Freedom and Choice

No Limits

2012-01-09T23:29:00.000-06:00

I seldom think about my limitations, and they never make me sad. Perhaps there is just a touch of yearning at times; but it is vague, like a breeze among flowers.

~Helen Keller

Everyone loves a good Helen Keller quote. Now wait just one minute, before I go any further, this is a WARNING - that this post is going to be one of those sappy, high-minded, idealist, cliche, flowery, hippy-ish, happy-go-lucky, and just way too optimistic types - to all naysayers; enter at your own risk. Back to Miss Keller, which is a funny thing, because as the ultimate model of a person with a disability who overcomes all odds, and finds a voice for herself at a time when it wasn't proper for a woman to be vocal, I actually don't know much about her life. I suppose all I really know is the legend, if that, and it has been impressed upon me that she was an extraordinary individual. I mean, ultimately I don't know, time has a way of distorting the lens of reality through which we judge people, so maybe she has some dark side we don't hear about (I don't think I saw that movie), but for purposes of this public service announcement, I'm going to maintain my ignorance, disregard WikiPedia, and stick with the extraordinary thing. But, like I said - everyone loves a good Helen Keller quote.

We all need inspiration (even if we don't want to admit it.) For some, maybe Keller inspires because you have a disability, and you know what it feels like to overcome, or maybe you haven't overcome, and you desperately desire to do so. Maybe you don't have a disability, but you've overcome your own challenge, stigma, or oppression. Maybe you are a woman, maybe you are not. Maybe you are empowered, maybe you want to be. Or Maybe you're doing just fine, and you just want to remind yourself, "hey, at least I'm not deaf, blind, or disabled." It doesn't matter, we all need inspiration. If you don't believe me, just Google "inspirational quotes" and see how many pages of results you get. Not to mention, the Lifetime channel would have no advertisers if this were not true (especially around the holidays.) And Oprah, she certainly wouldn't have her OWN network. Like I said - inspiration.

Okay, so at this point, I realize I am dangerously close to surpassing the attention-span of the average American, and you are begging me to get to the point so you can get back to your Sims Social game on Facebook, so I will now attempt to wrap this up like a cute pixelly Farmville gift you didn't ask for in the first place. You remember how I said "overcome" in the last paragraph, like as in, "overcome your limitations?" That's what I love about this quote, because, embedded in this quote is a higher level of understanding. You see, it's one thing to overcome your limitations, but entirely another to overlook them. Don't get me wrong, congratulations if you have overcome, because it is no easy feat in this world of multiplying internal and external barriers. I don't mean to diminish feats of strength and courage, as I certainly know the glory in triumph. I also, don't mean to say that you must pretend you do not have limitations, or to not acknowledge those you do have; on the contrary, you must know your limitations before you can move past them altogether. For we all have physical, mental, emotional, and societal barriers that "limit" us, as an output of production in comparison to some set standard of normalcy (really, "to be limited" is just a numbers game), but the important question is - do you let it "limit" your potential? And it is at this crossroads of contemplation that I arrive at the gift I so teasingly promised - which is, to purport that it is the perpetuation of the idea of limitation in our minds that is the cause of limitation in our potential.

Why does Keller choose to "seldom think about" her "limitations?" Because, to do so would only lead to a defeatist outlook. The thought of "limitation" is like a Mogwai (think Gremlins) - it seems innocent enough at first, but you pour water on it and it multiplies, and then you feed it in your darkest hour and it turns into an evil monster that takes over your thoughts. The crazy thing is, you often don't even notice it happen. Certainly this happened to me. I have a legitimate disability, with a legitimate wasting of muscle strength that I can claim as my limitation, not to mention an overdose of pain for good measure. And those are just the ones that most would easily hand me a "pass" (on life) card, as I have all the other ones too - bad relationships, failed ventures, childhood issues, and a dilapidated bank account (among others.) Now, please don't accuse me of hypocrisy, because even Keller recognizes that sometimes she "yearns" for them, but only in passing. And plus, I'm telling a story by example, if you may, now where was I? Yes, the Gremlins in my mind that I did not even see multiplying and taking over. So all the limitations that I espoused slowly became excuses, which became a plague on possibility. I would be happy to bore you with the details, like a history of Hobbits, but this is the Internet after all, and brevity is king, so I'll move on an let you know the good news - there is a remedy.

The good news is that all you need to kill a Gremlin is a bright light. Ultimately, that bright light is inside you (yeah, I know, here comes the cliche-ish part), but it usually takes lots of shining lights outside of you, before you discover the internal one. I know I had a plethora of friends (you know who you are) that have been my shining lights over the last few years, and I am eternally thankful for each of them! I encourage you to seek out those shining lights in your life, and then challenge yourself to find the bright light inside. Yes, I am wielding the imagery of light, and I'll let you equate the light to whatever meaning you choose, but suffice to say, it's what's going to enrich your life. The light is that belief in yourself that realizes the absence of limitation, and the abundance potential. Once you realize this key, and overlook your limitations, then you can truly realize what it means to push "mind over matter" (maybe not Yoda style Force levitation, but close.) With that said, find your light, set your destination, and grab life by the [enter your favorite object of metaphorical grabbing.]

