I'm So Tired of The "I Can Shout!" Version of Political Discourse

I originally wrote this on a discussion board in response to specific claims. Then I realized that, even without changing the specific claims, it actually can fit with so many other similar discussions.

I want an end to the tactics of Karl Rove. I want to hear a political discussion where some research is evident. Where no one is called names, where no one repeats a stretch of an assumption ten times to make you think it must be true.

I want accountability. I want facts. I want something measurable, said by someone unafraid of the idea that if they put something out there that can be measured or tested they might end up being embarrassed because a mistake was found.

I'm getting so tired of the way certain people on these boards, when confronted, retreat into opinionated statements of doom and despair that have no component that can be discussed in a concrete manner.

Please provide evidence that there is a dictatorship or tyranny being planned. Please reference the definitions of dictatorship and tyrant while doing so. Please show examples of elected officials in this country who are legally entitled to hold their position "until death."

Please show evidence that the "far left" is a homogeneous group and that it is funded by a certain individual. In particular, expand upon claims that politically-motivated organizations with large memberships are the tools of a shadowy demagogue rather than the voice of a segment of the population.

Please be specific about which propaganda, please define socialism and compare and contrast it with the ideals in these publications and then please tell me how ANY political belief that is pursued through the current political system can actually be un-American when it is clear that public debate from all sides was considered to be an asset by the Founding Fathers.

Please define "myriad forms of welfare." Please discuss how certainty that medicare and medicaid will bankrupt the country fits with opposition to the establishment of a national healthcare system that would eliminate them. At the same time, please show why eliminating the significant cost to business that is currently imposed by supplying health insurance would be a negative upon the health of those companies... since I can't think of a single small to medium business owner I know who would not immediately point to health care and workers comp as their two biggest costs associated with employees other than actual wages.

Please provide examples of failed policies and programs that would indicate that this President is ineffectual rather than effective in a manner that disagrees with your personal goals.

Please provide examples of international failures and losses of territory and influence that would show that the global status of the United States has been weakened in the last six months.

And finally, please provide evidence that any and all of these individuals you scream against "hate America" rather than that they have certain beliefs that do not align flawlessly with your own.

I want stuff that can be proven or disproven. I want something besides the opinions. I want to see if you can actually quit screaming long enough to have rational discourse.

Forgive me if I don't believe that any of that will happen.

Anticipating A Decision In California

At approximately 1 pm eastern, the California Supreme Court opinion/decision on the most recent skirmish in the battle for California equality will be published. The decision will be focused on the legality of the marriages performed prior to the passing of Proposition 8.

Personally, I expect a decision that will satisfy no one. I expect them to uphold the legally-performed marriages in the interval between the striking down of the previous stricture limiting marriage to a man and a woman (which was not a constitutional amendment) and an opinion that because Prop 8 was a constitutional amendment, it has to stand.

I disagree with that last part. In my opinion, Prop 8 was only a constitutional revision. As such, it can be found to be incompatible with the actual document and rejected under the same grounds as the original court case that caused the drafting of Prop 8 in the first place.

Prop 8 does two things that, in my opinion, violate the constitution. One, it creates a separate standard of legal judgment for people of homosexual orientation, thereby deriving them of inalienable rights that are guaranteed in Section 1 Article 1 and making Prop 8 incompatible with the original document. Two, it violates Section 1 Article 4.

Free exercise and enjoyment of religion without
discrimination or preference are guaranteed. This liberty of
conscience does not excuse acts that are licentious or inconsistent
with the peace or safety of the State. The Legislature shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion.

I believe that the existence of Prop 8 is inconsistent with the the peace and safety of the state. I further believe that Prop 8 prevents the free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference. What is more, I consider the denial of rights of a significant minority of the population based on religious beliefs to be licentious and therefore not protectable under the basis of freedom of religion.

I don't believe the Supreme Court will have the guts to completely overturn Prop 8, although I do believe that they will certify the marriages that took place prior to its passage. However, I also believe that they have reason to overturn it completely, reason that they themselves expressed in their prior opinion and that remain consistent with both the law and the Constitution.

I sincerely hope that the Supreme Court of California follows the path ofprotection of the rights of all of its citizens instead of following the opinion and preferences of a small and shrinking majority of its citizens.

Strike down Prop. 8.

Universal Health Care & Cops On San Diego Streets

With the ending of last falls election, some of the political steam left my blogging. Because rebellion against the establishment is fun to write but expounding on the pratfalls of Republicans and expanding on my admiration of Barack Obama went from supporting my candidate to feeling like I was gloating.

