We need some "extraneous" voters around here

I just want everyone to understand completely what the Republican Party in the US has become. You know, just in case they let you vote.

On Wednesday night at 8pm, they rolled out the farm bill to be voted on on Thursday. It's a 600 page document. In spite of this, enough people actually got it read for every democrat and even 12 republicans to vote against it. That wasn't enough. It passed by 8 votes.
Here is what they did: the farm bill has always been tied to supplemental nutrition programs. That kind of makes sense, right? We help out farmers, we feed the hungry. Sounds fair. Nope, not anymore. There is no supplemental nutrition included in the bill. Not only that, the insurance level for big ag goes up to 90%, meaning essentially that if you are a large scale commodity farmer, you cannot fail. It's now a risk free line of work. And not only that, a provision was snuck in to make this effective not until 2018 when it was supposed to sunset, but in perpetuity.

But wait, it gets even better. Donna Edwards (D, Maryland) asked the republicans who directly benefit from big ag investments to recuse themselves from voting on a bill that directly put money into their own pockets while taking food out of the mouths of the poorest of the poor. I think you can guess that they didn't go along with her request.

I'm asking everyone out there, everyone who can do this, to get together in your community with organizations that serve the poorest and most disenfranchised communities and make sure that the people in those communities get to vote, starting with the 2014 elections, and including local elections. Set up a shuttle to pick people up, take them to their polling place, take people back home and pick up the next load. Take them water while they stand in line for hours. Help them get the IDs that are now being required.  Take back our right to vote.

One other thing: the majority of people who receive supplemental nutrition are the working poor. The same people who don't want minimum wage to be raised to a living wage want to take supplemental nutrition away from these people. They also want to take food out of the mouths of children in schools, the elderly, the disabled. The word that was used to describe these people was "extraneous". (If you're on twitter, Donna Edwards started a hashtag for that - #extraneous.)

If anybody didn't already think this is the feudal lords trying to get rid of their excess of serfs, please think again. And please vote. If they still let you.

Does anyone know where the rule book went? It isn't in the box with the game.

Okay, so seriously. What if president Obama was treated in the same way the president of Bolivia just got treated? Have France, Italy and Portugal (along with the US of course), just decided that amnesty for political dissidents is no longer an option on this planet? Because regardless of what your opinion of Edward Snowden and his actions, there is nothing that should prevent him from seeking asylum. The United States has given asylum to plenty of people where their native countries want them back, who have been charged with crimes in those countries, who sought asylum exactly for those reasons.

Do we not play by the rules at all, in anything anymore? I live in one of those states that jumped on the Supreme Court ruling and immediately started moving to kill voter's rights systematically. I live in one of the states that is trying to sneak in taking away women's reproductive rights, voting the day before Independence Day - do you get the irony? Somehow I don't think our republican legislature does. Maybe your sense of humor fades when you're that old and grey? Or maybe it's only if you're old, grey, male and white. Who knows? We don't really have a control group to observe here in our state government.

I think I would like to go back to some rules. You know, basic playground rules. Where it has to be fair for everyone to play, to have a voice, and we don't change the rules in the middle of the game just to fuck with someone we don't like. I'm sorry if the parties involved in current politics had freakier childhoods than mine and didn't learn these basic things, but I would be happy to explain the principles.

 Also just to remind the feudal lords that us serfs outnumber them.

Just one quick question

If the roles had been reversed, if Trayvon Martin, a young black guy, had deliberately pursued George Zimmerman while carrying a concealed weapon and shot to kill, would the trial even be getting this coverage and would there be any question of the outcome? Okay, maybe two questions:  how is it okay with us as a culture that we perpetuate these biases on such a deep, unspoken level?

A thank you note to Michael Hastings

Disclaimer: I'm not, in general, a conspiracy theory kind of person. I'm also not stupid.

The world no longer has Michael Hastings in it, and that's an enormous loss. He was unflinchingly honest, brave, articulate and passionate. 

We know that the FBI was investigating him. We know that he brought down gen. Stanley McChrystal and facilitated the wind down of the war in Afghanistan. We know that he was working on a piece about the NSA. We know that he contacted wikileaks about an hour before he died. We know that he was in a single vehicle accident, that his car exploded and that he hit a tree in Hollywood. We will never ever know the order in which those last two events occurred. 

My hope is that every single investigative journalist and balls-out political analyst channels Michael Hastings and pushes every edge of every envelope. Sorry to put you guys on the spot, but there are only so many cars that can go up in flames before it starts to look kinda odd. Meanwhile, take taxis, folks. And/or check under your cars. And thanks, all of you who put your asses on the line so the rest of us can know stuff. Thank you.

Villains and heroes

Edward Snowden gave up everything - a high paid position, a home in Hawaii, and any kind of real freedom, even if he gets to a safe haven country, his relationships, everything - because he knew the US government has been unconstitutionally drag netting all information across internet and phone records and calls, theoretically under the patriot act and specifically section 215 which is supposed to apply to business. Without probable cause, anyone who works for these agencies can monitor your emails, your calls, your internet activity, the prescription your doctor gave you. Anyone. Anyone who works for one of these contracted agencies who is pissed off at an ex, anyone who wants to take a big lump of cash from another government, or from someone who wants to frame someone else for their actions and can afford to pay for it, anyone. These are regular people with regular lives and all the kinds of personal issues any of our coworkers have ever had. For disclosing that this is going on, he's being called a traitor. I think he's an incredible hero.

What I want to know is, when we're closing down public schools because we can't afford them, denying food assistance to children, cutting necessary government services (and those are the kinds of services government is there for in the first place, to build roads, to maintain infrastructures, to maintain the underpinnings of a society), we have money to pay people to read my email and listen to my phone calls? You know, just in case.

In Philadelphia, almost 4000 people will be laid off in order to close down enough schools to save $300 million on the budget - the same budget that is funding a $400 million dollar correctional facility. And oh, guess what? The schools closing have an 81% black population and 91% low income. Anyone want to guess what the proportion of the prison population is by those two categories? You already know the answer. We can't afford education, but we can afford to contract companies to see if I might just by chance be doing something unnecessarily interesting, or maybe just for the fuck of it.

Yeah, I can really see how the true problem here is Edward Snowden.

Spend more, buy less

I want you to imagine having those cute Gap jeans in a bag in your hand, or that incredibly affordable adorable thing from Target, or whatever cheap thing you found at Walmart, and right in front of you the horrible sweatshop these lovely cheap things came from collapses and 1100 people die. In front of you. You can hear the building crashing down, you can hear the screams, and then you can hear the absence of screams. If this didn't happen on the other side of the world, if you had to acknowledge what you are supporting, would you go home and put on your new stuff?

There is the most basic of safety agreements which has been endorsed by the EU and some US retailers. I have to give credit to Abercrombie, and Calvin Klein, whether I shop there or not. But Target, Walmart and Gap are refusing. I also want to point out that this is only dealing with the most basic of safety measures - emergency exits, fire prevention and sprinklers, buildings that are structurally sound. Not the horrible sweatshop conditions, the poor compensation, nothing but just working in a space which won't directly kill you. Gap at this point has said they will sign if it isn't legally binding, which is of course meaningless. Walmart wants to do "self-inspections". The facility in Bangladesh did self-inspections. The most recent was the day before the building collapsed and 1100 human beings died. So that obviously works well.

So I'm asking you, whether you shop at these stores or not, to email them by going to their sites, clicking on "contact us", selecting the corporate hq option and explaining that you won't shop at a store that isn't willing to commit to the most basic of safety conditions for the human beings who produce their goods. And then, if you do shop in any of these places, stop.

Beyond that, just consider how impossible it is to live on minimum wage here, and how unpleasant the working conditions are. Now multiply that by about a thousand, with no overtime pay, no limit to the number of hours you can be forced to work, and no way to live on the amount of money you're being paid. No, not even in a poor economy. Consider whether you really need all that wonderfully inexpensive, cool stuff. Imagine looking into the eyes of person after person who is providing this trendy junk for you under horrible conditions and consider shopping less, buying local, dropping the concept of being "fashionable" in favor of functional things you'll keep forever and knowing how your products are produced. Consider joining one of the micro bank organizations that fund entrepreneurs internationally and create fair trade businesses (I like kiva, but there are others).  Shop at stores that support fair trade. Spend more, buy less. But more than anything, keep the human cost in your mind.

Let's abolish driver's licenses

Okay. There was a time when we used horses, carriages, bicycles, and because those things moved relatively slowly we could work out pretty equitable ways to share the road. We came up with cars, and after a while it became apparent that people needed to be trained and regulated
in piloting missiles weighing quite a lot at high speeds, aimed at one another. No one in their right mind would suggest that licensing drivers is an infringement of anyone's personal freedom, because we realize we're all in it together and your right to drive willy nilly might infringe on my right to continue living and we want it to work out for all of us.

Weaponry is only going to become more sophisticated. The idea of regulating it has to be embraced. Yes, our constitution protects the right to arm yourself. If you want as many muskets as you can find, have at it. If you want military assault weapons, I want to know, first of all, why you feel you need those, and at the very least want it to be known that you have them. And I think you ought to have to pass some pretty rigorous tests. Because you are automatically a little sketchy.

There is this weird argument that, well, the weapons already exist, so there's nothing we can do. As if making it conspicuously inappropriate to own an assault weapon would have no effect. As if people can't be expected to qualify to drive a car.

I don't care if people have handguns and hunting rifles. And muskets. But as technology changes weaponry, we  have to take some responsibility as a society just in favor of making a few rules. Because it's not okay with me if you live next door and have assault weapons, or a targeted missile or your own strike drone. Can we at least agree that it's a good idea to have some rules? Sheesh.