In conclusion - Helen Keller, inspiration, no limitations, Gremlins, bright light, mind-over-matter, grab something, the end.

Dear Mr. Congressman

2011-07-27T23:15:00.000-05:00

Dear Representative Yoder:

I have followed your career as an elected representative of the people in Kansas, and have actually discussed fiscal issues with you personally when you first entered the Kansas House. I know that you believe firmly in fiscal responsibility in government, while also preserving programs that are vital to Americans, especially programs that help and support the poor, disabled, elderly, and those suffering hardship. As a concerned American, and Kansan, I have been watching intently the current "debate" over the budget and and the debt ceiling.. I am writing today to let you know that I firmly support taking bold and expansive measures to reduce deficits, and pay back our national debt, but I URGE you to do so in a responsible and balanced manner that values compromise and bi-partisanship.

I support large-scale spending cuts in order to curtail out-of-control spending, but I also believe that cuts must be combined with raising revenues by asking Corporations and the Wealthy to pay a slightly higher share of the tax burden. I believe the President is on the right track with his plan to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion dollars with a combination of reduced spending and rolling back tax cuts and tax exemptions for corporations and the wealthiest 2% of Americans, while also protecting and preserving important programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. I do not know if the President’s plan is “the best” plan or not, but I support any plan that does the following: reduces spending; creates greater efficiency in government programs; combines programs to create efficiencies in government; takes a “new” or “outside-the-box” approach to solving fiscal problems and creating efficiencies in government; raises revenue on those that can afford to pay; eliminates tax exemptions and loopholes for the corporations; and protects vital programs that support vulnerable populations, education, jobs, and protecting America’s infrastructure and development.

I am personally appalled at those in the Republican party insisting that the only way to reduce the deficit is with a “cuts only” approach. Americans realize that our country’s debt situation is serious, and we are all willing to do our part, and make sacrifices to to keep our nation solvent and on a future track of prosperity, but we feel that everyone, including those with the greatest means to pay, must be willing to do their part. Resorting to spending-cuts only is not a responsible means of solving the problem, does not fairly ask everyone to give, and puts important government programs in jeopardy.

I remember during the 2003 Kansas legislative session, when our state was facing severe budget shortfalls, you were one of a few brave Republican legislators that supported tax increases in order to protect vital government programs. It was because of you and those Republicans willing to do the right thing and raise revenues that Kansas was able to balance our budget and avoid deep cuts to important government programs. Because of your actions in the past, I know that you understand the importance of taking a balanced and multi-pronged approach to fiscal responsibility that protects vital government programs and services. For these reasons, I urge you to take a path of compromise and reject any “cuts only” budget proposals, and support a plan that asks all Americans, including the wealthy, to contribute; that raises revenues and cuts spending; and protects and preserves vital programs.

Respectfully,
Jason Gallagher

Must See Blog

2011-06-01T23:38:00.000-05:00

I just discovered an awesome new blog, you must check out. Fun stories, great giveaways, and exciting challenges - what else could you ask for in a blog? Check her out - Big K, Little a!

Respect for J.T.

2011-06-01T23:30:00.000-05:00

The clip below says it all; why I have such great respect for Justin Timberlake. The man can sing, dance, look good, and doesn't take himself too seriously. He knows he's hot stuff, but can make fun of himself. Classy.

Gallagher For Congress 2012!

2010-11-02T23:10:00.000-05:00

Dear Friends,

Tonight I announce my candidacy for the KS 3rd District U.S. House of Representatives congressional seat in 2012. Why would I take such a bold step? I take this leap today, because I believe Washington needs a true outsider to shake up the Congress! It is time for the people to have more say, and the party establishment to have less. It is time to take the money out of politics, and put back the ideas. It is time to stop the hatred, and start the cooperation. I have a plan to help the people take back Congress, and it will start right here in Kansas.

I believe firmly that it is the responsibility of the government to protect, empower, and serve the citizens of the United States. Those who are elected to public office have a sacred duty to uphold the values set forth in the Constitution and to represent the people with the utmost dignity, integrity, and honor. I have lived my life by the values of honesty, respect, and understanding, and it is those values that I intend to bring to the voters of Kansas' 3rd District, and to Washington when I am elected in 2012.

Over the next few months I will roll out my campaign, and build my platform from the ground up. I have some solid ideas on some issues, but overall I will be taking a nuanced approach to issues. Most importantly, I intend to listen, and I want to hear what you have to say. I hope to work together with my friends and the entire community to generate ideas, to build a consensus campaign, and take back Congress in 2012! Please join with me to help bring a new understanding to Washington, starting right here in the great state of Kansas! Go America!

Let Me In

2010-03-24T12:48:00.000-05:00

Let Me In (revised 03/25):

I tried so hard to penetrate
The Layers of your misery,
I want to commiserate,
Yet, can't get inside you fully.

Can't see why -
When you are so strong
Can't see why -
Where did it go wrong?

Please, let me in your heart,
Please, let me give you peace,
Please, let me inside your soul
Please, let me heal the pain,
Please let me be the one to fill that hole.

I can't stand this sensation
The feeling of your instability,
I wait for an invitation
To go as deep as you'll let me.

