Who do you like so far?

 Loading ...

Boo-yah!

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Friday he won't support Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey, potentially derailing his confirmation over complaints that he hasn't taken a full enough stand against torture.

“No American should need a classified briefing to determine whether waterboarding is torture,” said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vermont. He planned an afternoon news conference to make the announcement in Burlington.

TPM is tracking the yeas and nays here. Right on, Pat & Bernie (and major  thanks to Kagro X for continuing to be a national leader on this).

Okay, okay… sheesh, I figured everybody'd be all over this poll. Guess it's up to me (for the record, over the last 24 hours, I have finished this post twice only to have the app crash on me and lose all my work… ARRRRG!!)

No two ways about it: the recent WCAX gubernatorial poll is huge. Here are Jim Douglas's re-elect numbers:

42 percent said they'd vote to re-elect Jim Douglas.

33 percent said they'd replace him.

25 percent said they were not sure.

Roper & company are trying to be blase about it, but this is a dramatic sea change. At this point in the last two cycles, Douglas's re-elect numbers were in the 60's. What's more ominous for the GOP is the significance of that number, which they no doubt recognize: 42%. It's roughly the mean, historical, hardcore GOP voting block that their statewides can depend on cycle after cycle. That's what he's down to, in terms of firm support.

To prop up his undefeatable image, Douglas has countered the bad news by touting the alternate job-approval poll: 

16% percent of Vermonters say Governor Douglas is doing an excellent job. 38% a good job, with only 5% of people not sure how he's doing.

But when you put these numbers together, you've got a clear picture; the “nice guy” Douglas image is still intact, but moderates and independents are no longer confident that he's the right man for the job. It's probably not helping him that he's been using his so-called “listening tour” to TELL voters (through the media) what's important to them, rather than – y'know – listening. That only widens the perception that he's out-of-touch.

And if you think they're not scared, consider this: The original title of the WCAX web piece on the poll was  “Questionable fourth term for Douglas.” If you'll notice, it now reads “2008 Governor's Race Starts To Shape Up“. The station reportedly responded to a reader's question about the change, saying they had received “internal and external complaints” about the original headline.

Now come on. Do you think if you or I had complaints about the message sent by a news headline that the Douglas communication offi- er, I mean WCAX – would give us the time of day? No freaking way. That was political damage control, pure and simple.

This race is winnable – and they know it.

Also of interest in the poll were the numbers for other potential contenders. The Dems who've made it clear they're not interested predictable polled in the crapper (and Campbell and Galbraith were not included). Among the two remaining names who actually are considered possible contenders: 

Of the eight choices, Democrat Matt Dunne and Progressive Anthony Pollina were the only ones with more than 10 percent — Dunne with 22 percent, Pollina with 12 percent.

Interesting.

The selling point of a Pollina candidacy from his supporters is largely that his name recognition and grassroots support start him off with the strongest base and make him the most credible alternative, but Dunne starts off at almost double his numbers.

Which means, once again, all eyes are going to be on Dunne. If he has been leaning away from a run for the top job, prefering for round 2 against Dubie, he's got to be reconsidering the question. And those pushing for a Dunne/Pollina ticket, might want to consider the reciprocal.

The game's afoot!

Senator Obama’s New Hampshire campaign will begin airing its fifth television ad tomorrow in New Hampshire.  In the thirty-second spot, entitled “Need,” Obama describes American workers as the “bedrock” of our economy and offers his plan to reverse the widening gap between the middle class and the wealthy.

For more than two decades–as a community organizer, a civil rights attorney, a State Senator, and a United States Senator–Obama has been fighting to improve the lives of working Americans.  In September, he unveiled his Middle Class Tax Fairness plan, which would restore balance to our tax code by closing corporate loopholes, providing tax relief for the middle class–including more than 800,000 working people in New Hampshire–and eliminating income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000 per year.

Tim Foley
Proud to be a NH staff member for Barack Obama’s movement for change.

Is there any area of our government, over the span of the last seven years, any area, in domestic or foreign policy, national defense, public welfare, the economy, name it, where the average, reasonably informed American might point to success, to signs of progress, of improvement, something, anything, to point to with satisfaction, with pride?

