can't pass it clean, make sure everybody knows why. Then run it again. And again. Take a stick and poke it in their eye very publicly and do it over and over. Why pass a "gee George, we don't think we quite like a surge thingy," Resolution? Bring forward a Resolution that says exactly what you're getting paid to say and when the Republicans pull a filibuster, stick it in their eye. You can either show the American Public that you GET IT or you can be pussies.

Americans want us out of Iraq, they don't seem to want to do it any more. Write THAT Bill and when it gets stopped kick the snot out of the stoppers. You've got over 1/2 of Americans that want THAT and you've got 2/3 of Americans that are at least real unhappy, what kind of a mandate do you want? Listen you pussies, you're a 250 pound 6 foot 4 incher in a street fight with a one legged half-wit and you need more on your side? Do you think you need a cannon to swat gnats? You take your play to the public and they'll back you - they're your weight and reach in this fight and what? The press will ignore it? They'll eat it up. Fox will yowl and what could be better than for them to come out swinging for the rich and the hawks? You couldn't ask for better political capital and freeeeeee advertising, namby pamby ninnies.

How about putting a capital D in democratic, or are you happy being the democrat party? You happy letting them define you into a corner again? I know, you're too important to pay any attention to a nail bender from NE OR, that's your loss.

You Proabably Know This,

since you're here you must be some form of political junkie, but I'm going to remind you or rather, I'm going to let Larry Beinhart over at HuffPo do it. Regarding Habeas Corpus:

"Under Habeas Corpus, you have the right to say, I want to be brought into the court to determine if I am the right person charged, if there's an actual law prohibiting what I'm charged with, if the people who are holding me have the jurisdiction to do so, and I want that publicly known and I want the right to dispute all of that and the right to be tried too."

I was going to write my own version, but his is too succinct to mess with. Alberto Gonzalez actually told the Senate Judiciary Committee that the Constitution didn't explicitly "grant" a right to Habeas Corpus only a prohibition against taking it away. I cannot think of a reasoning process that states something does not exist and still has its removal prohibited. Mr Beinhart reasons that the government is trying to set a precedent for ignoring Habeas Corpus so they can just "disappear" people (Padilla ?) or to set up a defense that AG A. Gonzales put forth the opinion and they just acted out of good faith.

I don't think it's that deep, they want to, so it's OK to do it. No, I don't believe the President is surrounded by simpletons, but having an intellect does not mean it is put to good use. Gonzalez is a lawyer, that particular job involves the making of arguments and rebutting the other side. This does not always involve reason or truth, but it does demand at least the appearance of such. The statement made to the Committee does not even make that attempt. What carpenter is going to buy it when I tell him that I'm not allowed to take away the nails he doesn't have? It is on its face stupidity, the kind of stupidity that is uttered by a man with no place to go from where he's stuck.

These people are going to do stupid things because they're stuck. They have no place to go from where they're stuck at. (Jail would be one, but I don't think they're striving for it) The question that we need to fear is just how stupidly they will act. A large percentage of this nation are stressed: a war they don't like, an economy that's not working for them, being an illness away from catastrophe, and a President that doesn't hear them. This really shrinks the wiggle room for BushCo and some more awareness of the closing grip of government intrusion and corporate favoritism may turn it into a vise, that's when stupid can really get going. Watching very carefully is not paranoia.

DPO Elections

Jim Edmunson has decided it's time for someone else to be Chair of DPO, he's had a long run, and can point to great achievements. This Party was in drastic shape when he started out, today Democrats hold control of both Houses, the Governorship, and most other high offices. The DPO is financially secure, urban and rural interests are considered, and infighting is minimal. I have no idea how the man managed to tolerate herding cats for as long as he did, but he's done the job admirably and deserves thanks.

I have no public stand on the race for Chair, the candidates are declaring and I've had no chance to consult with my County on the issue of Chair or male Vice-Chair. I have consulted with the County on Female Vice-Chair, Jill Thorn has my unqualified support. I've worked with Jill on Platform and Resolutions Committee, possibly one of the most controversy engendering Committees, and her management and concensus building skills made it a pleasure and success. She will be an invaluable asset in that position.

We are fortunate in the quality of the candidates, it is hard to see how we can less than well served, whomever wins. It is important to remember what a challenge it is to be the public face of the Party and still manage this bunch without losing your sense of humor, much less your mind.