Can't see why -
When you are so strong
Can't see why -
Where did it go wrong?

Please, let me in your heart,
Please, let me give you peace,
Please, let me inside your soul
Please, let me heal the pain,
Please let me be the one to fill that hole.

I tried so hard to penetrate
The Layers of your misery
Still waiting for an invitation
To go as deep as you'll let me.

Now I wait for the release,
For all those feelings inside to explode,
Don't know how long it'll take
But I will wait.

Please, let me in your heart,
Please, let me give you peace,
Please, let me inside your soul
Please, let me heal the pain,
Please let me be the one to fill that hole

Beautiful Smile

2010-03-12T23:45:00.000-06:00

I wrote this tonight - it came naturally from an outpouring of emotion inside -

I tried so hard to penetrate the layers
of your misery,
But somehow I only made it part of the way.

I never thought it'd be so hard
Because you have the strength of a thousand suns
And a love that's so strong

Why do the fears inside you always release
Just when it seems
We can make our dreams come true?

When you're awake you say it's all okay,
But when you sleep I can see the pain
And all I want to do is protect you from the demons
That dwell inside.

She has the most beautiful smile, it's like sunshine in the spring,
But inside her eyes, I can see the storm that stirs deep inside,
It's a stormy kind of radiance,
And I just want to give her peace.

Why can't I help you overcome the fears that
Keep you from living life to its fullest?
Why isn't my love strong enough to wash away
What must be a scar that just can't be healed

She has the most beautiful smile, it's like sunshine in the spring,
But inside her eyes, I can see the storm that stirs deep inside,
It's a stormy kind of radiance,
And I just want to give her peace.

Now I just wait to see if time can mend the wound,
Because it's hard to see such a beautiful soul
Wandering in the world with a shroud so dark.

She has the most beautiful smile, it's like sunshine in the spring,
But inside her eyes, I can see the storm that stirs deep inside,
It's a stormy kind of radiance,
And I just want to give her peace.

To give her peace with my love,
It's all I ever wanted to do.

My Dream Purchases

2009-02-13T01:42:00.001-06:00

I consider myself a frugal man and besides my computer I don't have a desire to own many material things. I don't dream of owning a nice car, mansion, or an island. However, I think if I could own the following three things, I'd be happier and enjoy life that much more:

1. A Library - I was watching the movie Inkheart (great movie) today and in the beginning of the movie one of the characters has a house with a large room that is just shelves of beautiful books. I'd like to have a room with shelves and shelves of books. I love the feel, look, and general atmosphere of being around books; like being in a bookstore. It's even cooler when the bookstore is a used bookstore or antique books. This library should have a personal reading space that has a comfy chair of some sort with the appropriate lift technology to get me in and out of the chair.

2. My own personal movie theater - I love movies and I love them BIG. Nothing beats the experience of watching a movie on a 30 foot screen! Wouldn't it be sweet to have your own big-screen? My big-screen would be hooked up to my computer whereby I could be productive, communicate online, learn, play video games, and watch movies all from the mid-level viewing of my own theater.

3. Pinball Machine - I have always LOVED pinball. The more bells and whistles the better! Pinball seems to be a lost art these days as you see fewer and fewer pinball machines in arcades. Luckily, some are still being made - today I just played an awesome Indiana Jones pinball. Though I have a special place in my heart for the Simpson's machines I've played (at least 2 different versions). I've found the Simpsons machines to be extremely balanced, challenging, and most of all - FUN!

That's all. Is that asking for too much???

Should I be writing for the NY Times???

2008-11-12T19:31:00.000-06:00

On Saturday I wrote a blog entry detailing best first policy steps for Obama with emphasis on how to get the economy back on track.

On Sunday, I see the following Op-Ed piece by Al Gore appear in the NY Times entitled The Climate For Change. In his article Gore outlines why and how a bold plan to combat climate change will simultaneously battle our economic problems.

Al Gore writes:

Here is the good news: the bold steps that are needed to solve the climate crisis are exactly the same steps that ought to be taken in order to solve the economic crisis and the energy security crisis.

AND

First, the new president and the new Congress should offer large-scale investment in incentives for the construction of concentrated solar thermal plants in the Southwestern deserts, wind farms in the corridor stretching from Texas to the Dakotas and advanced plants in geothermal hot spots that could produce large amounts of electricity.

Second, we should begin the planning and construction of a unified national smart grid for the transport of renewable electricity from the rural places where it is mostly generated to the cities where it is mostly used...
Third, we should help America’s automobile industry ... to convert quickly to plug-in hybrids that can run on the renewable electricity that will be available...
Fourth, we should embark on a nationwide effort to retrofit buildings with better insulation and energy-efficient windows and lighting.

I wrote in MY blog:

As well, we should embark on a 21st-century "greening" of America by outfitting government with energy efficient design, encouraging businesses to use green technology, and to fundamentally alter the way America approaches building design, energy usage, and product consumption. If any help is given to the auto industry, it has to be with a clear ultimatum to wean America's cars off of oil consumption.