Yesterday I read an article by Steve Benin on the resignation of Karen Hughes from her post as Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, a mouthful there, and a job for which she was as ill suited and unqualified as the man who appointed her and in which, during her two year tenure, she accomplished little, if anything.

In truth, she accomplished nothing, unless you want to count convincing large portions of the world that all Americans must be as out of touch with reality, as clueless and unthinking as their current Commander in Chief, and at that she excelled, as anyone might, having been dispatched to the Middle East with the rank of Ambassador, but without knowledge of the language, culture, history, religions, and general pet peeves of the various states and peoples of the region.

But Karen Hughes was tapped for her office for the same reasons as all Bush appointees are chosen, not for expertise or experience, not for performance or integrity in public service but for loyalty, for unwavering belief in the Messianic delusions of neo conservatism, and a willingness to march in lockstep, nah, goose step, against all who might disagree or dissent.

As I read Benin’s article I had the thought that he might have written a very similar piece about nearly any federal department and the Bush appointees thereto in the last seven years. Which of the various cabinet level branches of the executive department of this country have not suffered greatly under the politically connected cronyism of the Bush/ Cheney administration?

We witnessed it at Justice, the politicization of the office of the Attorney General, the perversion of law and the resulting descent into the barbarity of denial of human rights and torture.

We saw it at Defense, where the best military minds of a generation were ignored in favor of the views of sychophantic careerists who allowed a lying Vice President and a comic opera Commander in Chief and their apparatchiks to lead them over the cliff and into the abyss of an endless and disastrous war.

We have seen time and again the incompetence, indifference and criminal neglect at “Homeland” Security and FEMA.

We have seen heads of federal departments turned into agents of electioneering, where party politics takes precedence over public welfare and the machinery and energy of the state is turned to the furtherance of private goals.

Agriculture, Interior, Commerce, Treasury and the rest are now run by the industries that they are legally bound to restrain, regulate and control in the public interest.

Executive branch departments have been stripped of many of their most dedicated, long serving professionals and replaced with Bush loyalists from business and industry, or, in many cases directly from the most favored campuses, the ivy leagues of Christian evangelism. Regulatory functions have been curtailed, enforcement budgets slashed, and inspection schedules diminished to a laughable degree in nearly every regulatory corner of the federal system.

But this, after all, was the intent, to create central government that would gladly do the bidding of the corporate structure, throw aside all restraints, all regulation and increase its profits and its power.

Nearly every day I encounter a story in the media, a story of illness, injury, death or disaster befalling unsuspecting citizens due to the inattention, incompetence, lack of inspection and failures of enforcement of existing federal laws regulating consumer products, work place safety, environmental prohibitions or other areas where purity, safety and security were once almost taken for granted.

During the last seven years we have devolved into a country whose livestock, produce and other foodstuffs are ridden with bacteria and other contaminants, whose drugs and medical services are becoming untrustworthy, whose ports and borders are dangerously porous, whose bridges and highways are collapsing, whose military is being misused and abused in continuous illegal and futile adventures on behalf of corporate America, whose jobs have largely been moved to other countries and continents, whose pensions have collapsed and whose Barbie Dolls contain enough lead to write a novella. (Or, perhaps, the last paragraph)

The real problem however, the crux of the matter and what may finally deliver us stumbling and stuttering, quavering with dread at the terminus of the road to Fascist hell is the incredible damage that has been inflicted on the American spirit, the American soul, the American psyche. I may be accused of naivete’ but in my world, in my mind and in my memory there was a time when the eyes of America contained a great measure of compassion, of kindness, of simple good will.

Those days are gone. Under the current regime the eyes of America, official America, the America of the ruling oligarchy are now filled with hunger, with avarice, with an insatiable lust for resources and power, for wealth and influence. America’s eyes are no longer the warm welcoming eyes of Lady Liberty but the cold calculating gaze of the largest and most dangerous predator to ever stalk the planet, a predator to be feared and distrusted, to be resisted at all costs.

The eyes of Americans, our citizens, our electorate are filled with a mixture of apathy and fear, of meekness, a cowering attitude and a shuffling posture which is all too heavily reflected in their parliament.