Lying Liars and the Lies They Tell and ...

I don't have the quote at hand but The Dick (Vice Decider) said that we shouldn't measure past performance when evaluating present allegations regarding Iran's threat to...oh...The World.
No, Dick, we shouldn't measure you against past performance, like a couple days ago telling us about our great achievements in Iraq. We absolutely should pay no attention to the Scooter Trial and your evident obsession with smearing someone who uncovered your BS regarding Iraq nukes - you know, smoking gun nuke cloud over NY and all?

Hey Dick, in my business - of considerable less import than running the US - one lie will finish you. Maybe that's because this is a small town, word gets around and maybe it's because this is the "Heartland" you pukes are all the time going on about. You know, your word's your bond sorta place? You keep bringing up Your God, at your age with a bad ticker don't you lose some sleep about being such a liar and having to stand before Him? Nah, you don't see it, you don't get it, so you just keep on, and keep on being surprised that the public detests you. Oh, and about that bridge you want to sell, fall off it.

Minimum Sense

The House lived up to its promise and passed a nice clean minimum wage bill, raise the minimum wage, period. The Senate put one together, same idea. Well, not gonna happen that way, no siree, not in our Senate. This is the responsible outfit, the six year guys, they know better than to go off half-cocked, you gotta look it over real careful like and make some changes.

Now just exactly who has suffered from the minimum wage being stagnant for over a decade? Who is it that has benefitted from the minimum wage being stagnant for over a decade? There is a case for saying there is membership in these classes. This ought to be a part of the consideration given this matter by the Senate. Workers suffered and business gained. So the Republicans in the Senate will make sure this doesn't move forward unless business gains. Even in labor intensive agriculture, labor is the smallest single component in the cost picture. Labor costs do not become significant until you get to high cost labor which is a completely different scenario than minimum wage labor.

The Republicans want a tax credit for small business. This is laughable on two issues, the government is going broke from tax breaks and the outfits they call small business are anything but the mom and pop concerns they want you folks to think of when they say it. Tell your Senators no. Tell your Representatives no. They'll send this back to the House to reconcile the two bills, the House needs to send the clean one back, that's it, period. If the Republicans want to play stupid games, there is less than year until the Senate election games start up, they can damn well be made responsible for their crap.

You Could Make This Up

If you were to try to write a novel about it, you'd have to look no farther than Kafka's The Trial. The NYT tells about two cases, one in the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals with the ACLU challenging wiretaps outside FISA and the other in Portland, OR a civil case before Federal District Judge Garr King asking for damages for the charity al Haramain Islamic Foundation for wiretapping.

Justice Dept has asked that the Cincinnati case be ruled moot since the Dept is now 'operating' under FISA (oh sure, but we don't get to know how), that hasn't been ruled on yet. The odd part, is how the Justice Dept is operating, they are filing their court papers, in their own building, filing with themselves. The court isn't very happy.

The Oregon case is weirder still. The FBI accidentally sent the charity's lawyers a copy of the wiretap authorization, copies of that then went to several people in the US and some in foreign countries. The case resulted from that document. The FBI demanded the copies back and got them from the US but made no attempt to get back those out of country. The government even "scrubbed" the computer of a lawyer. Somehow a copy was filed with the court by plaintiffs, the FBI went to the judge and demanded it back, he refused, they insisted, it's filed in a Bureau safe room. The plaintiffs are not allowed to use the document in court. In fact, the government took the position that their memories belonged to the government. The Judge finally ruled that the document was out, memories in. One of the government's lawyers refused to disclose to the judge whether he had a certain security clearance saying that was classified, the judge invoked Alice in Wonderland. When Judge King wanted to know who the document was secret from considering how it had gotten around, Justice said, "form anybody who hasn't seen it." I kid you not.

In BushCo-land life is a strange thing, things the Constitution says the government can't take away get taken away because the Constitution didn't say specifically you have them, secrecy is the order of the day unless it's your own privacy that's bothered, no words mean what dictionaries say they mean, only what the Decider says they mean, and the Cheshire Cat is a terrorist. I'd just about bet that if you had an internet pal in Saudi Arabia you could get a copy of this super secret document, the one the lawyers can't look at, but you could never sell a novel based on it, everyone would say the premise is stupid. Life in these United States...

Did You Pass 4th Grade ?

I'm not cherry picking the intelligence (or lack), this was in the Baker City Herald Ed Page. "The Way Forward In Iraq" by James Phillips of The Heritage Foundation. I won't even screw with the quotes to make it seem dumb, I (compared to some important Deciders) will play it straight. He opens thus:

"Critics of the war in Iraq call it a diversion from the broader war against terrorism. But as President Bush emphasized in his 'SOTU' address, this view is 180 degrees off. *** A defeat there would allow al-Queda and other hostile forces to establish a dangerous base in the heart of the Arab world." There are a whole bunch of other words re-stating this premise.

There are essentially 2 forces of nasties in Iraq, al-Queda and assorted Sunni murderers and Shiite militia murderers, the Kurds just want to get on with life and business. Let's deal with nasty Shiites, they want to kill Sunnis and for Americans to get out, otherwise they don't much care about America. The Shiites are the majority ethnic group. The Sunnis used to be the big dogs, now they're not, so they don't like Americans. Then there is al-Queda and its associates, they are Sunni, they hate America and want to hurt us, they are some Iraqis and a lot of foreigners.

Now, do some simple math, the Kurds want to get on with life, they don't want to play the terrorist game and pretty much like America. The Shiites don't like Sunnis who are the minority and especially don't like al-Queda - et al who are a minority of Sunnis. So guess what? al-Queda is not going to win in Iraq no matter what. The Shiites are going to kill them, the Kurds might help with that, depending on how much they screw with their agenda. Iranian Hammas only gains in oppressed Shia communities, that is not going to be Iraq. Iran may be theologically Shia, but Iran is also Persian and you have to be as stupid as BushCo to confuse Persians and Arabs, Iraq is Arab.

BushCo just cannot seem to get the idea that Arabs have long memories. They're still hot about the Crusades, well now since GeorgeII doesn't like to read maybe he's never heard that Persia has been an Empire more than once and was rude to Arabs every time. Last time around was the Ottoman Empire, the Arabs didn't much like that, either. Religion doesn't trump everything with that bunch, Jews should be evidence enough that they're racist bastards to the core, Persians ain't Arabs, Jews are closer to being Arabs.

So if you managed to get out of 4th grade (public school) you can add and subtract and you get - no al-Queda in Iraq if it's left to its own devices. You also don't get Hammas (who have never threatened the US).. You also don't get to own the oil. Neat, ain't it.

This guy Phillips has a bunch of titles and probably gets paid pretty well to write stuff this easy to debunk. But it's not about reaching those who think, it's about repeating the BushCo dogma for the true-believers.

Just so it's clear, the Herald is pretty darn balanced on its Op Ed page.

Have Some Fun Tonight

I've been sick with the flu and then horridly busy and still sick trying to catch work up, so no posts. I fell a little better and wanted some fun.

Libby trial.

How's this for fun. - Libby Trial. Ahahahahahaha!

When there are too many rats, they practice cannibalism - rodent rats that is. Makes you think.

And I Give A Rat's Patoot?

I sit at a keyboard and have my little say, it's opinion, sometimes it's the relation of facts, but nobody asks me to write for WaPo. I'm not real confused about why, my really big political achievements amount to getting a gun rights related resolution passed by DPO and a not real well received run for the OR 02 CD Dem Primary. Now that's not related particularly to my intelligence or political acumen, it's just not a real impressive resume for a national audience.

So why is that the WaPo is carrying Liz Cheny's little screed "Retreat Isn't an Option?" Maybe it's the part where you're impressed by who her father is. Hey, my daddy's an important guy, I got a job with the State Dept, you know I got it because I'm really qualified. I suppose the next thing is we get to hear how Barney feels about Iraq... We now know Liz can parrot Dick. You can find her Bio and see if it contains anything that nepotism didn't confer on her...

Can you think of a good reason to give a rat's patoot what her opinion is? Jeeze, I hope Hillary pays attention to it, I don't like her, either.

Non-SOTU

I got home from work after the thing had started and I tried to watch it. No, really I did try. It didn't work, he didn't pay any attention when I yelled at him and those people kept clapping while I fumed. I kept thinking, 'I've spent perfectly good money for a big screen, HD, and good sound for this??' until finally I lost my mind and went out in the 20F weather and brushed Gus the Pyrennes. He needed it and there was long white hair flying everywhere - I needed it too.

