Still Fighting has moved! Check us out at
www.stillfighting.com!
December 29, 2005
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Wednesday's Links
Activism
Do you have immunity from prosecution? Unless your father is the Sultan of Brunei, we doubt it. If you break the law, you should be held accountable. So why should it be any different for others? Texas wants to pass a bill that would grant the state's ethics committee "veto power over prosecutors seeking to enforce the state's election law." Essentially, since the committee has been overwhelmingly staffed by Republicans over the last several years, and this bill was produced as a direct result of the 2002 elections, GOP lawmakers are looking to save their skins from prosecution over shady election practices. Don't stand for this! Go here and sign the petition. And before you try and raise the argument about, "Hey, I don't live in Texas," ask yourself how long it would be before this bill would be introduced into YOUR state's legislature.
News
Bolton Allegations Too Much. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee was to vote on Tuesday as to whether or not to confirm John Bolton. Senator Richard Luger (R-IN), head of the panel, delayed the vote until next month after Senator George V. Voinovich (R-OH) stunned his party by saying that more time was needed to examine Bolton's record. Perhaps he was concerned about Senator Chuck Hagel's (R-NE) position on Bolton. Perhaps he wanted more time to examine the assertion that Bolton attempted to intimidate American intelligence officials whom he felt were alarmist. Or perhaps he simply grew a spine and realized that Bolton is not the man for the job. Whatever the reason, we are encouraged that Democrats will be able to press on and have Bolton's nomination blocked. It's also encouraging to see that some Republicans are exercising their integrity - we knew it was there somewhere!
Working Poor to Bush: No Thanks. We know you'll be shocked by this, but America's working poor are very much against Bush's plan for Social Security. Jonathan Wiseman has the details, but the bottom line is that Americans see money in the market as an investment that has no guarantee. So, when they see dips like this in the market, they are understandably uneasy. These aren't people with trust funds, or people where a 401(k) is an option. Instead, these are people who live paycheck to paycheck, many barely so, and absolutely need to depend on this retirement money. Good news for the Democrats, who are supposed to be the party of the working poor anyway, aren't they?
O'Connor Worried About Retaliation. Given the increased rhetoric regarding judges, can you blame Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor for being concerned? She receives threats from Americans, and although nominated by Reagan, is considered the most influential justice, and her vote could be called moderate. She is quoted as saying, "I don't think the harsh rhetoric helps. I think it energizes people who are a little off base to take actions that maybe they wouldn't otherwise take." Sound like anyone you've heard in the news lately?
Editorials
Behind Bush's Slump. David Ignatius on how, in the three months since Bush's 2nd term inauguration, his bold promises have fallen by the wayside. Bush's poll numbers have trended down, and the two biggest factors have clearly got to be Social Security and his involvement with Terri Schiavo. Bush's "second term slump" couldn't have come at a better time, with critical elections in 2005 and 2006 fast approaching. The best part about this? All of Bush's woes have been self-inflicted. Bush and the GOP chose to become involved in Terri Schiavo's life. Bush and the GOP chose to present an extremely ineffective and unpopular Social Security plan (well, not really a plan, but you get the idea). In fact, according to Ronald Brownstein, Bush's low poll numbers and lack of leadership are going to make it even harder for him to push his judicial re-nominees through the Senate. Bush has not shown that he can be an effective leader of the entire country, and he's finally paying for it now.
Frist's Intolerance. The Boston Globe has a fantastic editorial that sums up our distaste for Senator Bill Frist (R-TN). Frist has singlehandedly turned the fight over judicial re-nominees from a question of "interpreting the law impartially" to "Democrats are against these nominees because of their faith." It's an absurd argument, especially from a party that seems to speak for only one faith. But the Globe raises a good question - "Whose definition of 'faith' is in use here?" As long as Republicans continue to trumpet themselves as the party of "moral values," the line between church and state will continue to blur. We hope Americans realize where this path will eventually lead us, because we're certainly worried.
Fox's Sandstorm. Fox News Channel (FNC) is the most watched cable news channel in the country, easily beating out its competition. Why is that a bad thing? Spur the obvious impulse to say "Because it's a conservative network," and instead take a look at William Raspberry's newest column. Raspberry discusses why the notion of FNC calling themselves "fair and balanced" will ultimately lead people to lose all confidence in the news. Say what you want to about the left, but at least their pundits are open and up front about their biases.
|
December 29, 2005
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Wednesday's Links
Activism
Do you have immunity from prosecution? Unless your father is the Sultan of Brunei, we doubt it. If you break the law, you should be held accountable. So why should it be any different for others? Texas wants to pass a bill that would grant the state's ethics committee "veto power over prosecutors seeking to enforce the state's election law." Essentially, since the committee has been overwhelmingly staffed by Republicans over the last several years, and this bill was produced as a direct result of the 2002 elections, GOP lawmakers are looking to save their skins from prosecution over shady election practices. Don't stand for this! Go here and sign the petition. And before you try and raise the argument about, "Hey, I don't live in Texas," ask yourself how long it would be before this bill would be introduced into YOUR state's legislature.
News
Bolton Allegations Too Much. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee was to vote on Tuesday as to whether or not to confirm John Bolton. Senator Richard Luger (R-IN), head of the panel, delayed the vote until next month after Senator George V. Voinovich (R-OH) stunned his party by saying that more time was needed to examine Bolton's record. Perhaps he was concerned about Senator Chuck Hagel's (R-NE) position on Bolton. Perhaps he wanted more time to examine the assertion that Bolton attempted to intimidate American intelligence officials whom he felt were alarmist. Or perhaps he simply grew a spine and realized that Bolton is not the man for the job. Whatever the reason, we are encouraged that Democrats will be able to press on and have Bolton's nomination blocked. It's also encouraging to see that some Republicans are exercising their integrity - we knew it was there somewhere!
Working Poor to Bush: No Thanks. We know you'll be shocked by this, but America's working poor are very much against Bush's plan for Social Security. Jonathan Wiseman has the details, but the bottom line is that Americans see money in the market as an investment that has no guarantee. So, when they see dips like this in the market, they are understandably uneasy. These aren't people with trust funds, or people where a 401(k) is an option. Instead, these are people who live paycheck to paycheck, many barely so, and absolutely need to depend on this retirement money. Good news for the Democrats, who are supposed to be the party of the working poor anyway, aren't they?
O'Connor Worried About Retaliation. Given the increased rhetoric regarding judges, can you blame Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor for being concerned? She receives threats from Americans, and although nominated by Reagan, is considered the most influential justice, and her vote could be called moderate. She is quoted as saying, "I don't think the harsh rhetoric helps. I think it energizes people who are a little off base to take actions that maybe they wouldn't otherwise take." Sound like anyone you've heard in the news lately?
Editorials
Behind Bush's Slump. David Ignatius on how, in the three months since Bush's 2nd term inauguration, his bold promises have fallen by the wayside. Bush's poll numbers have trended down, and the two biggest factors have clearly got to be Social Security and his involvement with Terri Schiavo. Bush's "second term slump" couldn't have come at a better time, with critical elections in 2005 and 2006 fast approaching. The best part about this? All of Bush's woes have been self-inflicted. Bush and the GOP chose to become involved in Terri Schiavo's life. Bush and the GOP chose to present an extremely ineffective and unpopular Social Security plan (well, not really a plan, but you get the idea). In fact, according to Ronald Brownstein, Bush's low poll numbers and lack of leadership are going to make it even harder for him to push his judicial re-nominees through the Senate. Bush has not shown that he can be an effective leader of the entire country, and he's finally paying for it now.
Frist's Intolerance. The Boston Globe has a fantastic editorial that sums up our distaste for Senator Bill Frist (R-TN). Frist has singlehandedly turned the fight over judicial re-nominees from a question of "interpreting the law impartially" to "Democrats are against these nominees because of their faith." It's an absurd argument, especially from a party that seems to speak for only one faith. But the Globe raises a good question - "Whose definition of 'faith' is in use here?" As long as Republicans continue to trumpet themselves as the party of "moral values," the line between church and state will continue to blur. We hope Americans realize where this path will eventually lead us, because we're certainly worried.
Fox's Sandstorm. Fox News Channel (FNC) is the most watched cable news channel in the country, easily beating out its competition. Why is that a bad thing? Spur the obvious impulse to say "Because it's a conservative network," and instead take a look at William Raspberry's newest column. Raspberry discusses why the notion of FNC calling themselves "fair and balanced" will ultimately lead people to lose all confidence in the news. Say what you want to about the left, but at least their pundits are open and up front about their biases.
|
December 29, 2005
Do you have immunity from prosecution? Unless your father is the Sultan of Brunei, we doubt it. If you break the law, you should be held accountable. So why should it be any different for others? Texas wants to pass a bill that would grant the state's ethics committee "veto power over prosecutors seeking to enforce the state's election law." Essentially, since the committee has been overwhelmingly staffed by Republicans over the last several years, and this bill was produced as a direct result of the 2002 elections, GOP lawmakers are looking to save their skins from prosecution over shady election practices. Don't stand for this! Go here and sign the petition. And before you try and raise the argument about, "Hey, I don't live in Texas," ask yourself how long it would be before this bill would be introduced into YOUR state's legislature.
News
Bolton Allegations Too Much. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee was to vote on Tuesday as to whether or not to confirm John Bolton. Senator Richard Luger (R-IN), head of the panel, delayed the vote until next month after Senator George V. Voinovich (R-OH) stunned his party by saying that more time was needed to examine Bolton's record. Perhaps he was concerned about Senator Chuck Hagel's (R-NE) position on Bolton. Perhaps he wanted more time to examine the assertion that Bolton attempted to intimidate American intelligence officials whom he felt were alarmist. Or perhaps he simply grew a spine and realized that Bolton is not the man for the job. Whatever the reason, we are encouraged that Democrats will be able to press on and have Bolton's nomination blocked. It's also encouraging to see that some Republicans are exercising their integrity - we knew it was there somewhere!
Working Poor to Bush: No Thanks. We know you'll be shocked by this, but America's working poor are very much against Bush's plan for Social Security. Jonathan Wiseman has the details, but the bottom line is that Americans see money in the market as an investment that has no guarantee. So, when they see dips like this in the market, they are understandably uneasy. These aren't people with trust funds, or people where a 401(k) is an option. Instead, these are people who live paycheck to paycheck, many barely so, and absolutely need to depend on this retirement money. Good news for the Democrats, who are supposed to be the party of the working poor anyway, aren't they?
O'Connor Worried About Retaliation. Given the increased rhetoric regarding judges, can you blame Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor for being concerned? She receives threats from Americans, and although nominated by Reagan, is considered the most influential justice, and her vote could be called moderate. She is quoted as saying, "I don't think the harsh rhetoric helps. I think it energizes people who are a little off base to take actions that maybe they wouldn't otherwise take." Sound like anyone you've heard in the news lately?
Editorials
Behind Bush's Slump. David Ignatius on how, in the three months since Bush's 2nd term inauguration, his bold promises have fallen by the wayside. Bush's poll numbers have trended down, and the two biggest factors have clearly got to be Social Security and his involvement with Terri Schiavo. Bush's "second term slump" couldn't have come at a better time, with critical elections in 2005 and 2006 fast approaching. The best part about this? All of Bush's woes have been self-inflicted. Bush and the GOP chose to become involved in Terri Schiavo's life. Bush and the GOP chose to present an extremely ineffective and unpopular Social Security plan (well, not really a plan, but you get the idea). In fact, according to Ronald Brownstein, Bush's low poll numbers and lack of leadership are going to make it even harder for him to push his judicial re-nominees through the Senate. Bush has not shown that he can be an effective leader of the entire country, and he's finally paying for it now.
Frist's Intolerance. The Boston Globe has a fantastic editorial that sums up our distaste for Senator Bill Frist (R-TN). Frist has singlehandedly turned the fight over judicial re-nominees from a question of "interpreting the law impartially" to "Democrats are against these nominees because of their faith." It's an absurd argument, especially from a party that seems to speak for only one faith. But the Globe raises a good question - "Whose definition of 'faith' is in use here?" As long as Republicans continue to trumpet themselves as the party of "moral values," the line between church and state will continue to blur. We hope Americans realize where this path will eventually lead us, because we're certainly worried.
Fox's Sandstorm. Fox News Channel (FNC) is the most watched cable news channel in the country, easily beating out its competition. Why is that a bad thing? Spur the obvious impulse to say "Because it's a conservative network," and instead take a look at William Raspberry's newest column. Raspberry discusses why the notion of FNC calling themselves "fair and balanced" will ultimately lead people to lose all confidence in the news. Say what you want to about the left, but at least their pundits are open and up front about their biases.
