Here and There

This story, by Wired.com’s Ryan Singel*, describes an analysis of contributions from U.S. telecommunications’ PACs to representatives, and how the money may correlate to those reps votes on the recent FISA renewal act now in the Senate.

Singel points out that 40 percent more money went to the 94 Democrats who now support the bill (as opposed to their opposition to the original bill, which went before the House three months ago). Also, in total, meaning when you include Republican reps who, naturally, support warrantless wiretapping and, perhaps more importantly, immunity for the telecoms from prosecution, the PAC money to those voting in favor of the new bill is nearly double that going to members of Congress who voted against it.

This is slightly complicated, but very, very sickening.

Honestly? Screw campaign finance reform. How about legislative finance reform? How about Larry Lessig, and others like him, who are pushing to keep special interest money out of politics altogether?

Members of Congress are charged with representing their constituents. Since when are AT&T, Verizon, and the like constituents of anyone?

* Singel is a colleague of mine.

I brushed off your endorsement when I got wind of it early in the day. But damn you, you made me watch your speech.

And now I copy the embed code with wet eyes. Yes we can!

Just got done taking a Zogby poll. Setting aside questions of the pollster’s reliability, I like taking these surveys from time to time.

Something I had been thinking about as I was wandering the streets near my work the other day came up on this poll. It comes up frequently on Zogby’s, as I’m sure it does on others. It’s where the poll asks you to name what issues are most important to you (choose only two), and there’s a list of things like Taxes, Education, Economy, Space Exploration.

It seems more than a meaningless exercise to me. Because no one can solve all problems, and it’s best to have your priorities at the ready, I thought I’d share what I told the pollsters.

If I were allowed to choose five issues important to this country, they would be, in this order: Environment, Economy, Diplomacy, Education, and yes, Defense (thanks to the mess we’ve inherited).

Environment gets top billing because we’ve simply got to start, really start, making an effort now. Environmental damage is the farthest reaching and most potentially intractable. The economy trends up and down over time. Left alone, our climate is headed toward a condition in which no of us could live here anymore.

Economy because, frankly, it sucks. It sucks bad. Taxes are too low on the top earners, and too high and complex for the rest of us. It’s been seven years of skew, and it’s time to recognize that the experiment failed and get back to something more fair and sensible. A subsection to this issue is jobs, which can be created in areas concerning the environment, from cleanup to renewable energy, etc. Health care is tied in here, too. It should get its own topic, but there’s no lack of good healthcare in this country. There is, on the other hand, a telling lack of affordable healthcare.

Which kinda sorta leads to diplomacy. We’ve simply got to get our good standing back. Not launching unilateral wars for falsified reasons is a good start, but we’ve got to go so much farther. Helping struggling peoples where we can, but staying out of sovereign nation’s affairs is a safe bet, too.

Education is fourth, sadly. It should be first. But the world is fucked right now, so those others get 1-3. We’ve simply got to clamp down on education, from pre-school to college. Quality education needs to be made available at all levels. And affordable college, with reasonable loans in place, needs to be there, too. It will take a dramatic shift of emphasis, because at the current rate of school and student failure, this country is headed down the drain.

Defense because there are people who want to fuck shit up. We should be ready to stop them, but a true effort in these other areas might also reduce the threat. It’s all so wonderfully intertwined.

Been telling myself it’s fast approaching the time when I hold a fire to Democrats’ ass the way I’ve been doing to the GOP for so long.

Lo and behold, this landed in my Google Reader this morning: Chris Dodd tied to preferential mortgage program at Countryside.

Please, senator, stop addressing the housing crisis RIGHT NOW.

Do not give a misbehaving child what (s)he wants.

And with that implicit analogy, this blog now turns its full attention toward taking down John McCain. Reader submissions are accepted.

The aim will be to expose John McCain for what he is — an old-school politician, beholden to special interests with deep pockets who play by their own rules. The arguments about approach to government are tired, but must be hashed out. The real question is who these candidates are, what they represent, and how they will lead and represent the United States of America at home and to the world.

Given these tenets, the choice should be pretty clear, methinks.

He’s no superdelegate, but he’s super-rich. Super-rich as in the richest man in the world. And he’s got great ideas on economics.

Obama has so many of these, it’s ridiculous.

Three former heads of the Securities and Exchange Commission are set to endorse him today. I know, I know, they’re economists, so they don’t matter.

I wonder if anyone is keeping track of non-Superdelegate, public-figure endorsements. And of course, the obvious question: Will Greenspan endorse, and if so, whom?

Go to the second paragraph in this NYT story, and see for yourself how polling reveals that the public ain’t buying the gas-tax holiday.

This is really, really good news.

oh …
my …
god.

She’s done it again. She’s attempted to distance herself from the black hole of 2001-2008, and in so doing, has trumpted the Bush Co. mantra of “To hell with experts.”

The Rob has some excellent commentary from Clinton’s appearance this morning with her best buddy and family pet, George Stephaopoulos.

I’d like to add to his analysis by saying that voters aren’t beyond hearing about the devastating environmental consequences of making gas cheaper. They aren’t so stupid that you can’t talk from the outset, emphatically, about the crime of high prices in the face of record oil-company profits. And they’re smart enough to connect the dots between higher oil prices, a Middle East in a shambles, and demand having spiked.

It’s like with being a liar, or being a racist. To not be these things, you shouldn’t have to say you’re not. Ditto populism. A populist should never have to say, “I’m fighting for you,” or, “I’m a populist.” When they do, I smell bullshit.

Hillary Clinton is being a follower. She’s following the most cynical, unthinking viewpoint, which says, “Damn, them’s high prices. Oh, what? It’s because of the gubment taxin’ my gas? Damn them!”

No, a true leader connects the dots and speaks out and address the source of the problem.

Here’s Obama speaking Friday about the politics behind the idea:

Seems like yesterday afternoon was a ticklish fun time in Electionland. I was helping my lady move, and missed some nuggets, most importantly this one from Michael Bloomberg on the gas-tax holiday, aka, worst idea in the world.

Thx: Sullivan.

Thx: HuffPo.

I’m so with him on this, and think it’s remarkable that he’s the only candidate opposing it. My advice to him is to sharpen and simplify his attack on it, because this is one issue his opponents will throw in his face, calling him a tax-ready liberal. It’s actually a very conservative and fiscally responsible position to take (Obama’s), as well as being the most ecologically sound.

Bottom line: We need to drive less. The gas tax is meant as a disincentive to drive as much as we please, while also providing a steady revenue stream for road- and other transportation-related projects and maintenance.

The other senators should be honest. Stop pandering.