https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

The slippery nature of objective reality

Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans (and surrounding Louisiana) in 2005.

George W. Bush was President of the United States between 2001 to 2009.

Barack Obama assumed office in January of 2009.

No, really, you can look up those dates on the Internet. Or even in books.

2005 is literally in the middle of 2001 and 2009.

And, yet, a Public Policy Polling survey in 2013 (yeah, it's bouncing around the Internet right now, but it was in 2013) …

'PPP surveyed 721 Louisiana voters, including an oversample of 274 usual Republican primary voters, between August 16-19, 2013. The margin of error for the overall survey was +/- 3.7% and +/- 5.9% for the GOP portion. This poll was not authorized or paid for by any campaign or political organization. PPP’s surveys are conducted through automated telephone interviews.'

… found that, overall, when asked "Who do you think was more responsible for the poor response to Hurricane Katrina: George W.
Bush or Barack Obama?" the surveyed good people of Louisiana responded:

28% George W Bush
29% Barack Obama
44% Not Sure

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_LA_821.pdf

Breaking those numbers down, only when you get to "Moderate" voters do you get more "Not Sure" than (correctly) George Bush. By the time you drift to the "Very Conservative" column, the responses are:

17% George W Bush
36% Barack Obama
47% Not Sure

People sometimes wonder "How is it that people will vote against their interests for some schmuck who does't give a rat's patootie about their well-being?" The answer seems obvious: serious cognitive distortion. I mean, even if you think the Bush Administration response to Katrina wasn't, in fact, "poor," at most that should bump up the "Not Sure" answer. That over a third of very conservative Louisianans believe that Time Traveling Fake President Barack Obama invaded the White House four years early and messed up the FEMA response to Katrina …

… simply indicates a desperate, desperate disconnect with reality by a substantial portion of the American public. God help us all.

 

View on Google+

Birtherism Reborn

Yeah, is it really a shocker that Joe Arpaio and his "Posse" have come up with so much "probable cause" to think that the birth certificate is a fraud?

I haven't watched all the "evidence" videos yet (some of us have to work for a living), but I don't expect I'll be swayed. #ddtb

Embedded Link

Sheriff Joe: ‘Probable cause’ Obama certificate a fraud
A Free Press For A Free People Since 1997

Google+: Reshared 1 times

Picture imperfect

So as about everyone has heard by now (I’ve been a wee remiss in getting my blog updated), the AP is going after Shepard Fairey for his omnipresent Obama…

So as about everyone has heard by now (I’ve been a wee remiss in getting my blog updated), the AP is going after Shepard Fairey for his omnipresent Obama poster image, which was based on an AP photo shot by Manny Garcia in 2006.

The AP says it owns the copyright, and wants credit and compensation. Fairey disagrees.

“The Associated Press has determined that the photograph used in the poster is an AP photo and that its use required permission,” the AP’s director of media relations, Paul Colford, said in a statement.

“AP safeguards its assets and looks at these events on a case-by-case basis. We have reached out to Mr. Fairey’s attorney and are in discussions. We hope for an amicable solution.”

 

The use of photo images — especially ones taken as part of factual news gathering, as opposed to posed photos — as the basis for art has long been covered by Fair Use. The artwork has not economically harmed AP, it hasn’t made anyone think that AP was being represented by Fairey (or Obama) — and, in fact, the artwork is a derivative work, no more a copyright infringement than, say, Andy Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup can.

Or so I (who am not an intellectual property lawyer) think.

What’s particularly irksome is that AP has known about this for several months — Fairey’s never hidden that he found the AP picture via Google and used it as the basis for his work — and now, after the election, AP’s come gunning for some “compensation.”

Some people are not so sanguine about Fairey and his story, but this strikes me simply as opportunistic and yet another case of “big media” wanting to flex its muscles for a few smackers (in this case with some unpleasant political overtones).

 

New patch!

US Democracy Server: Patch Day Version 44.0    President  Leadership: Will now scale properly to national crises. Intelligence was not being properly applied. A bug has been fixed that allowed…

US Democracy Server: Patch Day Version 44.0 

 

President 

  • Leadership: Will now scale properly to national crises. Intelligence was not being properly applied.
  • A bug has been fixed that allowed the President to ignore the effects of debuffs applied by the Legislative classes.
  • Drain Treasury: There appears to be a bug that allowed loot to be transferred from the treasury to anyone on the President’s friends list, or in the President’s party. We are investigating.
  • Messages to and from the President will now be correctly saved to the chat log.
  • Messages originating from the President were being misclassified as originating from The American People.
  • A rendering error that frequently caused the President to appear wrapped in the American Flag texture has been addressed.