America, in the brief span of my lifetime and largely in the span of a single decade has devolved into a killer of humanity, a dream slayer, despoiler of freedom, a destroyer, the destroyer of America.

Bob Higgins
Worldwide Sawdust

I wrote this in November of 2007, and posted it here at the time.  I’m reposting it because there’s so much in it that’s still relevant today, and little progress along these lines.  There’s a lot I could update here: newer information about gas prices; how the budget cuts have ended my long-term gainful employment and are causing serious problems throughout state government.  But I’m going to let this stand on its own and if I feel a need to update, I’ll do so in the comments.

Okay.

So.

Poverty.

Let me start by saying that, for a lot of people, it’s going to get worse.

I don’t mean it’s going to get worse before it gets better.

I don’t mean it’s going to get worse unless we elect a Democratic president.

I mean it’s going to get worse.

I’m not making a prediction here.

I’m just going with the odds.

What does this mean?

It’s simple.

On Tuesday night, I attended one of the many forums Vermont is holding around the state on childhood poverty.  There was a panel represented by a range of people, some of whom help distribute resources and some of whom are recipients of public assistance.  Doug Racine (whom, incidentally, I think should run for governor again, but I’ll talk about that in a whole other post) led the forum, discussing its goals as to reduce childhood poverty by 50% in Vermont over the next ten years.

And you know, I think we can do this.  When we put our minds to creative solutions, we can find ways to transform our world.  We can harness the power of children playing to run water pumps.  We’re very clever this way, and we’re capable of introducing great change.  And if we have the will, we can do it.

But in the meantime, many of us are struggling.  Gas prices are going up.  Medicine is getting more expensive.  Food is becoming more expensive and use of ethanol may make it worse.  The Water situation is not good.

And, really, most people do get by and manage, through various means, to tread water, for a good chunk of their lives.  But for each and every one of those people, it only takes one significant event to kick them hard in the gut and force them into the ream of requiring public support or some other form of assistance.

And really, even that’s a misnomer.  We all receive public assistance.  Do you use public roads without paying a toll?  Congratulations.  You’re on public assistance.  Are you using the internet right now?  (hint: the answer is “yes”).  You’re receiving a public benefit.  Yes.  Even if you’re paying for internet access, you’re still receiving a subsidized benefit.  Do you buy food with the hopes that it will be safe?  That’s because there are public officials who, in theory, regulate the production, storage and distribution of food.  That way, we don’t have to have a major salmonella breakout in order to find out that a company is using poor food practices.

These are public benefits for the public good.  When someone tells you that it’s wrong to take public benefits or that they’ve never had to receive any help from anyone and have made it all on their own, you know they’re either lying or completely self-deceptive.  We all receive public benefits.

From a financial standpoint, I’m doing reasonably well.  I have a savings account with a decent buffer and I have the resources to pay my rent for four months in advance at a time.  So I know that even if I were to lose a major client, I’d be fine for the immediate future and I have the skills and creativity that I could probably find work again long before my money were to run out.

One of the things I’ve learned in the last few years is that going from near poverty to a really nice income changes your perspective and changes your ability to allocate resources.  When it came to buying a new washing machine, I chose the best one I could find: it was more energy efficient and would last longer.  While other people end up getting washers which are more expensive in the long run, I can afford to buy one that’s more expensive up front but much cheaper over the next ten years.  Similarly, I could afford to buy a hybrid vehicle, meaning that while a lot of people I know are getting 25-35 mpg, I’m getting 45-55, making my fuel costs dramatically lower.

These options aren’t available to people without as many resources.

The way my insurance works, there’s an up front deductible.  I have to pay $1500 out of pocket before the insurance starts paying for everything and, when it comes to medicine, I still have to pay up front and then I get reimbursements down the line.  One of the medicines I’m required to take in order to prevent my diabetes from causing me long-term damage costs over $200/month.  I can afford that, especially knowing that I’ll get that money back.  When I accidentally lost a supply of medicine once (left it on top of my car and drove off.  Clever), it cost me $250 to replace it, and that was out of pocket.

