You regulars may or may not have noticed me being rather scarce in these GMD parts over the past six months or so. Without getting into a sob story, it's been a challenging year for me on the personal front, with both the loss of my job after 15 years and a rather sudden and unexpected divorce.

Needless to say, it's distracted me a bit, and so I chalked my decreased presence here up to my personal foibles, which was true at the time. But, over the past few months, my life has improved dramatically. And I still don't show up here too often, so instead of making excuses, I'll just say what it is: outrage fatigue. It's to the point where my expressions usually come out in rather obnoxious, somewhat flatulent rude bursts, more appropriate for my own space on the net than over here at GMD. Yet this latest capitulation from the DC Dems seems to have triggered a bit of reflective soul-searching on the part of some of the FP'ers here, so here I go, if I may be so bold.

Hop below the jump for more musings, should you be so kind…

Now, I never bought into the hope/change nonsense about Obama like many did (and continue to do). My vote for him was probably 75% based in McCain/Palin prevention, and perhaps the other 25% was the fact that he seemed like a decent, highly intelligent guy, something one doesn't see too often in White House, even more dramatic after dealing with that braindead moron we've had to deal with in the last eight years.

My political awakening started in 1994, after that whole “Contract on America” b.s. I was primarily motivated by the reckless assault on the environment, more than anything else. And so, after over a decade of playing half-assed defense, the Dems retook the House and Senate and then the WH, as the GOP couldn't hide how deranged they were anymore. Of course, being a sentient being, I had no false expectations that things would change all that much; capitulation and timididty seem to be written into the Dem party platform, albeit in invisible ink. I was also very put off by Obama's “play nice/bipartisan” schtick, in that I don't think that negotiating with the criminally insane is very productive, nor is it wise or moral. I had (and have) no qualms about railroading the GOP like they did the Dems all those years, with one difference: Don't make shit up.

Alas, disappointment after disappointment, and hence the fatigue. One can only get mad so often before burnout sets in. Now, that's not to say there hasn't been a few good things; there most certainly has, even enough to convince me that the “both parties are exactly the same” bullshit is indeed that: bullshit. But I can't really find much worth defending at this point in regards to the DC Dems. They are thoroughly unworthy and incapable of governance, with few exceptions.

That presents another problem, is that your typical, independent low-information voter typically and reflexively, when unhappy with the party in power, votes for the other one, which is what I strongly feel will happen in 2010. Yes, people will vote to put back in the people who were primarily responsible for the mess we're in. And so the outrage fatigue increases, my eyes glaze over, and perhaps drooling is not too far away. We are all Sarah Palin now. Or at least a lot of us are.

Where am I going with this? It's time to start screaming for leadership.  What got my gears going was this fantastic op-ed over at HuffPo by Drew Western, Leadership, Obama Style, and the Looming Losses in 2010: Pretty Speeches, Compromised Values, and the Quest for the Lowest Common Denominator. 

It's a great read, but what struck me more than anything else was this, which pretty much sums up the DC Dems, not just Obama:

What's costing the president are three things: a laissez faire style of leadership that appears weak and removed to everyday Americans, a failure to articulate and defend any coherent ideological position on virtually anything, and a widespread perception that he cares more about special interests like bank, credit card, oil and coal, and health and pharmaceutical companies than he does about the people they are shafting….

Consider the president's leadership style, which has now become clear: deliver a moving speech, move on, and when push comes to shove, leave it to others to decide what to do if there's a conflict, because if there's a conflict, he doesn't want to be anywhere near it.

Indeed. When I hear those on our side say how this current HCR turd is “the best we could've hoped for” or something like that, all I can think of is how different the game might have been had Obama started it off with a simple statement: “I will simply not sign anything that makes it to my desk that does not have a strong public option. Period.” That's leading, it's not some overarching, courageous thing to do. If his leadership skills were half as good as his lofty rhetoric, we'd already be a much better country, only a year into his presidency.

We are in between a rock and a hard place, and the behavior of the Obamabots out there compounds it, as they pretty much defer to Obama the way the knuckledraggers deferred to Bush. We most certainly have idiots on our side, too; they may not be as mean or as evil as the right, but they're idiots, nonetheless. 