Vice President

  • The Vice President has been correctly reclassified as a pet.
  • No longer immune to damage from the Legislative and Judicial classes.
  • The Vice President will no longer aggro on friendly targets. This bug was identified with Ranged Attacks and the Head Shot ability.
  • Reveal Identity: this debuff will no longer be able to target Covert Operatives.
  • Messages to and from the Vice President will now be correctly saved to the chat log.
  • A rendering bug was affecting the Vice President’s visibility, making him virtually invisible to the rest of the server. This has been addressed.

Cabinet

  • There was a bug in the last release that prevented the Cabinet from disagreeing with the President, which was the cause of a number of serious balance issues. This bug has been addressed, and we will continue to monitor the situation.

Judiciary

  • Many concerns have been raised regarding balance issues in the Supreme Court. This system is maintained on a different patch schedule, and will require longer to address.
  • A large number of NPCs in the Judiciary were incorrectly flagged “ideological.” We are trying to identify these cases and rectify this situation.

Homeland Security

  • Homeland Security Advisory System: We have identified a bug in this system that prevents the threat level from dropping below Elevated (Yellow). The code for Guarded (Blue) and Low (Green) has been commented out. We are testing the fix and hope to have it in by the next patch.
  • Torture: This debuff is being removed after a record number of complaints.
  • Item: Large Bottle of Water is incorrectly generating threat with TSA Agents when held in inventory. We are looking into the issue.
  • Asking questions about Homeland Security was incorrectly triggering the Chain-Jingoism debuff.

Economy

  • Serious on-going issues with server economy are still being addressed. We expect further roll-backs, and appreciate your help identifying and fixing bugs. We can’t make these fixes without your help.

PVP

  • Reputation with various factions are being rebalanced. The gradated reputation scale was erroneously being overwritten by the binary For Us/ Against Us flag.

Quests
 

  • The” Desert Storm” quest chain was displaying an erroneous “Mission Accomplished” message near the beginning of the chain.
  • The quest chain that begins with “There’s no Cake like Yellow Cake” and terminates with “W-M-Denied” has been identified as uncompletable, and has been removed.

Reagents

  • Many recipes that currently call for Crude Oil can now be made with Wind, Solar, Geothermal and Ethanol reagents. We hope to roll out even more sweeping changes in the next patch.

Events

  • The “Axis of Evil” event is drawing to a close. Look forward to the “Rebuilding Bridges” event starting in January.

 

(Yes, this is much funnier if you online games) 

(via BD and Random) 

Re-oathed

On the Inauguration, I wrote: I can’t wait for the Wingnuts to parse the stumbling over Obama’s oath of office (both Obama and Roberts) to somehow prove he never took…

On the Inauguration, I wrote:

I can’t wait for the Wingnuts to parse the stumbling over Obama’s oath of office (both Obama and Roberts) to somehow prove he never took the oath and therefore is not president.

 

Apparently, after the initial laughter over the prospect, some people decided it was better to be safe than sorry, so Roberts re-administered the oath to Obama yesterday, without any bobbles (or a Bible).

Interestingly enough, the same thing (retaking the oath) was done by both Calvin Coolidge and Chester Arthur in their day.

I’m sure that won’t quiet the conspiracy nuts, but …

Time to get to work

Taking down the Obama poster from the blog sidebar. Peeling off the (magnetic) bumper stickers from the car. Got one last wear out of the Obama shirt last night, sharing…

Taking down the Obama poster from the blog sidebar. Peeling off the (magnetic) bumper stickers from the car. Got one last wear out of the Obama shirt last night, sharing some champagne with Margie, but … the campaign’s over, the governance has begun, and here’s hoping that the rhetoric and promises of the former are reflected in the latter.

Good luck, President Obama.

Yes, even Barack Obama can make a mistake

He said: My fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors….

He said:

My fellow citizens:

I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because we the people have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebears, and true to our founding documents.

Except he’s wrong, as are any number of other commentators who made a similar statement today. Forty-three Americans have now taken the presidential oath, though Obama is considered to hold the 44th presidency, and is regularly referred to as the 44th president. And, no, I’m not claiming it’s because Obama isn’t really a real American or some simlar lunacy.

Instead, it’s because Grover Cleveland did something no other person has done: served two non-consecutive terms (with Bejamin Harrison serving a term in-between), and so is counted as both the 22nd and 24th presidents.

Forty-four presidents … but only forty-three people have sworn the oath.

Of course, I assume Obama knows that, but one’s inaugural address isn’t the place for a history lesson (though, upon consideration, I can imagine Al Gore explaining it all to us). But … does that mean … if he did know, does that make him a liar, only two paragraphs into his presidency? (Aha! Film at 11! Double dittos! Next up on the O’Reilly Factor — Barack Obama: Threat or Menace or Just Confused With Numbers?)

And so it goes.

Katherine blogs the Inauguration

Or, rather, journals it while at school. A transcript: PRESIDENT-ELECT TURNS INTO PRESIDENT OBAMA Former president twisted back from moving boxes. [George H.W. Bush] Lincoln Bible McCain [one of the…

Or, rather, journals it while at school. A transcript:

PRESIDENT-ELECT TURNS INTO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Former president twisted back from moving boxes. [George H.W. Bush]

Lincoln Bible

McCain [one of the presidents, not GHWB] had back surgery – has to use a cane.

Lincoln Memorial

Sea of people [“I really liked that!”]

Forty-fourth President

First African-American President

Aretha Franklin – “My Country ‘Tis of Thee”

Even though the Oath of Office hasn’t been said, Obama is now President.

Obama is President!

[“After the oath of office had been said, in Obama’s speech …”] The snow stained with blood.

Love with a widening light.

 

Quotations for Inauguration Day

Today’s passel of presidential quotes from WIST.   A government of laws, and not of men.  ¶ John Adams (1735-1826) US President (1797-1801) “Novanglus” #7, Boston Gazette (6 Mar 1775)…

Today’s passel of presidential quotes from WIST.


 

A government of laws, and not of men. 

John Adams (1735-1826) US President (1797-1801)
“Novanglus” #7, Boston Gazette (6 Mar 1775)
Adams credited the line to James Harrington (1611-77), who wrote of “the empire of laws and not of men” (The Commonwealth of Oceana (1656)). Adams later used the term in the Massachusetts Constitution, Bill of Rights, article 30 (1780).

 


 

We stand today on the edge of a new frontier — the frontier of the 1960s, a frontier of unknown opportunities and paths, a frontier of unfulfilled hopes and threats. … The new frontier of which I speak is not a set of promises — it is a set of challenges. It sums up not what I intend to offer the American people, but what I intend to ask of them. 

¶ John Fitzgerald Kennedy (1917-1963) US President (1961-63)
Presidential nomination acceptance speech, Los Angeles (15 Jul 1960)

 


 

I pledge you, I pledge myself, to a new deal for the American people. Let us all here assembled constitute ourselves prophets of a new order of competence and of courage. This is more than a political campaign; it is a call to arms. Give me your help, not to win votes alone, but to win in this crusade to restore America to its own people. 

¶ Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945) US President (1933-1945)
Presidential nomination acceptance speech, Chicago (2 Jul 1932)

 


 

We must act upon the motto of all for each and each for all. There must be ever present in our minds the fundamental truth that in a republic such as ours the only safety is to stand neither for nor against any man because he is rich or because he is poor, because he is engaged in one occupation or another, because he works with his brains or because he works with his hands. We must treat each man on his worth and merits as a man. We must see that each is given a square deal, because he is entitled to no more and should receive no less.  

Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) US President (1901-1909)
Speech, New York State Agricultural Association, Syracuse (7 Sep 1903)
Full text.

 


 

Every segment of our population and every individual has a right to expect from his government a fair deal. 

¶ Harry S Truman (1884-1972) US President (1945-53)
State of the Union Message (5 Jan 1949)

Inauguration

Had a chance to watch the Inauguration from home (working furiously most of the time), and take, of course, a picture. More random (and non-sequential) thoughts. Cute kids! CSPAN…

Had a chance to watch the Inauguration from home (working furiously most of the time), and take, of course, a picture. More random (and non-sequential) thoughts.