When my car got broken into and much of my camera equipment was stolen, it ended up costing me over $1500 to replace, and insurance only reimbursed $500 of that.  The cost of repairing the broken window was below the deductible, so that came entirely out of my pocket.

So I’m out these chunks of money and they’re not painless, but they’re not debilitating either.

But I think about this, and how these events would have affected me when I was making less than $20k/year.  And really, the only reason I’ve got the work I have now is because I lucked into it.  I got hired for a short-term contract, which led to a long term contract, which led to other contracts.  One minor change in luck and this never would have happened.  I’d still be living near the poverty level and I’d be in that situation where I made too much money to receive health benefits but too little money to afford my own health care.  I’d be going on lower doses of medications in order to make them last longer, significantly affecting my long-term health and I’d have less control over my eating habits, opting for crap instead of good wholesome food, affecting my health once again and significantly impacting my quality of life.

This is the every day scenario for people in poverty.  You need a medication or you need food so you make your choices.  You need a car, so you find the clunker which constantly needs work and gets crappy mileage but it’s what you can afford, so you just never have the time to build up savings and every little thing that happens makes things worse.

If you add a child into the equation, it gets worse, just in terms of simple allocation of resources.

Now imagine that you’re not in poverty and that you have some means at your disposal, but you’re keeping afloat.  But you have to make choices.  Get the better health insurance or live in the better neighborhood.  Get the lower deductible for your car insurance or get the better school for your kids.

And you make choices the best you can, but then something happens.  It could be anything.  You’re laid off.  Your kid has diabetes.  Your or your spouse gets into an accident and needs four months of physical therapy.  Your house gets broken into.  Some of what you lose can be recovered but not all.

So you have to make more complicated choices and things get tighter.

And then gas prices go up and you have to decide between the really good job that pays better and comes with great benefits but costs you an extra $50/month for the commute or the crappy job that’s near where you live that doesn’t pay as well and doesn’t come benefits that are really as nice.

Or you’ve got a great job with great benefits and the company just decides that those benefits are too expensive.

And things get tighter.

Worse.

Sometimes we luck out.  Sometimes, in the midsts of all these difficult things, something gets better.  We luck into a new job.  We buy a lottery ticket and win $5k.  We inherit something from a wealthy relative we’d forgotten we had.

But, mostly, it just gets tighter.

And then, when we do need care, we go to the emergency room, because our insurance won’t provide for pre-screening.

And that’s more expensive.

For everybody.

So things get tighter.

For everybody.

And then there’s a drought in Georgia.  And Florida and Georgia fight over how to handle it because now they’re competing for precious resources.

And things get tighter.

For everybody.

So we’ve got this situation, with multiple levels of poverty causing multiple problems for people across the board.  We’ve got this squeezing out the poor and the middle class and, whether they understand it or not, it will eventually squeeze out all but the richest of us.  Those that have means which are so significant as to be almost untouchable will probably be generally fine, but even then won’t have a food supply which is necessarily safe. 

In the meantime, there are steps we can take that might not necessarily solve the problem but can, at the very least, help:

• Universal health care.  Until we’re willing to see to it that everyone is fully covered (regardless of citizenship or legal status), we risk immense problems.  Early screening and careful monitoring of health trends makes us safer as a country and as individuals.


• Loans and grants for community resource projects.  Providing resources to communities to build recycling centers, health clinics, composting systems and public transportation reduces strain on individual families and communities. 


• Creative energy systems.  Imagine what we could do if we used the motion of people walking on subway platforms to help power the subways themselves.  Imagine what we could do if we made a serious effort to invest in projects that find ways to take existing resources and make better use of them.


• Invest heavily in early education.  Research shows, time and time again, that early education is of immense benefit, not just to children, but to society as a whole.


• Get Over It.  People often seek public assistance when they don’t want to.  They receive social stigma for it.  They’re treated like dirt for doing so.  We need to start respecting that people who receive public assistance don’t want to be on public assistance and would avoid it if they could and just get them the help they need instead of constantly treating them like there’s something wrong with them that could be solved if they simply worked harder.

What are your ideas for what we can do to improve upon things?  How can we change our government, our people, our planet, to encourage true change that releases us from poverty?  Where do we go from here?