January 24, 2008 by yeswab.

Yes, I fully believe that, and the eight years of his presidency, by any reasonable measure, sucked less than the time of the present administration. I believe that economically, the country also fared better under Clinton than under the previous administration. (I just love the conservative pundits who say Bill Clinton inherited George Bush’s economic boom.)

As I’ve said time and again: The least competent of the Democrats would be better than the best of the Republicans. This of course includes the scenario of Hillary winning, and her administration having heavy policy input from Bill, or not. I did not mind in the least, the notion that Hillary had great policy influence in Bill’s administration. Hell, he even said we’d be getting both of them effectively in office. I loved the idea of her (or anyone not a Republican) leading an initiative on health care reform. It’s a shame nothing happened, and things in that area were allowed to get worse, to this day.

While we’re on the subject, I am praying, as I did in 2000, that McCain gets the Republican nomination, because I believe the Republicans will win. McCain is demonstrably the least evil of the Republican candidates.

My newly arrived at position regarding the Democrats is that if they’re going to run one of two nearly-unelectable candidates, they should run Obama. This will have two desirable effects:

• It will limit, possibly sharply, the kinds of slander and lies the Republicans can sling at him. This is absolutely because of his race, and in this case, his race adding an extra layer of protection is fine with me. This would amount to Obama “playing the race card” in the best way imaginable, by doing nothing. The Republicans will be stuck with the constraint mentioned above.

• Obama running will cause the media to pay more attention to voting in areas with high black populations. With such a sharply-defined reason to pay attention to black voters, it may prove harder for the Republicans to effect the type of voter suppression and sabotage they practiced in the previous two presidential elections. There is no equivalent scrutiny that could constrain Republican skullduggery with Hillary, because there are no geographic “areas with high female populations”.

Additionally, there is just too much Clinton-fatigue and Clinton-hatred in this country to make Hilary electable. On the other hand, Obama is apparently a little short on actual policy-speak.

I just had to vent.

Posted in General | 2 Comments »

December 27, 2007 by yeswab.

Posted in General | No Comments »

December 12, 2007 by yeswab.

Gold commercials on conservative radio talk shows AND Air America!

Michael Savage does them: “…my friends at The So And So Gold Coins As Protection Against the Collapse of US Currency Company enable you to acquire real gold, as protection against the possible collapse of US currency.”

AND, goddamn Randi Rhodes and Thom Hartmann do this same commercial! Is the very idea itself, “acquiring real gold, as protection against the possible collapse of US currency” an actual non-partisan idea?

It might well be!

In that case, I can have no logical objection to liberal personalities doing the same commercials for The So And So Gold Coins As Protection Against the Collapse of US Currency Company, as right-wing-asshole radio personalities. However, I can certainly profess to being creeped out by it.

Posted in General | No Comments »

December 12, 2007 by yeswab.

I was corresponding with a friend, who professed an increased interest in the work of John Lennon, and a renewed appreciation for “Imagine”. It occurs to me that the wad o’thought that I fired back at him might be worth posting on this all-too-infrequently updated blog.

Now, I love “Imagine” as much as the next 70’s-roots liberal, but I actually disagree with one part of the sentiment, and I know some of you will disagree with my disagreement.

I don’t particular desire a world with “no religion, too”. Uh-uh. There is no consensus among “reasonable people” (those who abhor war, famine and pestilence) that religion in itself is a bad thing. I am a grossly non-practicing Jew. I have tried attending synagogue within the last 10 years and (in a prissy Oprah-show-guest tone) “found that there was nothing for me there”.

I spend every Christmas and Easter morning at my wife and kids’ Catholic church, and have beamed with great love and pride as my children were baptized, or christened or confirmed or whatever the hell it is. (Their ages being different, these were two different occasions.)

