EFFin' Unsound

Turns out Michael Medved thinks it’s not that important a part of the American experience. Read Sadly, No! for a better making fun of than I could possibly provide. I would like to highlight this passage:

THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT TODAY’S AFRICAN-AMERICANS WOULD BE BETTER OFF IF THEIR ANCESTORS HAD REMAINED BEHIND IN AFRICA. The idea of reparations rests on the notion of making up to the descendants of slaves for the incalculable damage done to their family status and welfare by the enslavement of generations of their ancestors. In theory, reparationists want society to repair the wrongs of the past by putting today’s African-Americans into the sort of situation they would have enjoyed if their forebears hadn’t been kidnapped, sold and transported across the ocean. Unfortunately, to bring American blacks in line with their cousins who the slave-traders left behind in Africa would require a drastic reduction in their wealth, living standards, and economic and political opportunities. No honest observer can deny or dismiss this nation’s long record of racism and injustice, but it’s also obvious that Americans of African descent enjoy vastly greater wealth and human rights of every variety than the citizens of any nation of the Mother Continent. If we sought to erase the impact of slavery on specific black families, we would need to obliterate the spectacular economic progress made by those families (and by US citizens in general) over the last 100 years. In view of the last century of history in Nigeria or Ivory Coast or Sierra Leone or Zimbabwe, could any African American say with confidence that he or she would have fared better had some distant ancestor not been enslaved? Of course, those who seek reparations would also cite the devastating impact of Western colonialism in stunting African progress, but the United States played virtually no role in the colonization of the continent. The British, French, Italians, Portuguese, Germans and others all established brutal colonial rule in Africa; tiny Belgium became a particularly oppressive and bloodthirsty colonial power in the Congo. The United States, on the other hand, sponsored only one long-term venture on the African continent: the colony of Liberia, an independent nation set up as a haven for liberated American slaves who wanted to go “home.” The fact that so few availed themselves of the opportunity, or heeded the back-to-African exhortations of turn- of-the-century Black Nationalist Marcus Garvey, reflects the reality that descendants of slaves understood they were better off remaining in the United States, for all its faults.

Fuck the heck? First off, as S,N! mention, so what? Slavery was still horrible, and yes our practice of it was a blot on our record. Beyond that, maybe the slave trade that the U.S. took a part in (especially the early years of the republic, but Americans still participated in the slave trade in other countries after importation was banned here) played a tiny part in why Africa is in such a state today. A lot of those colonies especially on the West coast of Africa were set up to get slaves to the United States and the rest of the Americas. Also, perhaps it would be worth mentioning the fact that the former slaves lived as second class citizens in large part of the country even when slavery ended.

The Washington Policy Center is upset that Gregoire doesn’t hate children as much as the Washington Policy Center and President Bush.

Why does the governor want to take a health policy dispute to court?

Well, a few seconds with teh googlez, and I discovered that she is suing them because they implemented a rule change that she feels is an end-run around funding what the law requires. It has nothing to do with the policy dispute Bush is having with Congress. It has everything to do with rule changes that she feels are, “going to set the criteria so high that no state will ever be able to reach it.”

Governor Gregoire wants to the sue the federal government over expansion of the State Children’s Health Program (SCHIP).

She’s suing them over their rule changes that are designed to kick kids off of the system. It has nothing to do with the pending legislation, except for the fact that President Bush changed the rules knowing a fight was coming with Congress.

Judges are in no better position to set health care policy than elected officials. Expansion of SCHIP is not a dispute over interpretation of existing law. Bush wants to expand it by $5 billion and focus health care assistance to children from low-income families. Democrats want to expand it by as much as $70 billion, cover families earning up to $63,000 a year, cover more adults, and count people up to age 25 as “children.”

But judges are in a position to know if President Bush’s letter to the states violates existing federal law. That’s, in fact, the goddamn point of having federal judges.

As to Bush’s plan to “expand” SCHIP: It would be better if inflation didn’t exist, if healthcare costs weren’t expanding under President Bush, and if there weren’t more, you know, poor children without healthcare as a result of both Bush’s policies and childbirth. Also, I believe it’s over 5 years (at lest that’s the time frame used by the Daily O’s editorial linked above).

Bush does not want to cut SCHIP, as the media says. He wants to expand the program. Democrats want to expand it more, using a program for low-income children to cover higher-income families and adults. As often happens in reporting about government spending, a slower rate of increase is being called a cut. But no matter how much bigger SCHIP becomes, this is simply not a question for judges to decide. Elected officials should set health policy – after all, that is what we hired them to do.

He wants to cut the number of children on it. He has also set up new rules to do that. Whatever comes of the legislative process is a different story. Also a sad one if you’re morally opposed to sick children.

Besides, Gregoire doesn’t need permission from Bush or anyone else to expand taxpayer subsidized health care in our state in any way she likes.

Bush has an obligation to follow the law. Also, Gregoire and a Democratic legislature have expanded healthcare to children.

This year the legislature controlled a $2 billion surplus. Any or all of that money could have been used to expand state health subsidy programs, no lawsuit required.

A few million of it were spent to do just that, but then the Bush Administration sent a letter saying they were going to cut funding that she believes they have an obligation to pay under current law. Suing if it comes to that seems like a better way to get the money than, say, robbing Fort Knox.

He quit the not a campaign, because some mean ol’ nasty ol’ people were saying it was a campaign. And that’s all well and good, but from Andrew at the NW Progressive Institute Blog, and Rich Roesler writing for the Spokesman Review’s Eye on Olympia, I see that Dino Rossi has gone around the bend. At a campaign event totally not a campaign event because he just hasn’t decided if he’s running yet so stop saying that at the 28th district Republicans, he — well, I’ll let them describe how he spent his last day as a nonpartisan independent who we have no idea if he’s running for governor:

The dining room of the Tacoma Country & Golf Club overflowed on Tuesday, September 11^th, with 28^th DRC members and guests who had come to hear Dino Rossi and to enjoy a great evening with other Republicans.

There’s a country club Republicans joke in there somewhere, but I can’t wrest it out.

President Steve O’Ban began the program by talking about the significance of the date (9/11) and how it has affected our lives. He introduced Lynn Harsh, Executive Director of Evergreen Freedom Foundation and mother of Sergeant John Harsh, a young man who is serving his third tour of duty in Iraq, and followed by reading a very moving essay written by Sergeant Harsh about his impressions of Iraq and his introduction to combat.
Pastor Bill Johnson also recalled the events of 9/11 in his invocation and told how he and his pastoral staff prayed for the victims of the attack and their families.

Iraq, Iraq, Iraq, 9/11. I get it, you think Iraq has something to do with 9/11. But I want crazy from Rossi, not just the people he speaks to, so I’m skipping the next few paragraphs.

Finally Dino was introduced by Senator Mike Carrell, and Charlotte Carrell and five other women dressed in “Rossi Posse” t-shirts and cowboy hats got the crowd chanting DI-NO, DI-NO, Di-NO!

That’s a hell of a sentence. Is Mike Carrel one of the women? Why the extra and? The date stamp on the post is 9/24; did it really take 2 weeks to write this?

Dino began by saying that he was not here to speak as president of Forward Washington, but rather as a fellow Republican with a message of hope. He explained that the policies of the current administration will be its undoing, as people begin to realize that a 33% increase in the state budget will necessitate huge tax increases to cover the cost of the new programs. The hiring of 8,000 new state employees under the Gregoire administration will be unsustainable under the current budget.

Oddly these things that for the past three years they’ve been saying were right around the bend keep not happening. I just hope they can find the WMD in Iraq before the Democrats turn the surpluses under a Democratic legislature and a Democratic governor into deficits.