  1. Cute kids!
  2. CSPAN is too much fun. Never has it been more interesting to watch people standing around and chatting. On the other hand, sometimes it was annoying when the sound system was picking up an announcement from outside while the cameras were shooting a different group inside — e.g., hearing the announcement for Biden’s kids while watching Obama’s (cute!) kids.
  3. Great music between the acts.
  4. I can’t wait for the Wingnuts to parse the stumbling over Obama’s oath of office (both Obama and Roberts) to somehow prove he never took the oath and therefore is not president.
  5. Great inaugural speech. Powerful. Need to see the text; I strongly suspect there are quotables from it.
  6. Rev. Warren did a decent, if long, job of his invocation. I thought the Lord’s Prayer was a bit much — not any more objectionable per se (and there are elements of it that are fine), but as strongly a sectarian prayer as one could come up with short of the Nicene Creed.
  7. Cute kids — on boxes!
  8. Always interesting watching the interplay between the Presidents and their Families, as well as the protocols of the announcements.
  9. Bush, inside heading for the platform, looked a bit stunned. Obama almost looked dreamily relaxed.
  10. Amazing shots of the mall and the humanity there.

Amazing history. Glad I watched — and glad I DVRed it for Margie and Kitten tonight.

Go, Mr. President, go!

Obama takes the oath of office. At last….

Obama takes the oath of office. At last.

Inauguration Day

So here we are. Inauguration Day. The end of the Bush presidency. The beginning of the Obama one. Part of me is hopeful — yes, the sort who imagines…

So here we are. Inauguration Day. The end of the Bush presidency. The beginning of the Obama one.

Part of me is hopeful — yes, the sort who imagines Obama as charging in on a White Unicorn, smiting evil and bringing puppies and flowers to a world grown tired and dark through the machinations of the current administration.

Part of me is cynical — waiting for Obama to reveal himself as another politician with feet of clay and a weakness for special interest spending, a return to business as usual with a Donkey in charge instead of an Elephant.

Much of me is pragmatic, realizing that Obama cannot live up to anyone’s expectations, my own included, let alone everyone’s. He will certainly make decisions that disappoint me — perhaps because of weakness, perhaps because he knows something I don’t, perhaps for good reasons, perhaps for bad. But I think, based on what I’ve read and heard of the man that he will do more things that impress me, that inspire me, that make me as glad that he is our president as I was embarrassed and increasingly angry that Bush was. I think he will, net-net, be just what this country needs.

I don’t envy him his job. Between cleaning up the mess and setting the federal government back to right — both full-time jobs — will he have time and energy and opportunity to make some positive changes, not just fix the negative ones? What will be done, what will be tried, and what will be left undone? How much time will he have?

(Though I’ll note that, despite very earnest and heartfelt fears on some folks’ parts, the Bush Administration did not run Bush for a 3rd term, did not fake a major terrorist attack, did not cancel the election, did not pull Osama bin Ladin out of a hat, did not declare martial law before the inauguration, did not disappear Obama before he could take office. Yes, today is not yet over, but I don’t see any of that as likely to happen today.)

I don’t have any magic advice for the new president, save to stay grounded in what’s real with his family, to keep an eye on the goals and not on the day-to-day drudge, to listen as well as speak and to consider before action. I think all of those are behaviors Obama has already shown, which is promising.

I keep him, his family, and our nation, in my thoughts and prayers.

Change

An editorial from The Nation, titled, “A Farewell to Republicans”: For twelve years the Republican Party has been in power. During ten of those years it controlled the executive and…

An editorial from The Nation, titled, “A Farewell to Republicans“:

For twelve years the Republican Party has been in power. During ten of those years it controlled the executive and legislative branches of the government. When, a few years hence, an attempt is made to minimize the disaster of this last quadrennium, and to point to a preceding eight year period of material development and growth, let it be noted that in a purely material sense the American people are much worse off today than they were twelve years ago. Far more than was gained has been swept away. Savings have been dissipated, lives have been blasted, families disintegrated. Misery and insecurity exist to a degree unprecedented in our national life. And spiritually the American people have been debauched by the materialism which made dollar-chasing the accepted way of life and accumulation of riches the goal of earthly existence. The record of Republicanism must be judged as a whole, although, in fairness, the consequences of the war and the major responsibility of the Democrats for putting the United States into it must not be forgotten. […]

Moreover, economic disaster has been only a part of this sterile decade’s legacy, the burdens of which will descend to unborn generations. Our worthiest traditions have been impaired; vital tenets of American life have been destroyed. What has become of that fundamental American axiom “salvation by work”? In all our previous history it has been taken for granted that ours was a land of opportunity, and that rewards bore some relation to initiative, effort, and ability. Granting the large mythical content of these beliefs, they were more nearly valid in America in the first century and a half of our national existence than anywhere else on earth. They are no longer true today. The promise of American life has been shattered — possibly beyond repair. [..]

