Fired Up
I usually have to get fired up about some political issue to write a decent blog post. It's difficult to come up with potent rhetoric when I'm just lukewarm about something. I'm also one of those people who gets mad, then gets over it -- so I generally have to strike while the iron is hot or I can't muster enough energy to do my topic justice.
But there are some perennial issues I'm always passionate about, and a few of them have popped up on my radar over the last several days. In no particular order, they are:
1) Don't ask, don't tell, and don't DREAM. DADT has already been ruled unconstitutional by the 9th Circuit, and it is on its way out. Even the highest-ranking military officers want it gone. Over 60% of the population supports its repeal. It resulted in the firing of 14,000 military personnel over the last 10 years, when we are having huge recruiting challenges. But its repeal is getting stuck in a filibuster today.
(A local aside: Our senator, Mark Udall, introduced the bill to repeal DADT. Good for him! Mark Bennett, the other senator (up for reelection now) plans to vote for the repeal. Ken Buck, the far-right Republican senate nominee, wouldn't vote to repeal DADT. He said "the military should be as homogeneous as possible" to promote morale and effectiveness, and called homosexuality a "lifestyle choice." Mr. Buck, how homogeneous do you want the military? Should it be all male? All white? All Christian?)
I'm not happy with either party on this one; the Democrats attached the repeal to a military appropriations bill, which also contains the DREAM act which is designed to provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants brought into the US as children. If they serve in the military or earn a college degree, they could become citizens. Both of these bills are worthy -- and to attach them to the military appropriations bill is silly political maneuvering. Of course, there are some right-wing Republicans who will never vote in favor of any path to citizenship for any illegal alien, and there are others who will never vote to repeal DADT. So now what happens to both of these bills?
2) Far-right wingnuts in the spotlight. WHY are Sarah Palin's 15 minutes not long over? There can be no disagreement that the woman is a mental midget. Now we have Palin redux in Christine O'Donnell. Thank God voters are smarter than the media: Palin lost, and O'Donnell is behind. She's a gift to the Democratic party, though, since the polls show the man she beat in the primary would handily have won the election she is poised to lose.
And while we're on the topic of the upcoming election, why are the media so eager to call it for the GOP? We have two months to go, and voters have heard more about the Republicans during the primary season because of their intra-party strife. (Quick, who can name O'Donnell's Democratic opponent? I'll put the answer at the end of the blog entry -- but I'll bet you didn't know it.)
3) The recent shooting at Johns Hopkins. When someone takes a handgun into a hospital, shoots his mother's doctor, kills his mother, then takes his own life, I firmly believe the poor guy is a nutjob. But it raises a larger, more important question: Why did this man have a handgun to begin with?
In our society, owning and even carrying a handgun is an accepted, even protected action. Why? A handgun has no purpose except to injure or kill another human being. Unlike rifles or shotguns which are used for sport or hunting, handguns are for shooting people. What in the world makes us think that is ever acceptable, under any circumstances? If you need protection, buy a can of pepper spray that shoots 20 feet. Nobody is going to pose a threat to you after a shot of that stuff. And if you did use poor judgment and defend yourself against someone who in fact posed no threat to you, you wouldn't have to live with yourself for paralyzing or killing someone accidentally.
4) Corporate (and other) money in the campaigns. I'm going to do an entire post about this topic tomorrow. I have some common-sense suggestions about campaign finance reform. Who knows? Maybe some enterprising congress-critter will decide to use them.
Answer to the pop quiz above: O'Donnell's Democratic opponent, and the person who is likely to become the next senator from Delaware, is Chris Coons.
But there are some perennial issues I'm always passionate about, and a few of them have popped up on my radar over the last several days. In no particular order, they are:
1) Don't ask, don't tell, and don't DREAM. DADT has already been ruled unconstitutional by the 9th Circuit, and it is on its way out. Even the highest-ranking military officers want it gone. Over 60% of the population supports its repeal. It resulted in the firing of 14,000 military personnel over the last 10 years, when we are having huge recruiting challenges. But its repeal is getting stuck in a filibuster today.
(A local aside: Our senator, Mark Udall, introduced the bill to repeal DADT. Good for him! Mark Bennett, the other senator (up for reelection now) plans to vote for the repeal. Ken Buck, the far-right Republican senate nominee, wouldn't vote to repeal DADT. He said "the military should be as homogeneous as possible" to promote morale and effectiveness, and called homosexuality a "lifestyle choice." Mr. Buck, how homogeneous do you want the military? Should it be all male? All white? All Christian?)
I'm not happy with either party on this one; the Democrats attached the repeal to a military appropriations bill, which also contains the DREAM act which is designed to provide a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants brought into the US as children. If they serve in the military or earn a college degree, they could become citizens. Both of these bills are worthy -- and to attach them to the military appropriations bill is silly political maneuvering. Of course, there are some right-wing Republicans who will never vote in favor of any path to citizenship for any illegal alien, and there are others who will never vote to repeal DADT. So now what happens to both of these bills?
2) Far-right wingnuts in the spotlight. WHY are Sarah Palin's 15 minutes not long over? There can be no disagreement that the woman is a mental midget. Now we have Palin redux in Christine O'Donnell. Thank God voters are smarter than the media: Palin lost, and O'Donnell is behind. She's a gift to the Democratic party, though, since the polls show the man she beat in the primary would handily have won the election she is poised to lose.
And while we're on the topic of the upcoming election, why are the media so eager to call it for the GOP? We have two months to go, and voters have heard more about the Republicans during the primary season because of their intra-party strife. (Quick, who can name O'Donnell's Democratic opponent? I'll put the answer at the end of the blog entry -- but I'll bet you didn't know it.)
3) The recent shooting at Johns Hopkins. When someone takes a handgun into a hospital, shoots his mother's doctor, kills his mother, then takes his own life, I firmly believe the poor guy is a nutjob. But it raises a larger, more important question: Why did this man have a handgun to begin with?
In our society, owning and even carrying a handgun is an accepted, even protected action. Why? A handgun has no purpose except to injure or kill another human being. Unlike rifles or shotguns which are used for sport or hunting, handguns are for shooting people. What in the world makes us think that is ever acceptable, under any circumstances? If you need protection, buy a can of pepper spray that shoots 20 feet. Nobody is going to pose a threat to you after a shot of that stuff. And if you did use poor judgment and defend yourself against someone who in fact posed no threat to you, you wouldn't have to live with yourself for paralyzing or killing someone accidentally.
4) Corporate (and other) money in the campaigns. I'm going to do an entire post about this topic tomorrow. I have some common-sense suggestions about campaign finance reform. Who knows? Maybe some enterprising congress-critter will decide to use them.
Answer to the pop quiz above: O'Donnell's Democratic opponent, and the person who is likely to become the next senator from Delaware, is Chris Coons.
Comments
Post a Comment