So if you're looking for succinct commentary on George W Bush's State of the Union 2007 speech here it is:

He pissed me off.

there's a surprise

Jan 18, 2006 Sen. Judiciary Committee

GONZALES: Well, sir, the fact that they may have talked about the constitutional right to habeas doesn’t mean that the decision dealt with that constitutional right to habeas.

SPECTER: When did you last read the case?

GONZALES: It has been a while, but I’ll be happy to — I will go back and look at it.

SPECTER: I looked at it yesterday and this morning again.

GONZALES: I will go back and look at it. The fact that the Constitution — again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away. But it’s never been the case, and I’m not a Supreme —

SPECTER: Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. The constitution says you can’t take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?

GONZALES: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn’t say, “Every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to habeas.” It doesn’t say that. It simply says the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended except by —

Is there something I can add?

Tired Of A Name ?

I've made it pretty clear the I'd have preferred Hillary Clinton to have remained a NY Senator, period. They have their ideas and they seem to like her, since they elected her, but that's it, they like her. Well, NY and the Corporate Media minus Faux like her and even Faux has been going on forever about how she's a lock. She sure does have two things, money and name recognition. How about a voting record Democrats would like? I don't even mean the "looney left" like me, I mean Democrats.

I'll start off with the derailed locomotive of politics, Iraq, some folks have admitted to making a mistake there, some folks never made a mistake there, and Hillary? Try tracking the national polls on the subject and setting those beside her stands right afterward. I can barely get along with the idea that intelligent well-informed people went for the lies, shortly thereafter the lies became transparent, not Hillary.

Civil liberties rank a touch higher in my considerations, not because I minimize death and destruction, but because you'll play holy hell getting them back once the government has gotten hold of them, but I'm playing this card second. Check Mrs Clinton's votes in this regard. Not so hot. Then toss in her public statements regarding gun control, she'd like very much to stomp a mud hole in that particular civil liberty. For those of you enamoured of that stance, I'll just point out to you, once again, that BushCo's arguments and yours are identical and that should inform your philosophy. (if you feel insulted, ask yourself why)

Regarding guns and elections, Kerry would have won with a decent chunk of the middle politics gun owners. He didn't get it, Hillary won't either.

This is the lady who took such a beating over health care, but take a look at her stances regarding corporate advantages. Let's just take a look at her stance on illegal immigration amnesty and just how interested she is in holding employers to the law regarding hiring, can you get any deeper in the corporate pocket? Fine, lose the rest of the picture, but who do you think has been making money hand over fist off the backs of the serfs? She and her allies aren't trying to be nice to the poor oppressed brown people, they're playing to their corporate sponsors, if you get sucked along for the ride, that's wonderful for them.

On the topic of the health care debacle, she didn't get her head handed to her for working on health care so much as she got whacked for doing it in secret. There's a road I want to go down again. The loon right has its opinions on the matter, but the wide spread push back was over the secrecy. You are conveniently supposed to forget this stuff.

If you're on this page the chances that you're a fan of the DLC are pretty small. She's their darling. If you're wondering a little about that comment, consider where the dust up with DNC and DLC started and think a little about why it started. Hmmm, who is the corporate wing of Democratic politics? Just to pile on DLC a little harder, they try to take credit for the '06 election results, but a close check of election results makes that claim entirely specious.

I've run for office, it's a really trying exercise. There are a lot of aspects to it that aren't much of any fun at all, you have to do them, but nobody in their right mind would like it. Getting out and meeting people and having your say are actually the fun though defending yourself from preconceived notions and false claims are aggravating. The point is that this is a lot of hard difficult work and requires a real drive to win at it, so what's at the bottom of that drive? Is it to take a real good shot at improving your fellow citizens' lives or is just the ego thing about power? If playing in that league involves a policy agenda then you're going to have to push hard for it, no matter what you try, it is going to get watered down and compromised in some form before it gets through. If you start out the process most of the way over to the "other guy's side" that diluting process is still going to happen, triangulation is nonsense, that's what happens by the time it's done, not where you start. Hillary is proud of her triangulation, she should be ashamed of it.