I don't like to boast and I certainly have never belonged to that group who likes to beat their chest and proclaim their victory. Oh, I celebrate. But I don't like to be perceived as rubbing it in.

But I am returning to these fields of endeavor. There is stuff going on.

One of the things that got Barack elected is his commitment to revamping health care in this country. Over the last few years, I have become an advocate for ending our current broken system altogether and putting the federal government in the role the insurance companies are now in. I feel health care should be up there with police and fire services, roads,infrastructure, education and national defense as the things that a modern society provides for all its citizens. This gets me labeled a socialist, or at least a believer in socialized medicine. But my argument has always been that taking basic health coverage out of the hands of the private sector would be a boon to businesses large and small . And a situation occurring in my hometown illustrates why, and also speaks to the very important issue of public safety.

San Diego is recovering from bankruptcy. Among the actions they have been forced to take is dramatic restructuring of retirement benefits for Police Officers and Firefighters. Those changes go into effect on July 1st, and affect not only new hires but employees who have been there for forty years.

Because of it, San Diego expects to lose up to 100 of its most experienced police officers and an unknown amount of fire crew in the next six weeks as they take retirement anywhere from two to five years before they planned on it.

See, under the new plan, health benefits for retirees are capped at just under $9,000.00 a year. As opposed to the full coverage they currently receive. And if any of you have actually seen what a hospital stay costs in this country, you know that this is the equivalent of paying 10 cents on the dollar.

I understand why the City of San Diego had to restructure. For that matter, so do most of the officers and firefighters. They aren't quitting in a self-righteous huff. They are reluctantly leaving departments they love and can still actively contribute to based on an inescapable financial reality.

In a nation with universal health care, this would be a non-issue. And 100 of the best of San Diego's Finest could continue to protect my children and share their experience with younger officers for a few more invaluable years. I'm sorry, but I firmly believe that some things you can't learn off a computer or out of a book.

So tell me, architects of John McCain's "5K Health Benefit." What good does a 5000 dollar tax break do for these people? Tell me, opponents of UHC, how private insurance is doing a better job in this case. Tell me why UHC would not be a good thing in this case.

And then, sorry to be harsh, tell it to the mother who wants to know why the people who shot her son while he was standing outside a party are still at large.

Or how about you look at today's headlines out of Southern California and last Octobers... and then make an argument to me about why you feel it is a good thing for some of the most experienced leaders and Chiefs in San Diego's Fire Department to take early retirement? We need that experience available come fire season.

The lack of a comprehensive health care system in this country is a threat to our economy and to our very safety. Nearly every other advanced society on this planet provides health care to all its citizens without placing that burden on the employers and without leaving millions of freelance employees, private contractors, self-employed or the unfortunate unemployed and their families in the predicament of choosing between dental care and new clothes, food or even the rent.

Tell your congressman. Tell your Senator. It is far past the time we caught up with the rest of the world on this.

#AmazonFail and Occam's Razor

Over this Easter weekend, something went wrong for electronic mega-marketer Amazon. That much is undeniable. What exactly went wrong? That is not so simple to determine.

The problem: Somehow, in an escalation of a policy implementation that has existed in some form since at least February, hundreds if not thousands of books with erotic and GLBT content were excluded from Amazon's rankings and thus from many of their search functions.

The exclusions were remarkably targeted. For example, The Parents Guide To Preventing Homosexuality was not removed. Heather Has Two Mommies was.

Theories over how this happened abound. Amazon, after being confronted with a huge outpouring of protest, especially on Twitter, says it was a glitch. At least one person on LiveJournal has posited that it was a deliberate attack by a Focus On The Family-type organization. Because of how specific the targets were, many are convinced it is deliberate discrimination from someone highly placed in the online retailer. Some believe that it was simply another example of a corporation being stupid.

By applying the most basic form of the principle generically known as Occam's Razor (All things being equal, the simplest theorem is most often correct), I would bet on the last being correct. And yes, I am aware that the Razor is actually far more complicated than this and that this is a pop culture application, not a scientific one.

Think no one could be that stupid? Please. New Coke. Hilary Clinton landing in Bosnia under sniper fire. John McCain choosing Sarah Palin.

The really interesting thing here is the reaction and the power of the internet. Amazon is going to be reeling under this for days if not months. Especially because other entities are smart enough to be jumping at opportunities. Phaze Books is running a protest 25% off sale. Twitterers are telling people to get a checklist of de-listed books and go buy them...from All Romance eBooks or Barnes & Noble or Borders.