The Governor has blown through the $2.5 billion surplus she inherited, and the new spending plan will likely result in a deficit by 2009—the biggest in state history. We have also seen the largest expansion of gambling in state history because of the new contract with the tribes in which the state gets nothing back.
Gregoire’s health care mandates exemplify the liberal competition-killing philosophy and will result in fewer health care opportunities for our citizens.

Providing healthcare will take healthcare away. Dino then told the crowd that up was down, and that left was right. The sky was green while the grass was blue as we were living in an age of horrible deficits at the state level and massive surpluses at the federal.

The press isn’t telling us these realities because they are aligned with Gregoire’s style of governance, but we can spread the word and we must.

Hear that media? When you pretend that Rossi is a moderate, you’re saying that it’s perfectly reasonable to call children’s healthcare for the poor and middle class socialist, and oh by the way, to call the entire press socialist while you’re at it. Seriously, wouldn’t a better explanation for the fact that the media in the state aren’t reporting our horrible deficit and socialistic policies is because we are running surpluses and have one of the best business climates in the country? I mean call me crazy, but that’s probably a better explanation.

In answer to the question of whether he will run again, Dino explained that he will announce his decision at the end of the year, after he assesses the support available to him. “We’ll need the support of you and 129 of your friends,” he explained. And everyone in that room promised it.

Yeah, because I’m sure most of those Republicans totally sat out the ’04 election.

* Shorter Forward Washington: Dino Rossi running for governor has made it difficult to pretend that Dino Rossi isn’t running for governor.

* Shorter Radio Equalizer (this is a recording): I hate Al Franken.

* Shorter Andrew’s Dad: Some black woman doesn’t like war.

* Shorter Lou Guzzo: How dare the media cover sex abuse in the Catholic Church?

Goldy has a post on this up, and thehim is going to do one on a similar topic soon, but since this was already in the hopper:

The Seattle Times has an editorial on the MoveOn ad. And um, seriously, even if you don’t think the ad was appropriate, maybe it’s not quite as bad as, you know, the war.

The overzealous liberal group MoveOn.org proved once again that one organization can make a difference — a bad one.

MoveOn.org’s ill-considered, outrageous New York Times newspaper ad calling Gen. David Petraeus, the commander in Iraq, “General Betray Us” not only slimed a well-respected general, it distorted a very real and very serious debate about the course of the war. Instead of the U.S. Congress making progress on troop withdrawal, as some expected this month, the Senate wasted time debating and voting on a measure to condemn the ad.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said he walked away from the vote because it was an unnecessary waste of time. He has that right. It was also an unnecessary waste of ink.

Why can’t we, as a country, disagree about policy without undertaking childish ad hominem attacks on a general who is doing his best to represent the military in a very unpopular war?

This editorial page believes strongly it is time for the American troops to start coming home in an orderly fashion.

But we listened carefully to Petraeus’ testimony out of respect for his knowledge and understanding of a complicated region.

MoveOn.org embarrassed itself and its position on the war with an over-the-top and unnecessary attack on the general.

The war is bad enough. Nobody needs MoveOn.org’s stupid advertising campaign.

Because on the one hand, you have a disastrously executed, horribly unnecessary, and probably illegal oil war that will cost this country several trillion dollars, and already has cost us close to 4000 dead, and many more injured. It’s caused several million people to flee their homes, and perhaps killed another million. On the other hand, one of the architects of that horror may have his feelings hurt, so that’s about the same.

I don’t know if Lou Guzzo is little r racist, or just a crazy man. Anyway, he can’t see how anyone might be offended by the Washington Redskins.

Why all the fuss over Indian insignias in sports?

Has there been a recent fuss that I’ve missed? I mean I know it springs up from time to time, but is Guzzo responding to something?

One of the silliest and most unnecessary squabbles in the nation today is the ongoing dispute over the names of athletic teams at every level, from the grade schools to pro sports.

It isn’t just the names. The It’s also the mascots.

I can understand why many persons are upset over certain scurrilous names that clearly insult and denigrate ethnic minorities or even certain majorities. Those names deserve to be banned and those who use them severely reprimanded.

