Category: Random Stuff

Yesterday, The Austin American Statesman gave its endorsement to Rick Perry in an editorial that was, shall we say, less than ardent:

We would be more enthusiastic in recommending Perry’s re-election if we were sure that the governor will follow the direction he set for himself the past 18 months. Our reservations notwithstanding, Perry, 56, is the best of the five-candidate lot.  

The best part of the editorial is actually the headline, which is – get this – “Perry best fits Texas’ need for serious leadership.” After a quick check to make sure I wasn’t reading The Onion, I realized that the Statesman really was endorsing a man whose performance doesn’t exactly inspire the phrase ‘serious leader.’

Maybe I’m missing something here, but the man who sent a budget of 0’s to the legislature, who only truly committed himself to one issue in the past six years – congressional redistricting re-gerrymandering, who only made school finance a priority when the courts forced him to isn’t the most serious of leaders. Leaders, after all, lead, but Perry typically follows, and the people whose orders he follows? Grover Norquist, James Leininger, and Tom DeLay. You can tell a lot about a guy by the company he keeps.

The only thing Perry has succeeded in doing is acting on school finance and only because the courts forced him to deal with it, and ‘deal with it’ is about all that was accomplished. True, the last eighteen months have been better than the previous four years in the same way that a cold is better than the flu, but why not support a candidate who doesn’t have this kind of record of poor leadership, a candidate who would actually work with both parties rather than just the Republican majority?

A Democrat, Libertarian or Independent would have to govern in a bipartisan way. It simply makes no sense to return an empty suit governor to power when there are four other candidates any one of whom could easily clear the low bar set by Perry.

I can’t for the life of me figure out why the Statesman picked Perry unless, perhaps, they haven’t been reading their own paper for the past six years. Of course, they also choose Bush. Twice. Fool me once… oh, never mind, now that I think about it, I’m not at all surprised.

The most chilling aspect of the futuristic society imagined in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 is the fact that the people willingly gave away their rights and liberties. The thing about firemen going door-to-door burning books always seemed a bit silly, but the larger point, namely Bradbury’s vision of how America could become a totalitarian state is truly eerie.

More interested in being consumers than citizens, more engaged in passive entertainment than in civil discourse, Bradbury’s fururistic populace willingly gave away all their rights and liberties in the name of being kept safe and so long as they were all entertained, had plenty to buy, no one cared or noticed that a war was raging in the skies overhead, that a nuclear apocalypse was fast approaching, or that those who did notice were quietly disappeared.

In short, apathy, much like that which greeted the Military Commissions Act that was signed into law yesterday. We appear to already be on the road Bradbury imagined. This despicable law gives the president the right power to detain anyone for anything for any period of time, so long as he believes that that person is somehow helping terrorists.

Cheney says that debating these issues helps terrorists. Now I don’t think that those of us who don’t support Bush and his policies will be rounded up and sent off to ‘Gitmo, but it should be of grave concern to everyone that nobody knows who the next president will be. Or the one after that. Or the one after that. Bush is incompetent, in over his head and a fool, but I do not believe he is evil and I do not think there is any intention of rounding up political enemies, but even so, sacrificing this nation’s core values for the sake of safety and political advantage is shameful and evidence of a lack of fitness for the office.

At this point the only thing that will give us any balance, any oversight or accountability is to elect as many Democrats as possible to the US Congress. That is the only way we get oversight or accountability. Divided government is the only hope we have now to slow down or even stop the constitutional bleeding, but only we can make ourselves stop being afraid of terrorists and start being afraid of what can be done in the name of safety.

Bradbury’s vision suddenly seems frighteningly prescient. It probably won’t come to pass, but then every people who gave up their rights, their liberties, their values to be safe probably thought the same thing. When I used to teach Fahrenheit 451, we used to discuss whether or not it could ever really happen here. Sadly, I think the answer is yes.

If you haven’t already, check out Keith Olbermann’s commentary on this. He’s the only TV journalist who really seems to be calling it like it is, and his willingness to stand up to the Bush administration and call them on their dastardly machinations is truly inspiring.

That’s what commenter “Kinky is Awesome” seems to think. In fact, this person posted an entire post from the Kinky is Awesome blog in the comments section of my post about the recent debate. WordPress seemed to think that this was comment spam, but since it was on topic, I figured why the hell not? and let it in. Still, I wonder if other blogs have recieved similar comments from “Kinky is Awesome.”

So, what makes Kinky awesome? Well, let’s think about what “Kinky is Awesome” said.

Is it his desire to militarize the border and declare martial law? I wonder if Kinky knows what martial law is, and if so is he really in favor of turning the justice system in south Texas over to the military? Is this how he’ll get Chris Bell out of the way since Bell is apparently a terrorist?

Perhaps Kinky is awesome because he supported Bush/Cheney in ’04 and still supports Bush’s middle east policies? Admiration and support for incompetents and incompetence aren’t exactly selling points. Is this really the best time to be talking up your candidate’s admiration for Bush anyway?

“Kinky is Awesome” then goes on to suggest that perhaps I might be a bit worried that Kinky “showed liberal tendencies by voting for a tree-hugger like Al Gore.” Despite the fact that several recent posts on this blog indicate that that might be a selling point, “Kinky is Awesome” tells me that I needn’t fear since Kinky never voted between 1994 and 2004. I guess his conservative principles are intact even if he sold out his apathy. Awesome.

And, no, I didn’t think he’s a liberal because he’s a Jew, but having religious views (which really means political-religious views) “well to the right of Perry’s” isn’t very reassuring whether it comes from a Christian, Jew or anyone else.

The pitch here is basically that Kinky is no liberal. I guess the idea is to help him pull off some of Perry’s conservative support considering that he’s probably gotten all he’s going to get from Bell. Kinky strikes me more than anything else as something of a libertarian, which I prefer over Republicans so, yeah, “Kinky is Awesome,” you’re right he’s better than Rick Perry, but I’d prefer more tree-hugger and a bit less martial law on the border.

It’s Friday night and my wife is out of town. Naturally, I watched the Texas Gubernatorial Debate. Dork? Mois?

Okay, it wasn’t really a debate, it was more of a “debate,” but I watched it anyway.

Since the four way race between incumbent Republican Rick “Go Texas” Perry, Democrat Chris “Who? Huh?” Bell, Kinky “Why the Hell Not” Friedman and Carole “Grandma” Keeton Strayhorn began I’ve been one of the undecideds. I’m sick of Perry and he needs to go. The question is, who can beat him?

I flirted with Friedman and signed for Strayhorn, though I admit I lost the petition before I could mail it back.

In tonight’s “debate” Perry was polished and sounded good; if I hadn’t been reading the paper for the past six years, I’d have been impressed with him. He was most effective in dealing with Friedman’s recent racist comments and in defending his highway plans. I’d say give the devil his due, but there was no stench of sulphur, so I’ll just say Perry was as slick and polished as I expected him to be.

Friedman was all over the place. Willie Nelson in charge of energy policy? Come on. He’s running against politics and while he’s passionate about changing Texas, he has no idea how to do it. My brother said he doesn’t think we need a comedian as our governor. I agree, but I’d still take him over the clown we have. Comedians are funny. Clowns are scary.

I had high hopes for Strayhorn; however, she came off flat and uninspiring. I’d take her over Perry, but only since I know she really is committed to education. She sounded desperate, which is probably what happens when you’re fourth in the polls.

The best line of the night was from Chris Bell when he referred to the competition as his “three Republican opponents.” Bell was knowledgeable and he seemed to have a strong grasp of the issues. At times, Friedman even helped him out, though probably unintentionally. Bell has solid positions on education and has made transparency and clean government one of his signature issues. He gets points for being one of the first to file ethics complaints against Tom DeLay. He’s smart, witty and competent. Call me convinced.

I believe we are doomed to another four years of Perry (actually, two – he’s being groomed as the GOP VP candidate for ’08, God help us all) unless the Democrats come home to Bell. In all likelihood, they will abandon Strayhorn and Friedman and coalesce around Bell, which is a good thing since he’s the best candidate. If the traditional Democrat vote holds and he can pick up enough of the anti-Perry crowd (like me), he should have a chance.

I guess I’m decided.

Update: Thanks to the following blogs for linking to this post: Capitol Annex, Brains and Eggs, Easter Lemming Liberal News, Off the Kuff, and Houston Democrats.