So what is to be done? I still hear that “marching in the streets” canard all the time, yet it's always either hamstrung by an absolutist pacifism, disorganization, or most importantly, a lack of will to really go with it. Like the Indians did in the Salt Satygraha in 1930. One of the things that happened was Indians lining up and marching right into the batons of the policemen, one after another – and every blow and crushed skull was a pivotal blow to the British Empire that led the way to independence.

Now, I can't say that I've got the temerity do that; pain hurts. But it can be done, and I like to think there are people out there with the gumption to do it. Just marching, singing “Imagine” and yelling “Nader!” just ain't gonna cut it. Been there, done that, too many times. It most certainly gives one a feeling of empowerment, but it's just that: a feeling. It's not real power. It means one is out of ideas as to what to do. I can relate; so am I.

Demanding leadership means being creative, stepping out of our comfort zone, and pissing people off (oh, if the prez would only take my advice). Some people may take it very far. Perhaps that may be necessary, as well; I'll leave that between you and your consciences.

So, I'm hardly done around here, by any means. If anything, the continued incompetence in the congress and the WH is making the need to do things in Vermont all that more important and necessary. Although I don't see it coming, I'd love for someone to primary Obama in '12, regardless of what else he does, if nothing more than to send a message that nothing should be taken for granted, especially the citizens of this country. I'm going to support whatever gubernatorial candidate is going to work hard to change things, and with that, there's an expectation of real change, not just talking about it, which is all Obama ever seems to be capable of. Like Bobby Byrd said, sayin' it and doin' it are two different things (apologies for an obscure but appropriate funk reference).

I just need a vacation from the outrage. 

And so the HCR debate continues… Those of you following this closely are aware of Firedoglake's Jane Hamsher's campaign to prevent the passage of the Senate version of the bill in it's current form, which Bernie Sanders has agreed to support.

Anyways, our own Odum has teamed up with Jane to get a petition going to put some pressure on Bernie. The petition can be found here.

Go below the jump for the complete email letter that went out today.

UPDATE FROM odum: Some serious Bernie pushback today. Guess we're hittin' a nerve.

Sign our petition to Bernie Sanders “If you're going after progressive votes, you better cast a tough one in the Senate first.” Sign our petition and tell Bernie Sanders to kill the Senate bill. The Senate is trying to force a dangerous health care bill to passage by Christmas. Some of our strongest allies — statesmen who touted the progressive line aggressively at first — have definitively turned their backs on us. Bernie Sanders is the latest “progressive” to fall in line as a supporter. It's ironic, since he's always been identified as left-of-Dean. It's no surprise, then, that Vermonters who know this may wonder: why is Sanders' one-time “centrist” foil Howard Dean now more progressive than he is? Join us in bringing the voices of Vermont to Bernie Sanders: You were elected based on your progressive values. Kill the Senate bill.

Just last week, we watched Bernie Sanders shout from the Senate floor, slamming his fist on the podium, demanding real and comprehensive reform for all Americans. He stood before the chamber in support of helping Americans currently enmeshed in the crisis of our disintegrating health care system. He stood in opposition to the Senate bill in its current form. Now he supports the very same bill, thereby supporting the annihilation of choice for the citizens of this country. He now supports the insurance industry by supporting the anti-choice individual mandate that requires all Americans to purchase private plans or face IRS penalties.

Dean knows this is dangerous. Sanders, a true “progressive,” should too. Sign our petition to Bernie Sanders: If you're going after progressive votes, you better cast the toughest ones in the Senate first.

Thanks for all you do. Jane Hamsher John Odum FDL Action PAC/Green Mountain Daily

Republican auditor Tom Salmon apparently got hit with a DUI last night, according to Totten:

State Auditor Tom Salmon is facing a charge of driving under the influence after a routine traffic stop in Montpelier Friday night.