Behind the Administration […] have been the real rulers of America […] It was a Grand Old Party — for them — while it lasted. Makers and beneficiaries of our politico-economic system, these are the men whose failure is now written large in the towering empty edifices that scrape the New York sky, in the hundreds of thousands of “For sale” and “To let” signs which adorn our cities, in the closed banks, in the foreclosed farms, in the whole picture of devastation which has come under their rule.

Have these captains and kings departed — not to return? The epoch of their wanton and repulsive leadership is ending. Their incompetence and their betrayal are manifest. But much of the evil they have done lives after them. The coming years will see the struggle to purge America, to reassert the promise of American life, to validate, in consonance with the changed times and conditions, the high aspirations of the founders of the nation. The new president has the opportunity to be the leader of this renaissance, but he will have to forge as his instrument a wholly different Democratic Party from that which so long has been indistinguishable from the Republican.

Of course, that was (with a couple of snips and just two minor edits) their editorial from 1933, just as FDR was being sworn into office.

(via Obsidian Wings) 

Modern Donatism

Not many people know these days about the Donatist Heresy, but the battle over it (i.e., what got it eventually officially labeled a “heresy”) was a key development in Christianity….

Not many people know these days about the Donatist Heresy, but the battle over it (i.e., what got it eventually officially labeled a “heresy”) was a key development in Christianity.

Long story short, the Donatists argued that the sacraments were only valid if administered by an orthodox, theologically pure and right-thinking officiant (more specifically, by someone who had not renounced their faith during the persecutions of the Emperor Diocletian). If it turned out that Father Fred was not a right-thinking priest, then all those marriages and baptisms and confessions and so forth that Father Fred performed were invalid.

The anti-Donatists argued that the sacraments were a gift from God, and were not invalidated by a less-than-saintly cleric administering them. God’s the one doing the forgiving, the baptizing, the witnessing of the marriage, and the priest, worthy or un-, is simply a mortal instrumentality, the sacrament not at all invalidated by whether the person was worth to be a priest. The messenger is not the message, and the words spoken need to be considered apart from the speaker.

The anti-Donatist group eventually won (St Augustine was big in that effort), which is why Donatism is considered a “heresy.” The issue continues to crop up now and again, though. In the ongoing kerfuffles within the Episcopal Church, the unwillingness of some conservative / orthodox Anglicans to accept communion from some of those wicked, evil, apostate Episcopal bishops has been seen as an example of latter-day Donatism.

Which brings me to Rev. Rick Warren, a rather affable gent whose Hawaiian shirts and winsome smiles belie his conservative evangelical stance on numerous social issues, including strong opposition to gay marriage and abortion. Warren, by being less overtly strident and insulting than his ideological brethren (Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, etc.) has taken on a role as a Christian “moderate” — though the moderation is mostly in how he expresses himself, not in his theology.

So there’s a huge brouhaha over Obama choosing (in conjunction with the committee handling the particulars) Warren to do the invocation at Obama’s inauguration. While some folks see this as a clever (or honestly engaging) reach across the theological aisle to the conservative Christian Right (Obama’s disagreement with Warren, et al., has been made multiple times, and was clear during the Saddleback “debate” that Warren held with Obama and McCain), others see it as a huge betrayal, a welcoming to the table of someone who holds obnoxiously intolerant beliefs, and who acts on same (in an affable, Hawaiian-shirted fashion).

To me, though, the question is more what Warren has to say at the invocation, less than who he is or represents. Sure, he represents a religious strain that I don’t particularly care for (we did the 40 Days of Purpose program at our church, and Warren’s theology more than occasionally rankled me and many the Episcopalians in the program), but he also represents (whether he gets to speak at the event or not) a lot of people in this country, which makes it a politically savvy move on Obama’s part (what, you expected him to invite Bp. Spong?).

But, more important, the question is what Warren will actually say at the invocation. If he turns it into a forum for anti-abortion, anti-gay sentiment, then he deserves to be booed off the stage. But I don’t see Obama as giving him that sort of latitude (nor do I think Warren tone-deaf enough to do so, either). Instead, I think the message / prayer / invocation that Warren will give will both support Obama (all good there) and point out or focus on some of the common ground that folks on the religious (or irreligious) Left and Right can agree upon.

