Archive for the ‘congress’ Category

My latest Examiner column Out Gunn-ed Everywhere man is now up at my examiner page a peek:

Years ago Olver produced an ad which was a take off of the country song I’ve been everywhere emphasizing how many places in the state he has been to and worked for. It is still one of the best ads of its type I’ve ever seen. As the ad doesn’t mention an opponent or a year it is regularly rolled out each election. FactCheck.org even gave it an award in 2008.

However the I’ve been everywhere theme might be overplayed Viking Pundit explains:

“Every two years, this guy blows the dust off of his campaign commercial which is simply themed “I’ve been everywhere.” Except he hasn’t held any town hall meetings anywhere in Massachusetts’ First District. The first and last time he visited any towns in Western Massachusetts was to shoot that damned commercial.

It is a first rate ad but it looks like it will take more than that to ensure a 20th straight year of democratic control of the MA-01.

And just to remind everyone. My examiner columns are currently my only source of paid income (other than the occasional pc fix) I’m paid by the hit so every time you read one of my columns or you forward it for someone else to read it’s like dropping a penny (well almost a penny) in DaTipJar.

Of course if you want to kick into DaTipJar outright or hire me to write, that’s very welcome too.

I really like Morning Joe, I like Joe, I like Mika, I like Barnicle. They drive me nuts a lot because I DO like them. If I didn’t I wouldn’t care. (its the same way with Andrew Sullivan, he was one of the first blogs I ever read and when he went over the hill it hurt because I remember how great he used to be)

Today on Twitter he is doing a pubic service in a series of tweets explaining the political stunt used by Democrats who rather have a political point than help for 9/11 responders.

His tweets in sequence:

first

For those who don’t understand King/Weiner debate, here are the facts….

second

JoeNBC

1. You need 218 votes to pass a bill under regular order in the House of Representatives.

third

JoeNBC

2. Pelosi had over 250 votes to pass the 9/11 bill to help NY firefighters and cops.

fourth

JoeNBC

3. Pelosi and Democrats chose to bring up the bill in a way that would require a 2/3rds vote, effectively killing the bill.

fifth

JoeNBC

4. This procedure is called a “suspension” vote and is for non-controversial measures like naming post offices.

sixth

JoeNBC

5. Pelosi could have ruled Republican amendments out of order and still taken the majority-wins vote.

seventh

JoeNBC

I know many rabid ideologues don’t let facts get in the way, but House leaders chose to kill a 9/11 relief bill they could have passed.

Some might think this is unnecessary, but you should never assume that just because you know something other people do as well. People have to be constantly reminded by nature.

More please.

over the 14th amendment. There are actually 5 sections to this amendment. The irony here of course is the “why not just enforce the existing laws” instead of such “foolishness”

Why? For the same reason why Arizona felt compelled to pass their law, because the Federal Government hasn’t done it, and these same people who now say: “Just enforce the laws” Don’t favor them and don’t want them enforced.

To pretend that one side is playing politics with this issue and the other is not is disingenuous to say the least.

For those people in congress afraid of talking points memo might I suggest offering a new clean 28th Amendment as follows:

Section 1: Any child born after the adoption of this amendment of two non-citizens, those non-citizens being in the United States in violation of federal law, shall not be considered “born in the United States” for the purpose of determining citizenship.

Section 2: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Simple direct and to the point. Anybody want to sign on?

Memeorandum thread here.

I’ve always remembered a particular episode of Gilligan’s Island (Gilligan vs. Gilligan available online here) that had a particular exchange between Mr. Howell and the Russian spy posing as Gilligan. Mr. Howell puts his chess piece on an illegal square. Mr. Howell reacts indignantly:

Mr. Howell: Young man are you accusing a Howell of cheating? I’ll have you know I’m far too wealthy.

Spy Gilligan: To cheat?

Mr. Howell: No, to be accused!

It reminds me that there once was a time when our icons such as JFK were far too important to have their dirty laundry aired in public.

How does that relate to The Rangel/Waters issues? Consider this; as Black America gradually progressed in rights and influence, they also gradually took the places at the seats of power that their growing influence and the slow progress toward legal equality demanded.

Like all men and woman those people who attained power and office were individuals with their own strengths, weaknesses and foibles. However those foibles while they might be known in their own communities were not aired to the general pubic. Not because the community approved but because you didn’t tear down your own when it took so long to get to the mountaintop (this is of course not unique to the Black community). As blacks migrated to the democratic party and as the party became more dependent on their vote, it became a priority for the party as well to keep any problems in house with a tact cloak of silence. Thus any such suggestion became a racial issue and the proponent of such questions a racist.

Now however things are different, the digital age forces light on things that were once hidden (read Rev Wright) and with our first black president (sorry Bill Clinton) it is impossible to pretend that African American’s place in American society is defined primarily by the sins of the past.

James Clyburn not withstanding, Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters ethics issues have nothing to do with race and everything to do with actions. The actions against them are not signs of the return of the Jim Crow past meant to keep Black America underfoot. It also shows we have progressed beyond the equally offensive but less violent era of tokenism.

This is the sign of a new era where we can look at a member of congress of any race and see…a member of congress. This means we can judge said member not on the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I think that’s progress and America in general and the Black community in particular are better off for it.

Update: Morgan Freeman knew what he was talking about.

As does Col Allen West: