Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Archive for November 2008

lovin your ugly sugar daddy

I had an interesting experience today that reminded me why progressives really can’t afford ambivalence on the future of unions.  And as we face both the upcoming EFCA fight and  state “Right to Work” initiatives in 2010 ( not to mention the current slog through the public flogging of the evil UAW )  a strong reminder and warning seems in order.

Please read on as the truth might surprise and alarm the hell out of you.  Let’s engage in a little re-edumacation on just how progressive work really gets done.  

Photobucket

The Underwritten Story of the Campaign.

On C-Span 2’s post election Presidential Election Analysis Panel by the Smithsonian Associates. That’s how Howard Dean put it. See below.

Some key quotes from the video:

“Washington doesn’t get it. They always get it last. This is the most underwritten story of this campaign… by the press… by the media.”

“Women my age, in my generation felt this really acutely. Because they were the ones that suffered all of the indignities that you suffer when you fight to win the battle for equality. As they did.”

“Nobody understood the agony that women, particularly of my generation, were undergoing about this…issue…and to this day, it has been swept under the rug and been forgotten because she didn’t win.”

“We thought we were past all this stuff and we weren’t. We weren’t surprised about the degree of racism or lack of it or whatever, that was endlessly examined. We did not examine the fact that we didn’t get, we haven’t gotten nearly as far ahead as we thought we were about equality between the sexes. And that ought to be revisited as a result of what happened.”

“and it happened to Sarah Palin too. All the stuff that happened to Sarah Palin, and I know God knows I don’t have a lot of sympathy for her political points of view, but a lot of the stuff that happened to her, as she pointed out, would not have happened had she been a man.”

Do you think an honest discussion of this topic is possible yet?

Pity the Republicans?

Things are looking very grim for republicans these days. Their brand is at one of it’s lowest points in history. Gallup reports that only 34% of Americans have a favorable view of republicans and 61% have an unfavorable view of the party.

Why so low? Well, they have really messed things up in our country, and they now seem to be at war with each other. And their standard bearer, who exactly will lead the repubumblicans out of the desert?

By all account this woman is leading the pack.


see Sarah Palin pictures

Clinton to accept Secretary of State position.

According to a New York Times report, Hillary Clinton has apparently accepted the position of Secretary of State.

WASHINGTON – Hillary Rodham Clinton has decided to give up her Senate seat and accept the position of secretary of state, making her the public face around the world for the administration of the man who beat her for the Democratic presidential nomination, two confidants said Friday.

The apparent accord between perhaps the two leading figures in the Democratic Party climaxed a week-long drama that riveted the nation’s capital.

Mrs. Clinton came to her decision after additional discussion with President-elect Barack Obama about the nature of her role and his plans for foreign policy, said one of the confidants, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the situation.

Mr. Obama’s office told reporters on Thursday that the nomination is “on track” but this is the first word from the Clinton camp that she has decided.

This is great news, as far as I’m concerned.

The Wingnut Strikes Back.

Back in July, it was more than confirmed what a wacko Michael Savage really is when he decided to direct his angry rants at autistic children. Well in case you were hoping that he went back under the big dark rock from where he came, sorry to disappoint – he’s at it again.

During the November 18 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage said:

“You haven’t seen any of what’s coming in this country. You are going to see the wholesale replacement of competent white men, and I’m targeting exactly the group that’s gonna be thrown out of jobs in the government. And I’ll say it, and I’ll be the first to say it, and I may be not the only — the last to say it. I am telling you that there’s gonna be a wholesale firing of competent white men in the United States government up and down the line, in police departments, in fire departments. Everywhere in America, you’re going to see an exchange that you’ve never seen in history, and it’s not gonna be necessarily for the betterment of this country.”

Here’s a listen if you feel like barfing a little.

Solicitation for LGBT opinions

So, in the document below the fold is some text from the Obama Change.org site regarding Civil Rights.

One of the things in this document is:

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples: Barack Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples.

Note, the “Civil Union” terminology. Now, as mentioned before I like to think of myself as a pragmatist, so when something essentially says “equal rights” but calls it a Civil Union I can easily support it, especially if one thinks about it as a first step. It’s about “equal rights” right? And “Marriage” has a bit of a pejorative history anyways (being based on religious and legal ownership). So a big YAY, right? right?

Yet, it seems there are some in the LGBT community who automatically bristle at the term CU, seeing it as a “separate but equal” issue. And it does not seem to help when I try and frame “separate but equal” as being an infrastructure policy, separate schools, public spaces, bathrooms etc. CU seems to be a non-starter for some, no matter how it is phrased.

But, I can’t help but think, if the emotionally laded term “marriage” is removed it would make it incredibility easier to achieve those rights.

My query, am I off my rocker for thinking this is a good thing? I am after all a white, het, married, male so I am willing to admit the issue is not as immediate for me as it would be for others.

All responses welcome, but I’d like to especially hear from those within the GLBT community if possible.

Waxman takes over Energy and Commerce

In a 137-122 secret vote, the Democratic Caucus followed the recommendation of their steering committee to replace John Dingell with Henry Waxman as chairman of the influential House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Dingell, who represents Michigan’s 15th district and is a staunch ally of Detroit’s automobile manufacturers as well as sportsmen’s groups and pro-gun organizations, held the endorsement of many Blue Dog Democrats to keep the chair.  Waxman, as part of a more progressive wing of the Democratic party long frustrated by environmental obstructionism in both parties, is expected to use the broad jurisdiction of the committee to pursue more aggressive oversight and reform in a variety of areas in a manner more in line with the agenda of President-elect Barack Obama.

Dingell has been either Chairman or Ranking Member of the committee since 1981.  As chairmanships are usually determined by seniority, Waxman’s coup over a man who will become the longest serving Representative in the history of the House this February is quite uncommon.

Senior Democrats were stunned by the Waxman victory, which seemingly dealt a blow to the party’s long-held principle of seniority. “It’s just been buried,” Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said of seniority.

Dingell has in the past consistently opposed efforts to tighten environmental controls affecting Detroit, especially fuel economy and emissions standards.  This attitude has earned him the ire of more liberal Democrats including Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who, although remaining officially neutral during Waxman’s campaign to win the chair, clearly favored her fellow Californian for the post.

He has often clashed publicly with Pelosi, who made an end-run around Dingell last year by creating a temporary committee chaired by Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), a close Pelosi ally, to oversee global warming issues.

Despite House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s public neutrality in the race, Rangel accused her of tacitly supporting Waxman because her closest allies in the House ran his campaign and she did not intervene to stop Waxman, a home-state colleague, from running a campaign that exposed ideological fissures among Democrats.

“I assume that not playing a role is playing a role,” Rangel said.

The committee is likely to play a role immediately, helping to negotiate the terms and concessions of the big 3 bailout.  Dingell is married to the executive director for public affairs at General Motors and would have very probably called for a no-strings-attached package, while Waxman is likely to negotiate far tougher terms and hold management accountable for their failures.

Energy and Commerce is extremely influential on matters that affect the US economy, and so will play a more even important role than usual in the 111th Congress.  It’s encouraging for it to have a progressive leader who will fully support Obama’s legislative goals to enact real change for our country.

Let them eat cake – The death of the Big 3

As a life-long car guy, the plight of the auto industry is painful to watch. I worked for General Motors for 20 years before leaving to try my luck elsewhere. My father and both of my brothers spent their entire working lives at General Motors. The economy in my area is still highly dependent on good  paying jobs at area factories. The demise of GM would completely devastate this region of the country.

Many people have spoken out about the current crisis in the auto industry, including Mitt Romney. In an editorial in the New York Times, Romney argued for letting the Big 3 go through bankruptcy. That editorial will kill any chance he has of carrying Michigan in a future presidential bid. He angered those who know the industry best by not only placing blame in the wrong place, he got much of his argument wrong.

Romney argued that one important change the industry needs is to bring in top executives from outside the auto industry. Apparently, the presence of Alan Mulally at Ford and Robert Nardelli at Chrysler escaped his notice. Mulally came from Boeing and Nardelli from Home Depot. Those aren’t exactly car companies, Mr. Romney.

Daily Tubes

November 19, 2008 in 100 seconds. Do you watch too much news?

Heh. An Onion a day…