Then today I hear about this Op-Ed piece written on Monday by Paul Ingrassia entitled Detroit Auto Makers Need More Than a Bailout. Ingrassia writes, "But giving GM a blank check -- which the company and the United Auto Workers union badly want, and which Washington will be tempted to grant -- would be an enormous mistake. The company would just burn through the money and come back for more. Even more jobs would be wiped out in the end."

Next, Thomas Friedman expands upon Ingrassia's arguments, in an Op-Ed piece entitled How to Fix a Flat, saying,

Any car company that gets taxpayer money must demonstrate a plan for transforming every vehicle in its fleet to a hybrid-electric engine with flex-fuel capability, so its entire fleet can also run on next generation cellulosic ethanol.

Lastly, somebody ought to call Steve Jobs, who doesn’t need to be bribed to do innovation, and ask him if he’d like to do national service and run a car company for a year. I’d bet it wouldn’t take him much longer than that to come up with the G.M. iCar.

In Summary - my original idea was detail-less, as it was part of a greater plan, but the tenants of my plan, have been spelled out brilliantly by the minds of some of the best 21st century thinkers. Now, if only I had written my ideas in more detail.

Memo to Obama

2008-11-08T16:32:00.000-06:00

On Friday, President-elect Barack Obama gave his first press conference since being elected as the United States' 44th president (if you missed it, I have included it at the end of this post). Obama made it very clear that his first priority as president would be the economy. This is, of course, the most prudent action he could take; however, it is promising that he has moved quickly on assembling an economic advisory team, and appears to be soliciting advice concerning the economy from a broad range of political and economic minds. Certainly, it is better to get ideas from a diverse set then from a small group of same minded loyalists. It is this "Big Tent" bipartisan approach that holds the true potential for Obama's presidency. A good start, but still has a steep hill to climb.

With that said, I'd like to offer the following advice to Obama concerning best first steps once sworn in as president.

Dear President-elect Obama:

The following is my unsolicited advice on possible best first steps to take.

Work with Congress to pass a "Real Economic Stimulous Plan." The plan should be an Eisenhower style government spending project that should update, revitalize, and secure America's roads and bridges. As well, we should embark on a 21st-century "greening" of America by outfitting government with energy efficient design, encouraging businesses to use green technology, and to fundamentally alter the way America approaches building design, energy usage, and product consumption. If any help is given to the auto industry, it has to be with a clear ultimatum to wean America's cars off of oil consumption.
This will be a multi-year long-term project that will not come cheaply. It will, however, create jobs, spur growth, cut energy expenditures, increase energy independence, and rebuild America's infrastructure.
As soon as the economic spending package is signed you must quickly work on cutting the budget line by line and cutting government spending. Every department should be ordered to cut their budgets by 1% (including the Department of Defense). Dollars that go to state governments should not be cut, and could possibly be increased, but only with a caveat that state programs receiving federal dollars should be evaluated for efficiency from the bottom up. At all levels of government, there should be a "suggestion box" initiative. This initiative would allow consumers of government programs, low-level employees and managers, interns,and any interested parties to suggest ways to make government programs more efficient without fear of retribution. As a consumer of a number of government social programs, I have witnessed gross inadequacies and waste of dollars. I have personally tried to save the state money, but was not taken seriously, because of strict rules and regulations. Thus, programs that generally work, and have great benefit to society, should be allowed the flexibility to adopt best practices and change spending habits to promote efficiency. Again, this will only happen with a bottom-up approach that is demanded and supported from the top. Indeed, this is the best way to use your scalpel.
Health-Care: Create a bipartisan commission to study your healthcare plan, revise as needed, and recommend the best and most cost efficient plan for reducing healthcare costs across the board, increasing health care availability to all, and bringing healthcare into the 21st century. The commission should contain the following people -- the Sec. of Health and Human Services, the Commissioner of Medicaid and Medicare services, your top three advisers on your healthcare plan, majority leader of the House and Senate (Pelosi and Reed), Minority Leader of the House and Senate, 5 Congress members from each side of the aisle, and 6 to 9 important community and business members, including a health-care rep, an advocare for people with disabilities, a consumer advocate for families, an hospital representative, and so-forth.

The commission should be given a time limit, and all proceedings should be open and transparent, including being fully televised. You should either submit a list of your priorities to be considered for discussion, or you should be the moderator of the discussion. A final recommendation, with your approval, should be sent to Congress, within three months, with unanimous approval from the commission.
The War - Obviously, while simultaneously working on the above you will be working on your plan, with the advise and council of the joint Chiefs of Staff, your Secretary of Defense, and Congress, to get troops out of Iraq smoothly and safely, and commit redeployment of resources to Afghanistan.
All other priorities to follow - education, social security reform, other environmental issues, restoring America's moral leadership globally, trade policy, and of course any number of emerging issues and crisis.

Posters at the Library

2008-07-13T19:44:00.000-05:00

Recently, I walked into my local library branch, and to my surprise the first thing I see is a huge poster for the movie "Journey to the Center of the Earth" draped over the information desk. Then, when I was sitting at the study desk at the rear of the library minding my own business, I look up and see another huge poster of the movie hanging from the ceiling.

