The LA Times is right to place the blame for California's lack of governability on the structural barriers erected by Howard Jarvis and his tax revolters almost 31 years ago. For those of you wondering why my state's government is prepared to issue IOUs next week, this op-ed breaks it down into six easy pieces.
But then they have to go and make it sound all hopey at the end:
So what can be done about the dysfunction? In the next few weeks, a
blue-ribbon commission is set to recommend sweeping changes in the tax
system to stabilize revenue collections. Voters last fall approved
Proposition 11, which takes away the Legislature's power to draw its
own districts in favor of an independent commission. Next year, as they
elect a new governor, Californians also will vote on a system of "open
primary" elections aimed at aiding moderates, and they also will
probably decide on one or more initiatives to dump the two-thirds
budget vote requirement.
California Forward, a bipartisan good
government group financed by major foundations, is crafting proposals
to conform government systems and processes to modern management
methods. And the business-oriented Bay Area Council is pushing
initiatives for a state constitutional convention, the first since
1879, to wipe the slate clean and build a new, rational structure for
Now I understand everyone's shit's emotional right now. But I've got a 3 point plan that's going to fix EVERYTHING. Number 1: We've got this guy Not Sure. Number 2: He's got a higher IQ than ANY MAN ALIVE. and Number 3: He's going to fix EVERYTHING.
It's true that everyone is a hypocrite. But as a culture, we Americans (or perhaps humans in general) relish watching our fellow brethren fail. Failblog, Blagojevich, Jon and Kate, the list goes on...
The harder the fall, the higher the interest.
But we're not merely sadistic voyeurs - we Americans are suckers for a good redemption. To our credit, we can be very forgiving. Or maybe it's just our short attention spans in this 15 minute of infamy news cycle...but in a few years I'm sure Sanford's political career will be just fine.
I would be shocked Froomkin's pings haven't
drastically fallen: those who'd never read him still wouldn't, most who
read him for Bush-flaying stopped the day after Obama won, and a
significant number who did stay have since quit, repelled by Froomkin's Obama-flaying.
being, if McCain had won Froomkin's site would be profitably pinging,
which should remind not just neocons but all rubes everywhere what
(And here is proof of my roobiness, that I'd think neocons would
find Froomkin more valuable disillusioning Obama supporters than he was
as house liberal.)
here is proof of my roobiness: I obsess on this because I remember the
civic pride in calling the Washington Post my hometown paper.) Stuff.
While the events being reported out of Iran are of mild interest to me, I find myself more drawn to the "understanding" (as I see it) of the next step in the evolution of political power: The SuperState. Of course, all States/Governments are interested in maintaining their existence/hold on power, but we are now seeing a new form emerging, an incarnation that has but one purpose, the maintenance of the status quo (the State's continued existence and its exercise of a monopoly of power).
The SuperState has existed in various forms in recent years with such sterling examples as the USSR, Communist China and East Germany. Notice how these monolithic, all encompassing Superstates were "the enemy" during the Cold War as opposed to our allies such as the Philippines under Marcos, Nicaragua under Somoza and any number of countries that we backed ("They may be bastards, but they're our bastards."). And yet these smaller entities were just as efficient, if not more brutal, playing at being Superstates. But size is not a major criteria for being a SuperState. A SuperState must be willing to engage in any activity that insures its survival even at the expense of the people it is supposedly sworn to protect.
fire Froomkin? Again common sense requires we assume neocons are
pussies and will not tolerate accurate, documented proof of their
pussiness, yeahsureyeah, but what if...
Froomkin has already
shown he will hold Obama to the same standard of accountability that he
did George Bush. What if firing Froomkin is a neocon nod they know
Obama is one of them (and will help keep their secrets)?
are so pussy they're dimly aware Froomkin's a vital weapon against
Obama but order his execution anyway because Froomkin has to call them pussies to call Obama a pussy. Patriotism, bitches.
Concensus seems coagulating that Obama's .06% less shittiness than McCain vis a vis the crisis in Iran has saved us all from nuclear
annihilation, which is just as stoopid a meme as right-wingers saying
pwoggles wanna pweemptively suwwender and embwace shawia law (though,
nuclear annihilation is .06% more likely, my faith teaches me).
I love me some empire - I am invested, complicit, and rooting for my
continued comfortable life. I'll do what I can that the lives of brown
people on the other side of the world are .06% less shitty, I'll vote
for whores who are .06% less likely to take pride in bombing civilians, who will order the military to adjust their tables of engagement
so .06% fewer civilians die, but a man can only do so much and continue
to disc golf on weekends.
.06% less shitty! Buy into your complicity whole-heartedly, skip the Adjustable Rube Mortgage, and then address your less-shittiness.
The bobbleheads on Fox and Friends recently displayed their concern about this election thing with this guy and that guy in the Iran and everywhere like such as. In another report, a Fox reporter erroneously identified a gray-bearded protester as opposition candidate Mir-Hossein Mousavi.
I don't mean to pick on Fox necessarily. All cable news networks spew garbage (yes, even San Keith and Santa Rachel, sometimes) and are one month away from implementing a laugh track.