Which, if that’s what happens, is probably just the tone that Obama wants to set. And I’m okay with that. Considering what Warren has to say as intrinsically evil just because of his (to me, regressive and ultra-conservative and negative) beliefs is to confuse the messenger with the message. It’s the Donatist Heresy all over again, saying that in invocation can only be “valid” if the person doing it is ideologically pure and correct, and that only the “proper” folks can be considered for involvement in the inauguration (we’ll leave aside the substantial number of people who consider a prayerful invocation to be improper or goofy in the first place).

To be sure, I’m not particularly thrilled about Rick Warren having the role he’s been given — but I don’t consider it to be the Ultimate Betraying Evil that some folks seem to be taking it as.  I’m more interested in what Warren actually ends up saying — and in what the Obama Administration ends up doing — than in criticizing Obama for including Warren as part of the whole inaugural process.   

The Big O

Fascinating pair of videos on the design of the Obama logo. I hadn’t really considered it earlier, but, really, logos are relatively new in the election biz — at…

Fascinating pair of videos on the design of the Obama logo. I hadn’t really considered it earlier, but, really, logos are relatively new in the election biz — at least something other than the candidate’s name in big block letters. The only other case I can think of is the Bush “W” stickers, and even that was relatively limited and accidental. The Obama “O” (which I always saw as a sun rising over a plowed field, very Americana), though, was part of a thorough, intentional branding, in a way that has not really been done before (but which I suspect we will see in the future).

Cool stuff.

(via kottke) 

 

Rovean Interview

I don’t know if it’s the editing or if Karl Rove is just sitting … very … still right now, trying not to let his head explode. But this…

I don’t know if it’s the editing or if Karl Rove is just sitting … very … still right now, trying not to let his head explode. But this is a very odd interview.

Do you see the election results as a repudiation of your politics?
Our new president-elect won one and a half points more than George W. Bush won in 2004, and he did so, in great respect, by adopting the methods of the Bush campaign and conducting a vast army of persuasion to identify and get out the vote.

Of course, a while back, Rove was touting the 2000-2004 elections as mandates for Bush and a repudiation of the Democrats. But that was then.

But what about your great dream of creating a permanent Republican governing majority in Washington?
I never said permanent. Durable.

Do you think John McCain attacked too much or not enough?
Dissecting the campaign that way is not helpful.

At least, not in public, and not without a big speaking fee.

Have you met Barack Obama?
Yes, I know him. He was a member of the Senate while I was at the White House and we shared a mutual friend, Ken Mehlman, his law-school classmate. When Obama came to the White House, we would talk about our mutual friend.

Did you have lunch together? Talk in the hall?
We sat in the meeting room and chatted before the meeting. He had a habit of showing up early, which is a good courtesy.

Are you going to send him a little note congratulating him?
I already have. I sent it to his office. I sent him a handwritten note with funny stamps on the outside.

What kind of funny stamps?
Stamps.

Just … stamps. Funny … stamps.

Do you have any advice for him? You already criticized Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s new chief of staff, as a sharply partisan choice.
I raised a question as to whether this would be the best use of Rahm Emanuel’s talents. If you’re trying to work through a big legislative priority, it is sort of hard if you have a guy who has a reputation as a tough, hard, take-no-prisoners, head-in-your-face, scream-and-shout, send-them-a-dead-fish partisan.

What about you? You were always seen as very partisan.
I wasn’t the chief of staff. And you’d be surprised by the Democrats I actually met, got to know and worked with.

Like Joe Lieberman.

Do you like Joe Biden?
I think he has an odd combination of longevity and long-windedness that passes for wisdom in Washington.

 I guess the answer is No. 

Do you regret anything that happened in the White House during your tenure?
Sure.

And moving on to the next question …

You’ve been booed off stages recently.
No, I haven’t. I’ve been booed on stages. I’m a little bit tougher than to walk off a stage because someone says something ugly.

Upcoming House investigative committees will be glad to hear that.

Do you think the era of negative politics is over?
No.

Do you see yourself as being associated with it in any way?
Look, in 1800 the sainted Thomas Jefferson arranged to hire a notorious slanderer named James Callender, who worked as a writer at a Republican newspaper in Richmond, Va. Read some of what he wrote about John Adams. This was a personal slander.

What did he say?
He said he lacked the spine of a man and the character of a woman. Negative politics have always been around.

The truest thing Rove has ever said. Looking at the 1800 election between Jefferson and Adams makes the worst of Atwater, Rove, or Schmidt look like Mister Rogers.

You’ve never repudiated President Bush.
No. And I never will. He did the right things.

What about Iraq and the economy?
The world is a better place with Saddam Hussein gone.

  Period. End of story. Moving on …

Do you have any advice for him at this point?
With all due respect, I don’t need you to transmit what I want to say to my friend of 35 years.

Remember, attack politics are out. It’s a new age of civilized discourse.
You’re the one who hurt my feelings by saying you didn’t trust me.

Did I say that?
Yes, you did. I’ve got it on tape. I’m going to transcribe this and send it to you.

And that’s that.

(via BoingBoing)

Makes you long for hanging chads

So you think you could cut through the vote recount clutter in Minnesota and quickly come a conclusion about all those challenged ballots? Take the MPR challenge and see….

So you think you could cut through the vote recount clutter in Minnesota and quickly come a conclusion about all those challenged ballots? Take the MPR challenge and see.

One bit of amusement is how the challenging from both the Coleman and Franken camps completely flip-flops on similar bad markings that favor their candidates.

(via Ginny)

Alaska’s Senate race

Electoral-vote.com gives the latest on Alaska’s Senatorial election. First off, looks like Alaska and the Republicans won’t be embarrassed by a convicted felon being returned to office. With all but…

Electoral-vote.com gives the latest on Alaska’s Senatorial election.

First off, looks like Alaska and the Republicans won’t be embarrassed by a convicted felon being returned to office.

With all but 2500 votes counted, Anchorage mayor Mark Begich (D) now has an insurmountable lead of 3724 votes over convicted Sen. Ted. Stevens (R-AK), ending Stevens career as the longest serving Republican senator in history. The remaining votes, which come from overseas voters and igloos so far north that they don’t have polling places, will be counted next week before the tally is finalized.

Begich claimed victory yesterday evening; Stevens has not yet conceded. A recount is possible, but Alaska uses optical scan machines and previous recounts have not changed the results much. Begich’s victory brings the number of Democrats in the new Senate to 58, with races in Minnesota and Georgia still undecided.

 

The delta is high enough that if a recall is requested by Stevens, he’ll have to pay for it.

Interestingly, Stevens may have been torpedoed by a third party candidate — Bob Bird, who ran for the Alaska Independence Party and got over 12,000 votes, presumably from Stevens. But there may be some chicken-and-egg here — did Stevens lose because Bird took his votes, or did folks disgusted with Stevens but unwilling to vote for a Democrat shift their vote “safely” to Bird in protest?

An interesting note on Begich — he’ll be the only member of the Senate without a college degree.

“Truly, I do not understand.”

For once Keith Olbermann is softer-spoken about an issue than I am, turning his sarcastic bluster into rhetorically bewildered lack of understanding as to why people voted for Prop. 8….

For once Keith Olbermann is softer-spoken about an issue than I am, turning his sarcastic bluster into rhetorically bewildered lack of understanding as to why people voted for Prop. 8.

 

Me? It’s still tough for me to speak of the matter in anything less than angry tones, even if I can write about it at a somewhat even keel.

Praying for electoral victory

So one would think that, if anyone could be prayed into office, it would be the McCain/Palin ticket. Prayer for John McCain and Sarah Palin Please pass this prayer on…

So one would think that, if anyone could be prayed into office, it would be the McCain/Palin ticket.

Prayer for John McCain and Sarah Palin

Please pass this prayer on right now on behalf of John McCain. Please start prayer chains immediately for the election.

This election can be turned around for the glory of God if we will stop worrying and get on our knees!!! How many people can you pass this on to? Let us pray.

Father, in the name of Jesus, we come to You right now asking for a miracle in this election. Lord, we lift up to You right now Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin. Lord, we ask that You would just wrap Your arms around them and their families at this critical time. Father, we ask for miracle upon miracle in this election. We know that only You can turn the tide of evil in this election. Father, as we await the final days of the election, we ask in complete faith that You would allow the truth to be known across this land Lord, we ask for forgiveness for putting You last. . . Father, please heal our land and homes, allow us to have another chance to love You the way you should be loved. Lord, we ask specifically for John and Sarah’s health, wisdom, words, actions and their campaign staff. Lord, we lift them all up to You now. Father, we also specifically ask for the voters in many states who are battleground states. Lord, please convict the hearts of voters in Florida, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Ohio, Missouri, North Dakota, Virginia, Nevada and Colorado.