I have a serious problem with the library displaying advertisement for any commercial product or enterprise regardless of the material. I believe firmly that the library has a duty to the public to be apolitical, balanced, and neutral. I do not know if the library was paid to hang these posters, but I suspect they were, which would make the deal even worse. Even if they were not paid, my principle still stands.

The library simply can't allow itself to get involved in advertising for any entity that profits, know matter how lofty the company's goals, because it's a slippery slope of sponsorship. Once the library chooses to advertise something, they make a choice to take sides with whatever the product, issue, or entity advertised and all the corresponding political, social, and cultural representations of those products, entities, and issues. When dollars are involved, that choice benefits another party, and represents influence, and the possibility of shaping the library's agenda. For example, I don't care if the movie had a message of peace, love, understanding, share your toys, reads lots of books, treat adults with respect, and eat your vegetables - the problem is that it still has a message, and someone is making money off of that message. The library's agenda should be only one thing - to provide a broad, balanced, and neutral public resource for people of all ages. Ideally (and it's increasingly becoming possible) you would be able to go to the library and choose any book or publication ever produced, and thus the library can never be accused of "choosing sides" based on the materials they choose to put in their collection. I don't mind that they have Ann Coulter books in their collection, as long as they have Michael Moore to balance her, and Thomas Friedman to balance both of them.

Plus, kids are young and impressionable, and parent's shouldn't have to feel pressured to take their kids to the movies when visiting the library. I would prefer if they would just stick with the READ posters and bulletins for community (non-profit) events.

Speaking of their bulletin board, I once tried to hang a flyer for advertising for my own personal care assistants. I would not be personally benefiting financially from hiring someone (besides the greater ability to get a job with proper support) and I felt my ad should qualify for their community bulletin board, but I was denied. At the same time, I noticed an advertisement for an agency that provides home health care workers for the elderly - an agency I knew was a profit agency - and I promptly notified them of the misplaced flyer.

I will be writing the head librarian, and possibly the county commission, to let them know how I feel about the movie poster. I'll let you know how that goes.

End of the Line or "Just Getting Started" for Clinton???

2008-03-04T12:28:00.000-06:00

It wouldn't be a Tuesday primary if I didn't chime in with my picks. With two weeks gone by since the last vote, two debates, and lots of debacles, I am honestly not sure where the votes lies. Texas, Ohio, Vermont, and Rhode Island vote in primaries today. Vermont has always been an independent state and there is no doubt in my mind they will vote overwhelmingly for Obama. Rhode Island - I know nothing about. In the past Clinton has done well in the Northeast primaries, and the few polls out there show Clinton with a modest lead over Obama - so I'll give RI to Clinton.

Texas and Ohio are real unique beasts to figure out. I've spent all night and all morning trying to put myself in the mind and mood of the typical Ohio and Texas voter. I have also poured over some poll data and statistics (not as much as I'd like).

Overall, I am not sure at all how Texas and Ohio will vote. Honestly, I don't think anyone knows. I'd say there are two possibilities.
1) Obama wins big in both states because he has the momentum and Democrats want this thing over. The debates were essentially tied, and all the media buzz around a Clinton comeback is all for not. The voters reject Clinton's 3am attacks on Obama.

2) This thing is super close and Clinton eeks at minimum a victory in Ohio, and possibly both Texas and Ohio. She accomplished this by "chipping away" at Obama's momentum and invincibility. The "kitchen sink" strategy worked on concerned and fickle voters alike.

I tend to believe the latter is more likely, as we've seen a roller-coaster campaign so far. Democrats and Independents really do seem to be divided on what they perceive as a choice between two good options.

Here is my prediction (this comes with a low-certainty warning) -

Texas - Obama wins with a comfortable, but not large win in the primary. Obama will get a 3 point advantage over Hillary. In the Texas caucuses Obama will walk away with nearly all the delegates, with a vote percentage of at least 60%. Clinton has had some last minute scrambling and organizing for Texas caucuses, so the Obama landslide may not be as big as some Caucuses states.

Ohio - Clinton wins a nailbiter. Will it even be decided tonight??? For Ohio voters - it's all about the "economy stupid." The typical blue-collar working Ohioan strikes me as the "down-to-earth" realist type - an advantage for Clinton. Can Obama's message of Hope strike the hearts of the hopeless? Decidedly, it will go both ways in a tattered but proud state.

The Conventional Wisdom is that if Hillary does not win both Texas and Ohio she should drop out. I think if she loses them both she will bow out. But the million-dollar question is what will she do if she wins one and not the other? My guess is she'll keep on "fighting." I just don't think she knows how to accept defeat (for better or worse).

Here are some clever campaign ads that are bombarding the airwaves in Ohio and Texas:

The Wisconsin Primary

2008-02-19T09:45:00.000-06:00

Today Wisconsin holds a primary for both Republican and Democratic presidential candidates. Also today, Hawaii holds a caucus for Democrats, and Washington State is holding an essentially meaningless primary.

The primary in Washington State is required by state law, but Democratic and Republican rules required caucuses, which were held February 9th. Democrats will ignore the primary results, and Republicans will use the primary results to choose half the state's delegates. Though - interestingly, the Republican caucus in Washington was super close, and McCain was declared by state party officials to be the winner before all the votes were counted, while Huckabee disputes the win. Will Republican primary voters revolt against the caucus results and select Huckabee? Probably. Will it matter? Probably not.