Lou and I are on the opposite track here. Lou thinks that Redskins isn’t offensive (as we’ll see in a few paragraphs), but that some names should be banned. I think most of them are offensive, but shouldn’t be banned. I think fans, and alums, and for youth sports parents should question why their sports are doing these things. Still, banning is way too harsh. Teams should either do what Florida State did and work with the tribes who are offended to figure out a way to show respect, or change the names. But ultimately, that’s their choice. And the fans do seem to keep coming.

But, for the life of me, I can’t accept the accusation by certain native tribes and even some non-Indian persons that it is an insult to name a school or professional team the “Indians” or the “Chieftains” or some other tribal symbol.

Or to have the mascot dress up in silly cloths and dance around in a way that just represents ugly stereotypes. Or that Godawful tomahawk chop that Braves fans do. What could possibly be offensive?

Where is the insult or denigration in referring to the Cleveland “Indians”? If I were a descendant of an Indian tribesman, I would find it an honor to have a team bear the name of my forebears. Ditto for Chieftains, Braves, or even Redskins.

Again, there would be a way to do it right, but very few teams actually do that.

Have we become so skittish and thin-skinned that anything and everything that does not follow the most sacrosanct formula in our daily lives must be scuttled and consigned to the garbage heap?

This paragraph would be more powerful if it came from someone who wasn’t offended by Rainier Beer billboards. And then, you know, bragged about getting it taken down. And kept bragging decades later.

As an example, let’s examine the “Indians” label. Under whose lopsided reasoning is any use of the label an insult or a demeaning term? Frankly, I think it is mainly a sign of the times. Some people — even tribal members — have nothing to do except dwell on this silly subject.

I like that Lou concedes that tribal members are people. It must have been fun for them to work with him in Dixy’s administration. And of course they have other battles that they are fighting as well as this, why aren’t you writing about them?

Nevertheless, we find schools across the nation, colleges, and even professional teams in all the major sports squirming because they have one of the Indian-oriented labels and they are afraid of offending someone who might otherwise be inclined to buy a ticket to the game.

How dare people be less likely to buy a product that offends them?* Motherfucking capitalism!

How do we stop this nonsense? I would like to see the Indian tribes of America in all parts of the nation rise to the occasion and declare the entire issue inane. When I worked in state government, one of my duties as policy chief to Gov. Dixy Lee Ray was as her liaison with all Indian tribes of Washington.

You know, because all of the people of a certain race all think the same thing. And, honestly, I like how he criticizes tribal members for having the time to protest, but then thinks that they should all protest the protest.

In that capacity, I found how intelligent and understanding Indian leaders are in all the tribes. I believe that if they joined to discuss this silly issue, they would immediately lay it to rest — and, in fact, announced that they consider it an honor for teams to adopt Indian names!

Or perhaps if commentators decided not to bring it up for no reason, it might also be laid to rest. Or if sports teams stopped using racist mascots, it would be laid to rest. (more…)

I know: two Clintonista posts in a row. I’m not trying to make this a Clinton campaign blog (not that thehim would let that happen) and have tried to defend all Democrats when the Republicans attack them. But the righties are going on the attack on Hillary this week, so on to a quick one by Palosutics:

At Least Jenna Jameson Respects the Troops

That’s probably why she endorsed Hillary Clinton.

What’s the difference between a porn star and Hillary Clinton? This porn star at least respects the sacrifices of our soldiers.

She visited wounded vets in Walter Reed with her boyfriend. Good for them. According to the article, she’s, “a devoted Democrat” so that isn’t surprising.

As for Hillary…..

She refused to pile on an attack on MoveOn. But the fact that Ken Blackwell doesn’t like her, I guess that’s more important than her record: Her work to make sure to end the horrors that the troops faced at Walter Reed. Her amendment to extend family and medical leave for wounded vets.* Her support of the Webb Amendment to give the troops a rest.
(more…)