If you're wondering who is a good model for triangulation, look no farther than GWB circa 2000. He worked that really hard, remember "compassionate conservative" and "uniter" as mantras? What we've found is that the citizenry can go screw itself, power and plutocracy are the name of his game. People noted that GeorgeII had good Conservative credentials and a good record of working with TX Dems, and Hillary seems to be getting the play of good liberal credentials and working with R's. BushCo wasn't Conservative, he was a small "c" theocrat and big "C" corporatist and in the end, a power junkie. What exactly are Hillary's liberal credentials? They don't exist as a record, they exist as an image.

As a hard working DPO I'll make myself clear, if she wins this Primary I might vote for her, depending on what kind of idiot the RNC runs, but I won't knock on a single door, pick up the telephone, or cough up $0.02 for her. I'll work my butt off for OR candidates, but that piece of political work can go hang. If you're wondering, I'm DPO and I wouldn't work against her in a General Election. Oh; about the name, that's a stupid reason to vote for or not, almost as meaningful as her gender.

Know Anybody Like This?

I don't write like this:

Sociopathy is chiefly characterized by something wrong with the person's conscience. They either don't have one, it's full of holes like Swiss cheese, or they are somehow able to completely neutralize or negate any sense of conscience or future time perspective. Sociopaths only care about fulfilling their own needs and desires - selfishness and egocentricity to the extreme. (...)Everything and everybody else is mentally twisted around in their minds as objects to be used in fulfilling their own needs and desires. They often believe they are doing something good for society, or at least nothing that bad. The term "sociopath" is frequently used by psychologists and sociologists alike in referring to persons whose unsocialized character is due primarily to parental failures (usually fatherlessness) rather than an inherent feature of temperament. As Stout (2005) indicates, it only takes three of the following to be defined as a sociopath, and some common sociopathic traits include:

List of Common Sociopathic Traits
Egocentricity; Callousness; Impulsivity; Conscience defect; Exaggerated sexuality; Excessive boasting; Risk taking; Inability to resist temptation; Antagonistic, deprecating attitude toward the opposite sex; Lack of interest in bonding with a mate

Oh there's more

I'm not going to say a thing.

Here's Your Sign...

OK, that's a redneck comedy line, here's your prize #2,000, public recognition. Oh, it's not much, but it's surely the least I could do...

***********************************Ta Daaa******************************************
74.36.243
You are #2000 and you're from the great city and state of.......Somewhere in the Central Time Zone - Unknown?
You accomplished this feat at 3:43 PM PST, 5:43 your time and you got to us courtesy of us.f.590.mail....... and left us via my profile. More Cigarette Taxes caught your interest, I'm sure Oregonian cigarette prices are relevant on the other side of the Rockies somewhere. You really didn't leave much of a trail and I'm just shuckin' ya. Next time I hope something a bit more interesting catches you. Thanks for stopping by,
Chuck for ...


I know...but it's Sunday, I'm sick - flu - and I'm bored

Chavez - A Bit Odd

Hugo Chavez has asked the Venezuelan legislature for some powers that State Dept spokesman Tom Casey described as, "a bit odd in terms of a democratic system." These include removal of the 2 term Presidential limit and allowing him to rule by decree for 18 months. He didn't seem to think much of the criticism, the US should, "go to hell," and Condi is "my little girl." I'm surprised, though, that Hugo and BushCo aren't bosom buddies and downright astonished at the "odd" comment by the State Dept. After all, BushCo has ruled by decree for 6 years - see signing statements - and hasn't bothered to ask the legislature to let him violate the Constitution with laws, in some cases, and in others has gotten blatantly un-Constitutional laws passed. Maybe it's a money thing, who has it and who is losing it, that's probably it.

The bone of contention between these two isn't a philosophy of government or the importance of having enemies and stirring up fear and loathing in the public, it's all about money. Oil Money. Just think, all this ideological furor is just about money. Oil Money. You'd think there was some big connection with our government. I think maybe I'm too left to have any use for either of them.

Racist or Something 24

I've never watched this show. I've never watched it because I don't care to have Fox trying to scare me with fiction when I've got all this reality going on. Reality that's almost completely divorced from this show's premise.

CNN has an article up from AP about a Muslim organization, Council on American-Islamic Relations, that is quite upset with Fox and 24 for their depiction of terrorists who, this time, happen to be Muslims. I won't bother you with the show's disclaimers about using other groups, this is a thriller show with various villainous groups trying to do, I gather, very bad things to Americans. Oddly enough, the complaint isn't that the show is sensationalist crap built on tragedy and horror for the benefit of profiteering war mongers, no, the problem is that the villains are identifiable. Keeeerrriiiiipes....

No, I'm real far from being a PC sort of guy in this kind of thing, I value people by their behavior - first their actions and then their speech - so trying to get my knickers in a wad because the villains in a piece of fiction happen to belong to a group pretty similar to ones actually dedicated to harming the US is plain stupid. Fiction about gangs tends to have Hispanics followed by Blacks as the gang members, prison fiction tends to have large minority representation, oddly enough reflective of demographics. It is pointless to turn around and tell me how peaceful a religion Islam is, there are Hispanic and Black surgeons also, so what?

If these CAIR folks are serious about this, rather than fund raising, they should be actively kicking BushCo's butt. This fear and paranoia is a direct outcome of those people. OK, Fox is a piece of work for trying to capitalize on it, but what exactly were Hill Street Blues, Homicide, et al all about? I didn't notice that the influential movie Mississippi Burning had Black KKK'ers, seemed to be a bunch of white guys. Hey, anybody notice that the Democratic Party of Oregon has a Gun Owners Caucus despite the knuckle dragging GOP'ers image of firearm owners by some "liberals." You know what, there are knuckle dragging GOP gunowners and they're fair game.

Here's the point, if you belong to a group that has some bad actors it's pretty disingenuous to act as though having them portrayed as bad actors is bigoted. If you're afraid to go to the store, it's about something a heck of a lot more insidious than a TV show, like a government based on hate and fear.

Another Milestone?

The sitemeter went on at the end of August 2006, by December 12, 2006 it recorded the 1,000th hit. Some time Sunday January 21, 2007 it will hit 2,000. The sitemeter claims a daily average of 37 hits, I generally look - I like to know where you folks are coming in from and what you seem to care about. I'll address those things, though I write about what I care about. The main blog is hit most often, but so my lefty readers know, the second most hit is from word search for "stagecoach shotgun," and third is - for some odd reason - "fancy words." I addressed the poor pictures and light writing regarding stagecoach shotgun, but I have not a clue what "fancy words" is all about. I did a Google, there's not much, a couple writing style pages and me. I'm pretty darn sure my article isn't what they're looking for, so? And worst, this one's really international, I'm disappointing people from all over the world.

Maybe I should give a prize to 2,000, I don't know. Sitemeter is an odd affair anyhow, I know it doesn't register hits that came from a server with the site cached and there seem to be some other ways in that don't register. Makes little difference, what it says to me is that some people get enough out of what I write to stop back in, that's gratifying. I'll be honest, the stuff that takes you two minutes to read took a lot longer to put together, I'll look up at a clock and realize that a few paragraphs have eaten an hour, not all writing, checking source materials, re-reads for stupid constructions (yes, I miss them sometimes), and finally to determine that I actually meant what I wrote, sometimes an article is just a total loss and goes away. There are a few that I've read again after a couple weeks that should've gone and didn't - oh well - you get this free.

I don't get puffed up, there are plenty of sites that do thousands per day, there are plenty with better writing, and there are plenty that are better sourced. I'm ranked 649,000th or something like that in links, so I'm not changing the face of the "blogosphere" or even registering on it. But, you know what, this is fun for me. I get to practice at something I like for a live audience that can't throw rotten veggies at me. I don't know that I've ever persuaded anybody, but maybe I've provided a little jog to their thinking or at least some amusement for a few minutes. I get to have a say about things, I get to publicly push back without having to stand on a box in the park, and jeez, somebody pays attention. No, 2000 isn't a big meaningful deal, but it does give me a chance to thank you folks for the validation of showing up. THANKS

Remington Stagecoach Shotgun, Hammered Side by Side

Due to the large interest demonstrated by the site meter I decided to put up something a bit more detailed about a "coach gun" with better pictures. This is a Remington Rockledge Model SPR220H. It is the top model in all walnut stock hammered sided by side in blued steel with screw in chokes. It uses 2 3/4 inch 12 gauge shells, has a top sliding safety and breaks down. Left click pictures for full size.

This is a Russian built - IMZ&P - short light double barrel shotgun and it kicks like a mule. I am of medium build and it fits well and comes to point quickly with enough stock rise for my somewhat long neck. The fit and finish are excellent, moving parts are smooth and their action is crisp. There is no take up or sloppiness in the triggers. The sliding safety sets to safe automatically when the gun is broken open and closed. The stock's walnut figuring is nice, checking is sharp and clean. Assembly from broken down is simple, the barrels/receiver to stock fit is quite tight but straight forward, the fore end has a lever lock attachment which allows the fore end to block the barrel into the stock.

The hammers are the cocking mechanism, they strike external firing pins. Decocking is accomplished by breaking open the shotgun, moving the safety to fire position, and releasing the hammer with the trigger while holding the hammer with your thumb. Closing the shotgun sets the safety to safe, each hammer must be cocked to fire its barrel and each barrel has a separate trigger, front is right, rear is left. The instructions clearly state, one finger-one trigger, fingering both triggers risks double fire. The screw in chokes come in full, improved modified, modified, improved cylinder, and cylinder and are available in both lead and steel shot chokes. The gun should never be fired without a choke tube installed. The choke tubes walls are quite thin and care must be used in handling them.

The shooting season ended before I had a chance to do much shooting with it but I am impressed. Delivered this model runs about $500, it is available in a number of configurations of varying prices.

For more see Cowboy Action Setup
Bisley Vaquero

More Cigarette Tax

This would be a great time to tell you what a great idea additional tax on cigarettes for children's health care is ... not. Health care for children is a great idea, over due, as is some form of universal health care. Not just great ideas, wonderfully, stupendously, awesomely great ideas. Paying for them with additional cigarette taxes is errant nonsense. These are Oregonian's children, not cigarette smokers' children. On a pack of Camel straights @ $5.00 the tax is 24% of the cost, that's not the tax rate which is 31% and that is on top of the federal taxes. I mention Camel straights because I smoke 1/2 pack/day of them.

I make no claim that cigarettes aren't bad for your health, they absolutely are. There are some real basic problems with some of the claims, but that's small change. It cannot be shown that those costs are not recovered over time, there certainly are some issues about aging vs not that get lost. Even that is not the point. The point is that cigarette smoking has not squat to do with child health care. Yes, you can impose that tax by vote on a minority that hasn't enough votes to challenge it, because you can do something does not make it right or reasonable. It might not bother anybody that most smokers make less than the median income, but it sure seems an odd way to be progressive.

People make "fairness" claims about the social and health costs posed by cigarette smokers, as though voluntary choices like that only include smoking. Maybe those advocates would be well paid to take a look at the consumption of alcohol when they bring up those kinds of costs. It does pose a bit of a problem for the cigarette agenda, smoking pales in comparison. The single greatest hit in those costs is ... alcohol. Yes, there's an elephant in the living room and nobody notices. As far as personal health goes try on liver damage, brain cell death, nerve damage, esophagus and stomach damage, lowered immune system, circulatory damage, and pregnancy issues, then move onto mental health issues, including verbal and emotional components, neglect, irresponsible behaviors . From there add in car crashes, falls, assaults, lost work days. Then go take a look at the prison system and find how many crimes were committed under the influence. This stuff is advertised on TV and in magazines and its use is glorified, yes, in front of children. What works for alcohol is much better lobbying and advertising and a much larger constituency.

*Further disclosure* I don't drink, I haven't for almost 19 years, I do know something about it.

Do I want to duck responsibility for my smoking habit? No. I've smoked for over 35 years, though, and I'm healthier than the majority of the population and you'd better be in outstanding condition if you want to keep up with me. Since I can't afford to retire you don't need to worry about taking care of me in old age, besides I like my work.

If we're going to take on progressive ideas and institute policies on those ideas, let's do that exactly, do progressive things in a progressive manner. I'm sorry Gov. K. this idea sucks, but I voted for you and still would.

Blue Oregon is having a nice argument and they even have a poll. I don't like the idea over there either.