Hawaii will be an overwhelming win for Barack Obama. I predict he will get at least 75% of the vote. Hawaii is a caucus state (favoring Obama), a progressive state (favoring Obama), and Obama was born in the state.

Wisconsin is the real key today. I have been studying the state's primary and it's electorate, and it is a truly enigmatic race. First, I went to the Milwaukee Sentinal-Journal to check out their primary news coverage. Next, I checked out NPR's news coverage. And finally, I looked at US Census Bereau statistics for Wisconsin. This is in addition to my regular patrolling of Politico.com election coverage, which was generic at best.

Analysis - With Wisconsin being an open primary (anyone can choose to vote for either a Republican or Democratic candidate regardless of party affiliation) and with same-day registration, it makes this contest uniquely interesting. With McCain the presumptive nominee for the Republicans, will Republican voters try to influence the Democratic vote? Will Huckabee conservatives come out of the woodworks for him still? Or will they come out against Obama? According to NPR the state is progressive, a sign for Obama. The state is also geographically close to Illinois, with many Wisconsonites commuting into Chicago for work - also good for Obama. The state is primarily white (90%) - not necessarily a telling sign for either Obama or Clinton. Obama has won some of the whitest places in America, but those states held mostly caucuses which have overwhelmingly favor Obama. I'd like to see some stats on the age ranges in Wisconsin. How many universities and college age students? The 65+ crowd in the state (13%) doesn't differ much from national stats. The older crowed will lean towards Clinton, and the younger toward Obama. All polls, except one by the American Research Group (I do not know anything about this group) have Obama winning by comfortable margin. The ARG poll interests me because I wonder how their methodology differed from all other polls.

Polls, conventional wisdom, anecdotal evidence, and even the race momentum strongly supports Obama winning Wisconsin. The certainty of it all is what scares me. I just don't think Clinton can be counted out so easily. This is the scenario that occurred right before New Hampshire, and I predicted incorrectly for Obama to win. Clinton turned up the juice in New Hampshire and pulled out all the stops to win - I think she is capable of the same in Wisconsin.

Conclusions - Clinton wins a nail-biter. In the end it is the "hmmmmm" voters that decide the outcome. The "hmmmm" voters are the ones who know the importance of voting, and make an effort to vote, but have no idea who to vote for. They step in the booth and make their decision last minute. These voters, I believe, overwhelmingly favor Clinton. Obama's campaign is one of passion, and his voters will come on strong, and early. Clinton's voters are steadfast, but her votes come from the casual voter. The casual Democratic voter see both candidates favorably, but leans towards Clinton because of her familiarity and experience. Obama and Clinton will end up with nearly identical delegate totals, but the popular vote win will give Clinton a boost.

Can Huckabee pull out a surprise win? It's a remote possibility, especially if independent/moderate Republicans either stay at home or try to influence the Democratic nominaton. In the end McCain will secure the nomination, and Wisconsin will be Huckabee's final stand.

Potomac Tuesday

2008-02-12T11:24:00.000-06:00

Hello Friends!

Turns out I was WRONG on Saturday! Obama swept the Saturday races, including Washington state, and won Maine on Sunday too. Why was I wrong about Washington State? Because Washington held caucuses, and Obama has won nearly every caucus. Why does he do so well??? Obama supporters are fired up and excited about his campaign. It takes real heart to go out in the bitter cold of winter and then stand in line for hours to make sure you are counted; it is much easier to take 10 minutes at lunch-time to make a name on the ballot. The huge turnout for Democrats in all states shows the clear enthusiasm among Democrats for their choices, but the real prize for excitement belongs to Obama.

For the Republicans, Huckabee is still hanging in there. I attribute this to the Republican Party's sharp ideological divide between social conservatives and moderate conservatives, McCain's complacence, and the Media's pre-mature declaration of McCain as the Republican nominee. What reason do McCain supporters have to get out and vote if they think the race is already over? On the other hand, the media bias just fuels the Huckabee grassroots fire, which already had some great kindling.

Today the District of Columbia (DC), Maryland, and Virginia, are all holding primaries (known as the Potomac primary).

Here is how the candidates will do:

1) Obama will sweep all three contest, and pick up the most delegates. The vote will be especially decisive in Maryland and DC, with a much closer margin between Obama and Clinton in Virginia.

2) Huckabee will edge out McCain in Virginia. This will be a big win for Huckabee. Two reasons why this will happen. 1) Virginia has an "open" primary, meaning that reagardless of your party affiliation you can vote either Republican or Democrat. Conventional wisdom says this could benefit McCain, being that he is more moderate, but in reality, the open primary benefits Obama the most. Obama will suck away McCain's independents, and leave the deeply conservative religious voters to come out for Huckabee. 2) There is a sizable number of evangelical Christian voters in Virginia, being that it is the home of Jerry Falwell's church and Liberty University.

3)McCain wins easily in DC, and narrowly edges out Huckabee in Maryland. However; don't be surprised if the Republican voters in Maryland come out for Huckabee - never underestimate the power of the "underdog."

Let's see how it goes!

Early Results out of Kansas

2008-02-09T15:40:00.001-06:00

With at least 3/4 of caucus voters counted in Kansas, Huckabee has a commanding lead over McCain, with nearly 62% of the vote. This is just exactly as I predicted. I am interested to see the results of Louisiana and Washington caucus/primaries.

Let-Down Saturday?

2008-02-09T13:13:00.000-06:00

After all the hype of "Super-Duper-Cali-Fragi-stic-expe-ali-missouri-ocious" Tuesday, Saturday's contests seem less exciting. I assure you they are not any less important or interesting.

Here are my predictions:

Republicans:

Louisiana - Huckabee wins with a substantial percentage of the vote.
Kansas - Huckabee wins in a landslide. (see this article for more proof for Huckabee to win Kansas. Huckabee drew an overflow crowd of 4x as many supporters as he was expecting at a rally in Olathe, KS (in the city). While McCain could only manage to get 300 for his rally in Wichita. Huckabee and his supporters are fighting hard, while McCain is starting to let his guard down and act to confident.)
Washington - This is a hard one to call. I think McCain will edge out Huckabee. I imagine that Ron Paul will get a heavier than usual vote in Washington.

Democrats:

Louisiana - Obama wins big.
Nebraska - Obama.
Washington - A virtual tie between Clinton and Obama. Clinton will get 1% more of the vote.

Romney Out - Who's In?

2008-02-08T13:49:00.000-06:00

Everyone has been asking me - "Jason what do you think of Romney dropping out of the race?" Well, I was just as surprised as you were. I thought for sure he would keep swinging at McCain to try and get the nomination. Why did he do it? I don't know really, but I imagine he wasn't very happy with his Super Tuesday results, and future polling was not in his favor. Plus, I figure he's just saving his money so he can go at it again in 2012 (I read at politico.com that it is rumored he has said he is eyeing 2012).

What does this mean for the Republican Race? I think it helps Mike Huckabee. The conventional wisdom right now is that McCain has it locked up. McCain has somewhere between 714 and 724 delegates (depending on where you look) and needs 1191 delegates to win the nomination; a difference of approximately 472 delegates. This compares to Huckabee who needs at least 525 more delegates than McCain to win.

I have not done all the math, and I don't think it will be easy for Huckabee, but I would not count him out just yet. Huckabee has always been the "true" social conservative in this race, and he has run a very "scrappy" campaign. The hard-core right conservatives, especially the social conservatives, feel McCain is too liberal. Romney was the presumed #1 challenger to McCain, and so Huckabee was largely ignored. If I were McCain I would not get too confident.

Let's look to Kansas as an example of what could happen. Kansas has Republican caucuses tomorrow. I feel positive that Huckabee will win in Kansas. Kansas Republicans had to register as Republican by January 25 to be eligible to caucus. Democrats allowed anyone to register as Democrat on the day of the caucus. At my caucus site there was a line of hundreds out the door in the line for people who needed to re-register. I don't think all those people were first time voters or people who needed to change their addresses. I think they were independents and moderate Republicans changing their party affiliation. In a large part, these people were voting for Obama (as he won 74% to Hillary's 26%). These moderate and independent voters are precisely the voters that McCain needs to win. What you have left is the ultra-conservative base - they will go to Huckabee. If Huckabee gets a strong showing in Kansas and Lousiana (which I think he will), it will inject momentum into his campaign. I don't think Huckabee has as good of a chance in Washington state (also tomorrow), but a surprise upset there would further solidify Huckabee's chances. Huckabee likes being the underdog right now, and McCain isn't comfortable as the front-runner (he's usually the underdog) - so I am not so sure the CW is all-knowing at this point.

I'll be back later with more predictions for tomorrow, including Democrat primaries held tomorrow.

Kansans Line Up to Make History

2008-02-06T12:20:00.000-06:00

I wrote in my last blog about the craziness at my Caucus site. My experience was the rule, not the exception, here in Johnson County, Kansas. Check out the video below to see a local news report showing people standing outside, in freezing temperatures, with snow coming down, in lines to vote for their favorite Democratic candidate. The caucus organizers were only expecting 200 to 500 people to show, and overwhelmed when thousands showed! When the reporter says, "Caucus organizers had to take matters into their own hands," this is the understatement of the year. The organizers at my site were making up the ruls for organizing and counting us as they went, and this is what happened everywhere. My dad called me last night saying that he stood outside for more than an hour waiting in line to vote, because they were holding his caucus at a Church that only holds 250. The outpouring of caucus goers in Kansas prompted the Obama campaign to send this text message to Kansans at 7:51pm last night:

62262 (2/5 7:51pm) Everyone has a right to caucus. Tell your friends to STAY IN LINE! Share this msg with all Obama supporters. Major problems contact: 866-675-2008. Yes we can!

This is excellent news for Democracy in America! We Kansans witnessed history in the making last night. Americans, Democrats and Republicans alike, realize that after seven years of Bush in the White House, our country is heading in the wrong direction, and fast. Last night we saw record turnouts all across the country, because Americans are hungry for real change.