But Fox just has a fantastic track record. Remember two years ago when they picked some random black dude's photo to adorn their report on Congressman Cold Cash Jefferson? I bet the same intern has been working their Iran story graphics.
Although, this might be one of my favorite news identification fails...
And for the bonus round, here's a little Bill Hicks for ya.
The inevitability of this was evident back during the election. We weren't going to have George Bush to kick around anymore. In today's world, what's an anti-imperialist, economic disestablishmentarian supposed to say to his friends and extended family of liberal Democrats?
Liberal Democrats who like to talk politics at family functions. [Italics are me.]
"We were traveling in Canada recently, and you know what impresses the people up there most about Obama? He hasn't said one bad thing about Bush. He's just came in and got down to business."
"I didn't think Obama was going to win. I thought a bunch of racists were going to come out and vote against him."
Many yeah's, and much head nodding around the table as consensus is reached.
"Of course he was going to win. The Rethuglicans weren't even trying. McCain and Palin?! Come on!"
More yeah's, and head nodding, and a few chuckles.
"Waht it was, is the Republicans didn't want to be stuck holding the bag on the economy."
"You know what I like about Obama? That you don't have to hold your breath every time he strings together more than four sentences."
"Yeah, Bush was awful! I cringed every time he opened his mouth!"
What I had planned on asking, before the above conversation broke my will to utter the words, (guess I'm not so hardcore after all,) was this: "What do you make of all the unmanned drone attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan killing civilians and militants at a rate of 50 to 1?"
To tie it in with a favorite progressive trope of the Bush years that I hadn't been able to disabuse one particular cousin of, I thought I might add, (again, turns out I'm not hardcore at all!) "Think we would be doing that if Gore was president?"
[I follow Maine Owl'sincessant drone coverage. Why are you trying to ruin my family dinners, The Owl? Well it didn't work this time, you scoundrel!]
Sometimes I think that the blog Shakesville is actually posing as a parody of an unhinged, moonbat, totalitarian progressive community. You know, like a left-wing version of Stephen Colbert.
After one glance at their latest group manifesto - which features an eight-point commenting policy - it's hard to take them seriously at all. I'm sorry, but this shit is just too damn easy to mock. I should really move on to more difficult targets...
Here on the left coast we've been saturated with advertisements for Chase Bank. Late last year they took over the failed Washington Mutual, which was omnipresent in these parts. Here in Irvine there were three Wamu branches on the same street within a five mile stretch. Now they are all Chase.
Part of the Chase ad campaign is to introduce Californians to the east coast brand - since apparently no one here has ever heard of them before. Their current commercial features a shitty cover of a John Lennon classic.
Was Yoko hard up for cash or something? Using this song to promote the legalized loan sharking industry is just - wrong. Then again, what Beatles song hasn't been used to peddle feces to the masses?
In my world, Instant Karma (the original JL version) would be played to footage of bank CEOs jumping out their high rise windows to their deaths on Wall Street. Now that's karma.
Yes, that's right, ladies and gentlemen, a movie was actually shown in the capital of Saudi Arabia for the first time in decades. Now, before you throw your hands skyward in thanks for such a momentous cultural breakthrough, no women were permitted at the screening (girls up to 10 years old provided they were accompanied by an adult male).
Frankly I don't give a rat's ass what they do in Saudi Arabia. Or Dubai. Or the U.A.E. Really, it's none of my business how a culture wants to do things. It isn't my care or cause for concern that women have no rights in the Middle East...it's just not. They live by a different system of values and beliefs and I thought we were supposed to be "enlightened" and "open minded" enough (that's a little joke there people) to understand that each culture was unique and wasn't required to embrace the canon of Western liberal values...that they were fit to conduct their affairs the way they saw fit no matter how backward our assessment of those values might be. Yet there are those on both sides of the political dividing line that would have us believe it is our moral obligation to bring Western Enlightenment to these cultures because our way of life is naturally superior. They are meddling do-gooders with their heads up their asses.
No my biggest objection is the fabrication of a fiction in which the United States and Saudi Arabia (in particular, but substitute any of the moderate members of OPEC) are valued friends and allies. Do you really think I was made with a finger? There is only one thing that links our cultures and one thing only: commerce. They have oil; we have dollars. If they didn't have oil, do you honestly believe anyone in the West would give a good goddam about the Arab world? Be honest, now. Aside from scholars, historians and art history professors, no one would give a rat's ass about the Middle East. Ask yourself, how much you have in common with the average Arab in the street and after you get beyond the basic human traits of eating, sleeping, excreting, etc...there isn't a lot of commonality. There just isn't and this tirade isn't about increasing the strains between two very different cultures, but let's not lie to ourselves about our level of involvement. Perhaps if we start telling the truth at the most basic level then perhaps that might lead to the beginning of an honest relationship.
So stop selling me bullshit and keep my gas prices within reason.
I am not a citizen of the world. I am a citizen of the United States because only in the United States does citizenship start with our creator. [...] I think this is one of the most critical moments in American history. We are living in a period where we are surrounded by paganism.
Here I thought citizenship started with birthright. For Gingrich and his God Rediscovery Team believing in the Judeo-Christian creator/father god should be a litmus test for citizenship.