According to a police summary of the incident, Trooper Brandon Doll stopped Salmon around 10:30 p.m. Salmon was driving a 2008 Honda Civic and failed to use a turn signal…

“Long dinner, special occasion. On the way home, I failed to put my on my signal during a routine right turn in Montpelier and was stopped,” Salmon said. “Asked if I was drinking I said yes, red wine. Was taken in and blew a .086. DUI 1. I didn’t protest anything.”

Between recent financial troubles and his switch to the GOP, it’s not shaping up to be a very good year for Salmon, and one can seriously wonder what his future electoral prospects are after this latest development. Not like we’re fretting too much about that over here, of course.

Not sure what to make of it, so I’ll let you figure this one out, from today’s vtbuzz:

Pollina, the Progressive who ran for governor in 2008 as an independent, continues to ponder his political future, but he said he’s in no hurry to decide. He’s weighing lots of options from running for state Senate to joining the four, soon-to-be five Democrats in a free-for-all primary to pick a gubernatorial nominee.

(note from JD: I fixed the link to the CLF's ATV page)

Those of you who follow forest recreation issues are well aware of the recent proposal from the ANR to open up some state lands to ATV riders. They sought public input and commentary on the matter, a good thing, right? I thought so too, until I received this email alert from the Conservation Law Foundation, who have been working on trying to prevent the new proposals from being enacted:

After reviewing nearly 2000 comments submitted by Vermonters like you, ANR estimates that those opposed to the ATV rule outnumbered those in favor by a margin of 4:1. Nonetheless, ANR has chosen to move forward with the proposal after making some minor changes, including the addition of a pilot program.

You can read the revised proposal here. Outnumbered 4 to 1 and they went ahead with it anyways.

The Argus had a bit on this new rule a few days ago, and among other things, noted that due to the current economic crisis and budget cuts, the money for enforcement will be hard to come by. Of course, they feel that money from registrations (and hence, more trails) will take care of that.

To add to the outrage, the scientific impact (page 8 of the report) is blank. Apparently, they're going to wait until the pilot program to fill that part in. Good luck getting that genie back in the bottle.

Fortunately, the eight-member Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules will consider ANR’s proposal at a daytime hearing on Tuesday November 3 in the Vermont Statehouse, Montpelier from 10 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. It's open to the public, and one can hope they'll be a bit more receptive. It's important to show up, as supporters tend to be a rather vocal minority. The CLF suggests:

Witnesses should plan on speaking nor more than 3-5 min. and, if opposed to the rule, it's most helpful to focus their remarks on the 3 criteria on which the committee can object to the rule:

1) the rule is not in accordance with legislative intent;

2) the rule is beyond the authority of the agency;

3) the rule is arbitrary.

If you plan to provide handouts, please bring at least 20 copies. Advance copies to LCAR are appreciated. To testify, contact: Katie Pickens, Committee Staff Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (LCAR) 828-5760

Although I still think we as a state have a long way to go, it was heartening to read about a recent report by the Commonwealth Fund that studied the state of healthcare in all 50 states. The result?

Residents of Vermont have the best healthcare in the country, the foundation said. The small northern state, which embarked on a radical plan to provide all citizens with healthcare less than a decade ago, also leads the nation in “equity,” or making sure that people of lower income groups have healthcare.

Us damn socialists! Not surprisingly, the low-tax, super-conservative states fared the worst. It’ll be interesting to see whether they opt-out of the “opt-out public option’ if it passes. If it does, you can watch the jobs in those “right to work” states start to relocate pretty quickly, that’s for sure.

I know, I know, most of you could probably care less about Glenn Beck’s new best friend, Thomas Naylor, the leader of the now-discredited seccesionist group, Second Vermont Republic. But like the teabaggers, there’s that “gotta-stare-at-a-car-wreck” thing that unhinged lunatics just make me get.

It was a big story on here a few years ago when we publicized his organization’s ties to racist groups like the League of the South. This got the anti-hate organization, the Southern Poverty Law Center interested, and they did a big report about them a while ago, which Naylor dismissed, but soon after, he supposedly broke ties with the LoS, decrying their racism.

But Naylor, when it comes down to it, is “obviously a good Confederate”, as he was once told when appearing on a white-supremacist’s radio talk show last year, obviously an unreconstructed one, as, yes, he’s back in bed with the LoS, as this new report from the SPLC reveals:

The divorce didn’t last long, however. Naylor and a close ally, prominent New York leftist writer and editor Kirkpatrick Sale, are now scheduled to speak at a conference on secession being organized by the Abbeville Institute. They will share the stage at the Charleston, S.C., conference in February with neo-Confederate scholars such as Thomas DiLorenzo, Clyde Wilson and Livingston, the Abbeville Institute founder. All three have current or past links with the League of the South. (Go here for profiles of DiLorenzo, Livingston and Wilson.)

Defiant as ever, Naylor, echoing the same sentiments about the SPLC that one would usually read on white supremacist sites such as Stormfront and VNN (no links, if you want it, look for it), had this to say:

Reached by telephone at his home in Vermont, Naylor declined to discuss the state of his relations with the neo-Confederates. “This has nothing to do with race,” he said. “It’s the SPLC that’s the hate group. Why don’t you go fuck yourself?“

Class act, that Naylor. No word yet from his cohort at VT Commons, Rob Williams. He’d probably say he doesn’t care, as he’s said in the past, all in support of the lost cause.

It's taken a very long time, between all the obstructionism, outright lies and manufactured outrage, but miracles evidently do happen. The Senate Republicans have finally found a tactic and a strategy that will actually benefit the American people, if you can believe it. What could it be? A sudden bout of conscience or something? Are you kidding?

The new strategy? Quit. Yep, as in the “take my toys and go home” way:

Republicans on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said Friday that they will no longer participate in an investigation into the Bush administration's interrogation policies, arguing that Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.'s decision to reexamine allegations of detainee abuse by the CIA would hobble any inquiry.

They're not too thrilled that Holder didn't stick with Obama's “make-nice-move-along-nothing-to-see-here” capitulation in regards to the CIA abuses perpetrated under Bush, so they're not participating:

“Had Mr. Holder honored the pledge made by the President to look forward, not backwards, we would still be active participants in the Committee's review,” the ranking Republican on the intelligence panel, Sen. Christopher S. Bond of Missouri, said in a statement.

Ok, so after whipping up the Teabagging mouthbreathers into a perpetual pants-pooping frenzy about Obama's fascist/socialist/communist/antidisestablishmentarianist (insert your own “ist” here – they won't have a clue, regardless) lies, all of a sudden they took him at his word that he was gonna brush the Bush stuff under the Oval Office rug. Convenient.Yet they don't believe him when they say there's no “death panels”. Go figure.

Of course, Diane Fienstein (D- Milquetoast) is all upset that now it can't be “bipartisan” – you know, you have to have some element of reality-detached craziness in there for it to be taken seriously by the Amuurrican people, but overall, I hope that this will be a new-found winning strategy the GOP is taking on… getting the hell out of the way. Think of the things we could finally accomplish.

There's still those Blue Dog Dems to deal with, the real impediment to progress nowadays, but at least we wouldn't have to hear McConnell or Boehner whinin' and lyin' anymore.

I’m out in Utah this week, packing in about 15 days of adventure into 9, solo.

Yesterday, I went to the famous Arches Nat’l Monument and took some great photos that I’d like to share.

I hit the Arches at sunrise, before those crowds that Edward Abbey ominously warned us about showed up:

The world famous Delicate Arch:

Lots of stuff like this on the way in:

Delicate Arch from below:

Ute Pictographs:

There’s more photos here at a Photbucket album:

http://s131.photobucket.com/al…

So this afternoon, I’m off to backpack into the Canyonlands, then tomorrow up to a hotel in Beaver. Day after that, I’m attempting the 12,000+ foot Delano Peak (sleeping up there), then the next day a hike in Bryce, then back to Vegas, then home to VT. If I can get to a computer agin, I’ll give you another update, if not, I’ll have a bunch of great pics up when I get home.

For background on this, please read CL's post about it here.

I went down to the AIV seminar this morning to have a look, it was about 3/4th's full, and Jon Margolis was still not allowed to attend as a member of the press, although he did interview a few folks. I had a moment or two to sit down with him and get his thoughts on the matter: