The Republican Legacy

As I see the Republican punditry admit to the fact that the George Bush presidency was a disaster, I can't help but wonder; what the hell were they doing the last few years? Did the Republican punditry try to sell us an administration that they KNEW was a disaster? Did they just attempt to deal us another crappy hand (McPalin) so they could further puff up their collective ego and self-vindicate their misguided and dangerous ideals?

Every utterance from a Republican that identifies a McCain or Palin weakness; every whisper from a Republican that reflects the sheer incompetence and malfeasance of the Bush Cheney regime; should be perpetually amplified and echoed as evidence of this grand mistake known as the Republican Party.

Bipartisanship?! Democrats offer bipartisanship, although honestly Republicans deserve no such latitude due to their inherent dishonest nature. When complete idiots like Hannity and Limbaugh declare that the 'Obama Recession is under way'; I can’t help but feel validated for the moments where I am convinced that the Republican Party is nothing more than an elite group of greedy criminals manipulating the group of incurious, ignorant, self destructive lemmings known as the Republican electorate.

They actually blame the Democratic Congress for this financial mess, without acknowledging that in the past 20 months, the Republicans were the most obstructionist minority in the history of the US Congress, and without acknowledging that the Republican agenda of deregulation (or no-regulation to be more exact) is exactly the cause of this mess.

A fitting image is one of a bunch of Republican toddlers; each with a fresh load of shit in their diapers, crying to mommy and blaming the Democrats for the putrid load of waste they carry with them. This is the legacy of the Republican Party; a putrid load of shit in the diapers of ignorant toddlers.

Bush's Final Pillage

In regards to the 'bailout'; the one that Hank Paulson tried to shove down our throats with a three page proposal that was absolutely absurd in its content;

Naomi Klein has written a fantastic commentary that sheds new light on this confusing topic.

"Clearly, it was never really about getting loans flowing. It was always about doing what it is doing: turning the state into a giant insurance agency for Wall Street—a safety net for the people who need it least, subsidized by the people who will most need state protections in the economic storms ahead."

http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2008/10/bailout-bush-s-final-pillage

Prop Eight

This election has provided some bittersweet results.

Back in 1967, the idea of an African American becoming President was as likely as Jesus walking the earth again.

Back in 1967, in numerous states, it was still illegal for an African American, Asian, or Hispanic to marry a Caucasian.

Back in 1967, it took the Federal Supreme court to declare that such discrimination was unconstitutional and that an African American, Asian, or Hispanic may indeed marry a Caucasian in any state in this Republic.

Here in 2008, an African American is the President Elect.

Here in 2008, the California Supreme Court, with its Republican Majority, declared that gay couples can marry.

Here in 2008, the California electorate overturned that California Supreme Court decision.

I believe that the Supreme Court has an obligation to protect the civil liberties of the minorities, and that the Supreme Court is indeed Supreme over any majority decision that discriminates against minorities. I believe that Prop Eight is an abomination of basic human rights.

If, in 1967, when the Federal Supreme Court declared banning interracial marriages to be a violation of civil rights; if that same decision were given to the electorate, the results would not have been the same.

To the gay community I say this; your time is near. The tide is with you. The religious organizations who financed campaigns to strip you of your civil liberties have crossed a line that may legally relieve them of their tax exempt status. So chin up, it will happen.

What to do next? Here are my suggestions. Whether you deem them sound or not.

First; file a Federal Lawsuit targeting the religious organizations that financed this prop eight campaign as to strip them of their tax exempt status. Funding a political campaign while enjoying tax exempt status provides a financial advantage that compromises equal protection under the law.

Second; organize a grassroots effort to boycott any corporation that supports the agenda of these religious organizations. The Internet is very powerful. Use it. Boycott. Madison avenue has yet to figure out that the gay community is a large demographic and consists of many successful professionals with plenty of disposable income! Make Madison Avenue aware that their allegiances to discriminatory organizations is costing them money.

Third; petition your representatives to fight for tax exempt status to any gay person on the grounds that they have been stripped of civil liberties guaranteed by the constitution. Why should any American citizen pay the same taxes while they are proactively being stripped of basic civil liberties.

In closing. I feel you have freedom and validation close at hand. Trust that many sympathize with your cause and will support you. The religious zealots have had a couple of decades of government intrusion, and I believe this inequity can be easily overcome. I find it ironic that the groups opposing you are invariably Christian. I am an Atheist, yet I appreciate the 'teachings' of Jesus. It seems the Christian zealots have completely forgotten the tenants of Christianity; love your neighbor, act in the common good not for the good of greed, and accept of those who are different.

Fight the fight intelligently and pragmatically, you are almost there, and you have the support of more than you might perceive.

Let this nation rid ourselves of these discriminatory pretexts, so we can realize a society of progress unhindered by fear.

Rosa Sat Down

By now the world knows that America has a different voice from the one the world has been listening to for the past eight years.

I am so proud and so happy that words can not be found to express this emotion.

Now the real work begins. Let the garbage of the past be just that; the garbage of the past.

Tomorrow is a new day. The nation has the opportunity to work on an agenda focused on the needs of the people, not the excesses of the greedy.

Bush is now officially a mistake of the past. His policies are not destined to become legacy to the leadership of tomorrow. The world is better for this.

I have argued and blogged about the misguided agenda that has been delivered to this world by the Bush administration. This misguided agenda has been stifled by more than change for changes sake; but by a leader who has displayed the judgement, composure, temperament, and leadership that the nation and the world has been so void of for the past eight years.

The past eight years have bestowed upon us the failed policies of those who crave leadership for wealth and power, while sacrificing the well being of the common people of this great nation. This criminal element has sacrificed the lives of so many brave American men and women to line the pockets of cronies. This criminal element has wiped the lives of innocent men, women, and children from the face of this earth. This criminal element has destroyed our Bill of Rights, committed blatant treason, spied on us without just cause, engaged in torture, extorted our federal reserve, destroyed Americas standing in the world, and corrupted our Justice Department.

The world should never give the benefit of the doubt to the Bush crime family. The world must never forget the abuse of power propogated by Bush and his cronies.

It is a new day.

I thought I would end my blog upon this moment, but I feel compelled to continue.

This canvas is a motivating entity for me to keep my eyes on developing policies. To prod myself into examining issues and convey my opinions in the most summarized and concise statements that I may muster. So, maybe, just maybe, I can convey some artifact of my knowledge that provides clarity to anyone who would like to contribute a supporting or contradictory opinion. Let us not rest in the complacency of laurels, for there is still so much more to achieve.

I heard a quote that I must convey. I know not who is credited for this quote, but it is well worth repeating. The sentiment of this quote stems from a particular history of racial strife. Yet, I believe this sentiment transcends race and finds purchase in the common experience of trying... and failing... and getting up to try again. For nothing more, or less, than the sole purpose of making this world a better and more hospitable place than it has become.

Simply put ...

Rosa sat so Martin could walk.

Martin walked so Barack could run.

Barack ran so our children could fly.

The Abortion Issue

Let me start by saying, NOBODY is pro-abortion. Abortion is something that nobody chooses with joy in their hearts. Nobody wakes up in the morning and says "I hope I get pregnant today so I can have an abortion".

It is a horrendous decision. I have known the most adamant Christian family to take part in this decision and indeed decide upon abortion. Incidentally, this Christian family subsequently continued to be fervant opponents of abortion after the fact.

What would improve the issue of abortion? Education.

Yet, there are certain groups in our society that not only claim abortion should be illegal, but that education leading to the avoidance of such a decision is an abhoration. Left to them, educating our young adults in the responsible methods of avoiding unwanted conception is unthinkable.

Our country has been so led by these groups as to deny financial aid to developing countries if the aid would lead to sexual education and free contraception. Yes, the United States of America has successfully asserted this position.

The impoverished who have teenage daughters should be forced to bring the baby to term. If the young mother requires welfare to support the baby, then that young mother is a welfare theif, planning pregancies to get more government money. Believe it or not, this absurd mindset indeed exists, and anyone who embraces this logic, in my opinion, is less than human.

There is a book I can refer to called Freakonomics. This book contains statistical analyses for many of societies current disparities. One of the many topics covered, is an examination of the effects of the Roe V Wade decision to uphold a womans inherent right to privacy. I recommend reading this book. It clearly substantiates that when you force a teenage woman of poverty into keeping an unplanned pregnancy, the odds that the unwanted child would have a productive life are extremely low.

An even harsher consideration is the late term abortion. I agree that this sort of abortion carries serious implications. But, if the health of the woman is in imminent jeopardy, the decision should be left to the doctor, the woman, and the family involved.

Roe V Wade was not an abortion issue as much as it was a right to privacy issue. NOBODY is pro-abortion. Education can seriously reduce this unfortunate circumstance.

Sarah Palin wants abortion to be made illegal. When pressed for an answer as to whether or not she wants women who have abortions put in jail, she wiggled a bit and claimed that she does not. A bit of nuance here; she wants doctors who perform abortions put in jail.

It's easy for Sarah Palin; her daughter will always have a financially sound base to help raise this child. But what about the impoverished teen who has no hope of such a financial foundation.

Sarah claims that she's proud that her daughter, given the choice, decided to go through with her pregnancy. The operative word being choice.

John McCain stumbled in the 2000 Republican primaries when an astute journalist asked him what would happen if his teenage daughter Meghan became pregnant, and he replied to the effect that it would be a family decision. What's that John? Did I hear the word 'decision' ... as in choice? Did I hear 'family decision'? Implying privacy?

So; John McCain; judging by your answer, you supported Roe V Wade.

You did John. Flip Flop all you want about this one, but you did.

Sarahs Rally Today

Talk about an illegitimate dig ... today Sarah said 'we need a leader who isn't afraid to use the word victory'.

Meanwhile, in Early September 2008 General David Petraeus claimed that victory in Iraq is not possible.

I guess we passed that threshold a long time ago.

What we are actually dealing with now is mitigating this disastrous Bush McCain foreign policy blunder.

Who Counts The Votes?

Last Thursday I thought I would get a jump on things and cast my early ballot to avoid any lines at my voting station.

This was after all a moot point because I live in a fairly well to do Republican stronghold called Naperville Illinois, and because we enjoy such stature, I have never had any complications on election day.

We always have plenty of voting facilities, and I never once had to wait on a line to cast my ballot. Unlike the more urban communities who don't have enough voting booths to accommodate the population.

But, that's okay, they are mostly lower income communities who always vote Democrat anyway, so as we know from past reports on past elections, most have to wait in line for hours to cast a vote, and if a number of them can't vote, well they're most likely Democrats anyway and we don't need their votes that favor liberal concepts like fair economics. Or so Grover Norquist likes to think.

When I arrived at the city center I was surprised that early voting meant I had to use a voting machine.

So I decide to wait until election day to cast a paper ballot.

Why would I decide such a thing?

I have been an Information Technology professional for about twenty two years now. Currently a systems analyst, but in the past I have been a programmer, project manager, account manager, and quality assurance manager.

The voting machines indeed have problems. This has been illuminated in news programs and documentaries. A few have explicitly displayed a person touching a Democratic candidate while the Republican candidate received the vote. Funny how it works out that way isn't it? I've never seen an incident of a person touching a Republican vote that turns Democrat.

Being an IT professional, I know that if I release a system into a production environment it better work. Yet, there are occasions where malfunctions occur and we call these malfunctions 'bugs'.

When a system is implemented and a bug is encountered, the first thing we do is gauge the risk ... severity. If risks are identified during the development process, when mitigation plans could be put in place to capture and correct any foreseen risks, then things are usually sound.

If a risk is big enough to generate a serious integrity issue, and there is no sound mitigation plan in place, then the system must be pulled from production. These are the parameters I must live within as a professional who is accountable for any compliance violations in a product I am responsible for.

Compliance with voting machines would be as simple as providing a paper printout of the transaction so the voter can view this transaction and approve. Those paper printouts can subsequently be used for any recount. Some recounts are mandated by state law within certain tolerance margins. Simple enough right? But, if a recount is mandated in a district that utilized these voting machines, then no recount is possible, therefore subverting the State constitutions that mandate such recounts.

To be fair, some machines have been equipped with such a function, yet these machines are by far the minority of voting machines out there.

Better yet; the source code of the programs can be audited by compliance enforcement before they are ever even issued. Such a precaution will still not guarantee a hack proof solution, but at least the processes of oversight may negate such indiscretion.

Yet, these companies like Diebold will not permit auditing of source code referring to intellectual property breaches. In this case the position of Diebold is not valid because our tax dollars pay for these machines so the 'intellectual property' belongs to the American people. We have every legal right to audit these machines. We, the American taxpayers own these machines. We, the American taxpayers own the software. Why then, are we stripped of the right to audit these artifacts?

This begs the question; why are these machines are being built by private corporations instead of the Federal Government?

Well, the unbridled free market loonies don't want government bureaucracy, and there are huge lobbyists, and that's just the way it goes. Just look at the global economic situation that we are dealing with right now and you might deduce why this philosophy is in essence a conflict of interest.

I state again, these machines are paid for by our tax dollars, we have every right to audit these machines, but the lobby laden lunatics running our government don't seem to allow this. The risks are indeed great, and there is no sound mitigation plan... why are these machines not being pulled from production right now? There is a lot at stake.

Because we own these machines, we should demand that they work in a pristine fashion. Wouldn't electronically stealing votes in an election be a considerable compliance violation?

Why are they allowed to get away with this?

Because Americans, for the most part, care more about their television viewing habits, than they do about the stability of our Democracy.

The power lies not within those who cast the votes, the power lies within those who control the votes.

Sleep well America, I hear the new fall season of television programs have fine production quality.