Ideological Purity

David Sirota writes in the San Francisco Chronicle that there is a real problem with people in power not owning what they said about the Iraq War, this is certainly true. He holds John Edwards up as an example of how it should be done - I made a mistake and I regret it. He goes on to note that there definitely is a massive case of CYA going on. This is where it gets sticky, why is this going on?

We all know why the President of the US would state that he never said, "Stay the course." It's politically stupid to do it, but he does have the semantic dodge of what course he was talking about, Nostradamus works well in that respect. There is however the matter of pundits and other pols who beat the warm drum enthusiastically. It is now a generally unpopular stand to take and those who take it publicly will be held to account for that stance. There is such a thing as Conservatism that isn't about god, gays, and guns; I don't subscribe to the philosophy but one of its tenets is military adventures aren't to be done. That used to be a Republican deal, but ideological purity requirements of the past decade silenced that. The political price to be paid for opposing the Iraq adventure on philosophical grounds outweighed principle. You weren't pure in the Bush ideology.

The responsibility for this falls on Parties and voters. Politicians can count. If philosophy loses to Party line the fault is not solely the Party's. This notion of ideological purity driving political discourse is harmful to Parties and to national policy and Republicans are not the only guilty party. There are, of course, issues that in voter's mind's trump ideology. Joe Lieberman is an example, his stance on Iraq cost him the Democratic Primary despite the rest of his political stances. There does, however, remain a blindness to policy and reasoning due to ideology. I will make a personal argument in this arena, I am intimately familiar with it and thus competent. During the Democratic Primary for OR 02 CD I set up policy statements and my reasoning for them, The Oregonian took those and attributed "the most conservative" of the candidates to me. As far as I can tell, there were 3 policies that contributed to that, strong support of the 2nd Amendment, opposition to illegal hiring/illegal immigration, and a stance that one size fits all environmental regulations is doomed. Now I'd be real surprised to find that conservatives exactly agree with my rationales for those stands, they are in fact based on hard left politics. Anybody that hasn't gotten the idea that I regard the 2nd as the final block against people like BushCo hasn't paid attention - and yes, I regard that bunch as exactly that dangerous. Sounds left to me. Illegal hiring crushes labor - I oppose fervently any actions to debase labor, and I don't mean just organized labor and in the 1920's that would've gotten me arrested. I'll fight the establishment of, enhancement of, and enabling of a plutocracy in this country tooth and nail and serfs are a part of that. That's damn left. Environmental policies that are created with the one size fits all philosophy are doomed, public backlash will occur and the very people you need to be partners become enemies. I want success in that arena, long term meaningful success. Left again. That is not the measure that was taken of me as a candidate. I failed the ideological purity test on the surface. Drivng drag cars fails completely.

Reasoning and motive become buried under simplistic labels, the fact that racist xenophobic nutcases oppose illegal immigration has nothing to do with the matter as far as the health and well being of labor is concerned. It certainly is not progressive politics to oppose something on the basis of race, neither is it progressive to participate in the oppression of labor. Pay attention. The fact that the NRA seems to have fallen in bed with some of the worst aspects of the Republican Party has exactly not one thing to do with owning firearms. The fact that Sen Chuck Schumer (D) sees a difference between interfering with the 2nd and interfering with the 1st does not make it progressive to do so, it is in fact absolutely oppressive to restrict liberty. It is not reasoning to ignore contradictions in the name of ideology, it is the pursuit of ideological purity that you've been told exists.

Do the Hillary Clintons pass ideological muster? Certainly on name alone, debate ceases if the surname and (D) becomes all important. The question really should fall on the balance of policy statements, their reasoning and their motives. The timing of her opposition (post mid-term) to Iraq is suspect in my eyes, her stances on gun control have shown no reasoning in light of the Constitution, in point of fact I find her very nearly the most poll driven pol I've seen. I cannot find a single iota of respect for labor in any of her stances beyond the minimum wage and that has yet to play out. Do I find Hillary's ideological purity in question? Not really, I have no idea what her ideology is by definition of action. I don't care if it doesn't look ideologically pure, I care about the outcomes and the reasons for them. Ideological purity is all about appearances and those who'll pass its muster should be deeply suspect. If you've 'stuck your foot in it' apologize for it, state why you were wrong then and why you're right now, people will take the measure of that and make an informed decision. If you're right, stand up for it, the heck with how pure it looks.