It’s more an intellectual conclusion, rather than a real feeling that I have settled on regarding religion. In SOME ways, from SOME angles, there is SOME merit in taking things at face value. Churches and synagogues and mosques and their members do charity work. The clergy charge their congregations with acting properly toward other people. They promote the Ten Commandments, the first four of which are of dubious value but at worst meaningless, the fifth is arguable and the latter four of which are utterly indisputable.

All that one reads about religions causing war and division has merit of course, aside from being a tired piece of anti-religious “wisdom”. BRAAAAAHHHHH (buzzer sound)—- the world is not black and white, and that particular truism cuts both ways (actually cuts all ways).

If one can argue against Big Government and others argue that government has a duty to use my tax dollars to serve the common good, which includes feeding the poor, then one can argue that local churches, synagogues and mosques do good works while their dopey national- and international-level leaders get involved with stupid enterprises like the Crusades, ignoring holocausts, and the like.

Sorry; there are contradictions in reality. I feel the good intentions around me in my wife’s church while abhorring the fucking stupid ignorant red-neck reactionary douche-baggery of the anti-choice stickers on some people’s cars. (I absolutely REFUSE to use the term pro-life, because so many anti-choicers fall on the same side of things as supporters of The War, and favor capital punishment.)

“Imagine” is a lovely song, and everything it advocates is lovely and desirable, except for one. In the name of sheer logic, I’m just pointing out the flaw. Not having religion, too, might be a fine thing, but logically, it does not qualify as something that must be done away with in promotion of the Greatest Possible Good for All.

On the other hand “Instant Karma” rocks much more effectively. Very slightly less profound than “Imagine”, but much funkier.

John Lennon was a very, very, very clever, creative guy, and probably a genius. But reading up on as much Beatles biography as I have, one also sees much evidence that he committed acts of violence in his youth, mis-treated his first wife and son (badly), and always admitted that he was no angel. Make no mistake though; he was my favorite Beatle; the edgiest, coolest one, and the writer of more of my super-favorite songs than any of the others.

Posted in General | No Comments »

October 25, 2007 by yeswab.

*Look into buying recycled-paper-source paper products. They’re out there. In New York-area supermarkets, the Marcal brand (based in my hometown of Paterson, New Jersey, no less) offers “Paper from Paper” paper towels and bathroom tissue. The stuff’s not even above-average in cost.

*At work, where you’re most likely to have access to an ink-jet printer, use DOUBLE-SIDED PRINTING! Virtually self-explanatory. Twice as many words on one sheet of paper. Less trees taken down. End of story. Absolutely painless for the consumer.

*When you need a record of something, consider saving it to a .PDF or Microsoft Office Document Image Writer file, instead of printing it to paper. (Microsoft Office Document Image Writer is just Microsoft’s would-be rival to Adobe’s PDFs.) This is what I do with insurance claims, saving a bunch of annoying-to-file paper. Considering all the other stuff you entrust to your computer, this seems eminently doable by today’s standards of record-storage reliability. Don’t be afraid to save purchase and payment confirmations; they never contain your complete credit card or Social Security number.

*When there’s a choice, select Electronic Delivery Only of trade/professional publications. If you read it that month, fine, and you can always print an article(s) to paper. It doesn’t matter if someone else is paying for paper that may be wasted. It’s still paper and ink going into the garbage/recycling stream.

*Just try to turn off lights. Try, just a little. A minor improvement is still an improvement.

*Unplug cell phone chargers when not in use. These are transformers that turn electricity into unneeded heat energy even when the phone isn’t connected. If necessary, look up what transformers are on Wikipedia. Aaaaah, hell; I’ll be nice: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer .

*When shopping, for anything, don’t take a bag from the cashier if you don’t have to. If you buy a single item, or even a few items that you can hand-carry, or put back into a shopping cart, you don’t need a bag. Just keep your receipt handy. This is actually a separate issue from the whole Trader Joe’s-mentality reusable shopping bag thing, since not everyone (including me) chooses to go that route.

Again, no one realistically can claim to be a saint on these issues, but merely trying is bound to help.

*Oh, yeah. One last thing. Buy a Prius or a Honda Hybrid Civic. If you insist on an SUV, buy a Toyota Hybrid Highlander. I think Saturn Hybrid VUEs may actually get better mileage, but let’s face it; when it comes to quality and reliability, do you want a Toyota or a GM (a Saturn by any other name).

Posted in General | 1 Comment »

July 30, 2007 by yeswab.

In the nicest possible way: “Unfortunately, his dad causes much more pollution jetting around the world to spread the news about the environment.” is standard conservative faulty reasoning.

Charges of “liberal hypocrisy” are virtually always wished-for “magic bullets”; something that just sounds automatically insightful, automatically valid, because it seems to puncture some deceitful veil of Liberal Thought.

Let me ask you something. Let me present a choice:

* A wealthy, powerful person who cares about the environment, or who even PRETENDS to care about the environment, and supports and/or enacts public policy that benefits the environment by reducing global warming?

OR:

* A wealthy, powerful person who debunks theories about global warming.

An anti-global-warming activist, flying around using jet fuel and creating jet exhaust does more net good for global well-being, than any politician (regardless of party) flying around raising funds, any band flying around on a tour, any tourist flying around on vacation or any businessman flying around for business.

Another item to ponder: WHO, in God’s name is opposition to global warming supposed to benefit? What secret “special interest” agenda could activists like Al Gore possibly have? AT WORST, at worst, he could be on the payroll of some business that might flourish making “green products” or perfecting “green”-er industrial processes. Do I hear you berating lobbyists for General Motors, Entergy and Exxon? AT WORST, “hypocrites” like Al Gore are just lobbyists for other types of businesses, businesses that will screw up the environment more slowly than current high-pollution businesses.

The only industrial business that is truly good for the environment is no industrial business at all. That said, there is a clear choice between industries that screw up the environment at a pace already proven disastrous, versus industries that MIGHT destroy the earth more slowly. It’s a choice between your children gasping for breathable air or your great-grand-children gasping for air. I’d take the latter, because it affords more time for somebody to eventually get things right. President Bush, King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud and Hugo Chavez would do well to remember that their children will be as screwed over by rising ocean levels and polluted air as our children. I take that back; the children of oil barons will be more able to afford real estate on high ground than yours and mine. They’ll still be suckin’ wind for breathable air, though. Oh, I forgot; they’ll have the domed enclaves their parents built for them.

Again, who could possibly profit from, what harm is there in, “green advocacy”? Who’s behind the conspiracy? If GM executives wind up losing their jobs, other executives will just take equivalent places at other big companies. In the global scheme of things, what’s the difference?

Posted in General | No Comments »

June 26, 2007 by yeswab.

Aaaaaagh! Democratic presidential candidates, and other “progressive” politicians are failing to knock down one of Conservative Thought’s most pernicious, ILLOGICAL ideas.

“Limousine Liberals” is one of those phrases that just automatically sounds meaningful, like it’s a magical, single bullet that penetrates some deceitful veil of Liberal Thought.

Let me ask you something. Let me present a choice:

• A wealthy, powerful person who cares about the underclasses, or who even PRETENDS to care about the underclasses, and supports and/or enacts public policies that benefit the majority of American and indeed, the majority of humankind.

OR:

• A wealthy, powerful person who PRETENDS to care about the underclasses, speaks to them intimately, pretending to be their friend, but who enacts public policies that help deny the majority of Americans economic and educational opportunity.

It’s like I said on my regular web page before I misplaced it by trying to put up this blog. If I hear the phrase “Liberal Hypocrisy” one more goddamn time, I’m going to be really fucking annoyed!

Posted in General | No Comments »

April 5, 2007 by yeswab.

It was idle contemplation of my Prius’s virtues that inspired me to finally start a blog this morning. (After weeks of encouragement by my friend Liz.)