Father we beg for every electoral vote. Lord, we lift all of our needs up to You now. In the name of Jesus we claim victory in Your name. Lord, we pray for Your will to be done in a mighty way…we know that this election can and will glorify You! Father, place the man you would have to lead our country in a Christian way on November 4. We love You, Lord. We await Your holy miracles…

In Jesus’ Name we pray, Amen

Send this on to as many people as you can think of. . . . .let it reach every corner of America. Get on your knees for this election. . . . Pray for God to send a REVIVAL across this land. Christians, it is time we get on our knees . . . . talk to people, speak up. . . . we’ve been silent too long.

 

Presumably a whole passel of folks joined in on that fervent prayer, given the rhetoric floating around about the Demon Socialist Commie Scary Atheist Pagan Muslim Obama.

And, yet … there the Scary Man is, elected and ready to destroy our Christian Nation.

Of course, there were a lot of people praying for Obama to win. But let’s discount them, for they are deluded and not Real Christians.

Or maybe …

… maybe praying to God to swing an election in favor of someone or another is arrogant presumption. Clearly intercessory prayer doesn’t work like some sort of magic spell — the out of “and sometimes God answers no” demonstrates that. That doesn’t seem to sway the “name it and claim it” crowd, but, well … I try to to not be too irrational in my religious delusions.

To my way of thinking, prayer is a way for the pray-er to actually consider and focus on what’s important to them — and what they can do about it beyond talking with God about it. So I don’t pray for God to make buckets of food appear to the starving people of the world — obviously, if God’s waiting for me to actually wish for that before He does it, there’s something seriously borked with the universe. Instead, I try to pray mostly for myself in that context — “Help me generous with what I have, to share with others who are in need” — or, if I’m feeling like being broader in prayer, I might pray for generosity in others, including myself.

Because, ultimately, if someone’s going to help feed the starving, it’s going to be people like me, not a sudden appearance of manna in the slums of the world.

When it comes to things like the election, I’m similarly dubious about praying to God for one candidate or the other. It’s like praying for a football game — or about a war. (I also tend to be leery of magic wishes — too many D&D games and rereadings of “The Monkey’s Paw.”) 

There’s firstly the presumption that the candidate I like is, in fact, the “chosen of the Lord.” Jeez, I have enough of a difficult time trying to figure out how I’m not living up to my own moral code and beliefs; making that judgment about another person to the degree that I would ask a favor of God to personally intercede on his or her behalf? That’s just asking for trouble.

Second, there’s the presumption that I know what God’s will — assuming God had a particular intent for an election during one certain year in a small nation-state on a tiny planet orbiting an undistinguished sun in one of a million galaxies — actually is in this instance. Assuming there’s a Divine Plan, my prayer would seem unnecessary to sway God toward it, or futile to sway God against it. Further, there’s always the possibility that what I think of as God’s will — even assuming I really truly have a handle on God’s sense of right and wrong — is what God really wants to see happen right this moment. Maybe (if I may be Biblical) the rumors about Obama are correct, and this is the prelude to the End Times with Obama as the Anti-Christ, Eek! In that case, it would be both futile and kind of uppity for me to tell God not to fulfill the prophecies in Revelations simply because I prefer John McCain’s policy on off-shore drilling, or even on abortion. (Which I don’t, but work with me here.)

And what’s God supposed to do with such a prayer, anyway? Tweak the voting machines? Compel people to zombie-like vote for the candidate of my choosing?  Fiery letters in the sky to vote for the right guy?  Sneak angels into polling places to throw the election? Drop an anvil on the opposition’s head the day before the election?

The most I feel I can legitimately do is pray for wisdom and clarity for myself when I enter the voting booth, charity in dealing with wins and losses, and resolve to continue to do what I glean as right. And, if I want to spread that prayer out further, hope for the same for the electorate.

I might have, in any given election, my own expectations about which candidate that wisdom might lead people to choose — but I try not to assume my own omniscient righteousness too much such that it justifies fervent prayer. For all that I have an ego the size of Baltimore, some times, I really try to maintain humility about a few things at least.

So I was unimpressed, and unmoved, even before the election, by exhortations to pray for victory for McCain (I didn’t receive any similar missives re Obama), save that they motivated me to go out and actually do something for the candidate of my choice, and promoted prayers that both candidates (especially, ahem, the one I wanted to win) exercised good judgment and courage were they to win.