One thing I am sure of is that the glitch explanation, by itself, does not wash. This was not an accident. That it may have been the exploitation of a found "glitch" by a small group of people, inside Amazon or out, with an agenda? That is most certainly reasonable.

But if Amazon is this vulnerable in their basic business practices, that doesn't make me feel very confident about the information security of my address, direct deposit info or, worst of all, my credit card info.

If you want to view the outrage, the information and some of the very funny opportunistic humor that lies at the base of this controversy, search Twitter under #amazonfail or, even better, under #glitchmyass. A good analysis of one of the possible causes is at Dear Author and you can find some interesting discussion at CNET.

A Bit of Anti-CPSIA Silliness

If they can pass a silly law I can write a silly poem. Not claiming that it's good, just silly.

The little boy
From down the street
was looking very glum
he sat on the curb
his eyes downcast
not having any fun
I queried him
and he replied
"Oh sir, the world is sad
all the grownups are so mean
and the kids almost as bad"
So I ran home
and got Shel Silverstein
To make him smile again
with tales of Dirty Dan
and Where Sidewalks End
I knew he'd smile then
I put the book
into his hands
and smile yes he did
as sirens blared
and the police jumped out
from the bushes where they'd hid
they cuffed me then
and glared at me
and pushed me to the ground
the lead detective opened
up the book and groaned
and fixed me with a frown
"1974's the date
you very vicious wretch
how dare you give
a boy a book
the cancer then to catch?"
They snatched me up
took me away
but could not foil my plan
for as the cops
took me to jail
the boy laughed at Dirty Dan.

Another Case of Extremes in Idiocy: CPSIA

Neil Gaiman alerted me to something via Twitter. It's not something I had heard about before and is indicative of the reason that we need to have the occasional common sense veto on our lawmakers.

When the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 was passed last year, in the wake of the lead paint panic, it seemed wise. But a poorly written law often can do far more damage than good.

Now, I only discovered this myself within the last couple hours. But as much as it sounds like an Urban Legend, it does not seem to be so.

In trying to address a legitimate problem, our government has passed a law that is nothing short of stupid. The part that first caught my attention was about children's books published pre-1985. These are now considered so hazardous as to be outlawed for sale or even being stocked in libraries? Excuse me? Look, my copy of Where The Wild Things Are is not going to give my kid lead poisoning. Apple seeds are poisonous too. In sufficient quantities.

Another affected area? Bicycles. After all, I see kids eating bicycle frames for lunch every freaking day. They might be poisoned. We must address this atrocity! If my kid gets a bicycle frame in his mouth somehow, I am more worried about the fall he just took and his teeth. Not about possible lead poisoning from the metal. (Note that they are talking about the structural frame, not the paint on the frame.)

C'mon. We can not afford to allow this kind of stupidity to go unchecked. If you don't tell stupid people they are stupid, they think they are not doing anything wrong.

More information here:
http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon0212wo.html
http://overlawyered.com/2009/02/cpsia-what-will-be-enforced
http://designloft.blogspot.com/2009/02/cpsia-by-numbers-why-libraries-cant.html

and directly from the source:

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml09/09120.html

Spread the word and let's see if we can't get someone of intelligence in Washington to notice this travesty!

Edit: Adding a good link about how to handle calling your Congressional Representative.
http://www.whimsicalwalney.com/wp/?p=156

Further edit: I checked out the usually-reliable Snopes and their article is aimed at clothing resale and gives a blanket false report, not addressing the book issue. Please do not be fooled by this. The stay on the law still exempts children's books printed before 1985.

A Review From The Wenches

BD Whitney over at Book Wenches reviewed the eXessica release Focus, which includes a short story/poem by yours truly. And she even liked it. Imagine that.

Dancing Wildly by Will Belegon:

After suffering the frustration of a long-distance relationship and six months of the delays that life can bring, a young man reunites with his girlfriend. Although he is initially uncertain of the reception he will receive from her, it soon becomes plain that their connection is as strong as ever.

The author of this short story has combined a poem with narrative to tell a tale of young love and joy. Although I am not a fan of poetry overall, this one is very well executed, and its use in this story is very effective in evoking an emotional reaction.

As a poet of emotion, who is less interested in being technically impressive than in eliciting a reaction, I am very pleased by the last line. Poem reviews are hard to come by. And when you do get them from someone not related to you, they are usually from other poets. I like discussing the details of word choice, etc. I do, really, I promise. But it is not why I write poetry. So I am especially happy to have this.

BD liked the entire book and gave a nice mention to my beloved for her short story Knead. BD, if I might be so bold, I think you show exceptional taste.

I'm biased, of course.