The historical nature of having a woman candidate and a black candidate, has been a huge factor in the excitement in the Democratic party. Democrats like both options. However, I credit Obama with a real movement that crosses all the lines - racial, party, age, and gender. In Kansas, Obama won with a 3 to 1 advantage over Clinton, often in largely Republican districts. Obama won huge in states in the South and Midwest - places like Kansas, Idaho, Georgia, Illinois, Minnesota, and even Alaska. Obama has the broadest and most diverse support. Clinton only proved she could win in the traditionally liberal strongholds like California, New York, and the Northeast corridor. If a Democrat expects to win, and have a mandate for change in the White House, they will need to win everywhere - Obama has that potential.

Hillary Clinton is too divisive a figure. I have a few conservative friends who support Obama and would vote for him, but would under no circumsttances vote for Clinton. The Clinton "machine" is too divisive to rally moderates, independents, and conservatives to challenge the Republicans and tackle the tough issues facing America. No doubt the Democratic race will come down to the nominating convention in Denver in August. Clinton is a strong candidate - I am not naive to her appeal and organizational power. I believe firmly that Obama is the best choice for America, and in the end he will be triumphant.

I am interested in others thoughts and reactions, so please comment!

Caucus Crazy Kansas!!!

2008-02-06T09:22:00.000-06:00

The Caucuses in Johnson County Kansas were craziness and pandimonium! It was confusing and exhilerating at the same time. My precinct caucus site was held at the Leawood Middle School two miles from my home. Over 1500 people showed! There were 1100 of us Obama supporters crammed into an auditorum that has a limit of 500! The 425 Clinton supporters were in the cafeteria.

It took over an hour just to get inside and get checked in! The lines were out the door. Parking was crazy, and my wheelchair van lift got stuck. I was worried I might not make it, as it took us over 20 minutes of fiddling with the lift to get it unstuck from the mud.

The huge turnout was especially crazy because it was 32 degrees outside with cold winds, cold rain, and heavy snow looming. Additionally, the 1500 of us were in a heavily Republican district - the most expensive homes in the city - who knew there were so many Democrats!!!?

A picture explains everything, and here is my picture. More to come later...

Super Tuesday (Sorry I have nothing more clever)

2008-02-05T16:56:00.000-06:00

The early news out of West Virginia is that Mike Huckabee pulled a surprise victory over Mitt Romney (expected to win). This could be good news for Huckabee or bad news for Romney. I think it just means we will be in for lots of surprises tonight.

I was going to write a long detailed prediction with state by state analysis, but it's a cold rainy day today, and I'm saving up all my energy to get to the Caucus tonight.

So here is my quick summary. No Democrat will pull forward. Both Clinton and Obama will win some and lose some, but remember, in the end it is the number of delegates that count. Obama will do well in the smaller states, especially in the South, and he will clean up in his home state of Illinois. Clinton will win a sizable portion of the New York delegates, and win New Jersey and the Northeast along with it. Clinton will squeak by with a popular vote win in California, but Obama will get enough delegates that it will be a virtual tie. In Kansas, Obama will get a clear Caucus win. In Missouri, Obama will win in a very close contest. Overall, Obama will come out with a few more votes and a few more delegates than Clinton. On the whole, expect Obama to get about 52% of the vote to Hillary's 48% (if you averaged the percentages from all states).

As for the Republicans - I'm not so sure McCain has it in the bag. I think Romney will win California, and Huckabee will win a handful of smaller states, especially in his home state of Arkansas and overall in the South. Romney wins in Massachussetts and the Northeast. McCain still comes out ahead, but not with enough delegates to solidify the nomination. I'd look to Kansas on Saturday as an indicator of who the Republicans really want for President.

Hope everyone had a chance to get out and vote today!

Obama in KC

2008-02-03T12:56:00.000-06:00

Barack Obama was in Kansas City on Tuesday, January 29, 2008, and I had the once in a lifetime opportunity to hear him speak.

A few days before I heard Obama speak in KC, I was having an e-mail conversation about politics with a friend of mine and he said - "real change will come from the bottom up, not from the top down." I knew this to be true already, and then I heard Obama make it a central theme in his speech, and I knew he was the real deal! He said, "Change will not happen because you elect a new president, change will happen only because all of you decide change will happen."

You can see Barack's entire speech below.

My friend said,"Americans...don't want to have anything to do with real public service." I agree; Obama talked about this subject also. He even had a proposal to give every young American who wants to go to college $4,000/year, and in turn the government will EXPECT that the student give back by volunteering, joining the peace corps, or working in low income hospitals and schools. Not only that, but on the whole, Obama talks about how change will not happen unless we, the American people, take responsibility, and work together. He talks about "hard work and sacrifice."

Another great speech he gave at MLK's church on the day before MLK day - http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/mlkvideo. In this speech he says that we have to look within our own communities and take responsibility for our problems (he was specifically talking about black communities, but I believe the message can be extrapolated). Change and Hope do make good slogans, but Obama understands what change and hope actually MEAN. He is truly uniting people. I could see this just by the crowd last night. It was very clearly a diverse crowd of people of all cultures and ages - and not just a sprinkling of non-white individuals, it was truly a mixing of people, especially of black and white.

Obama is taking a hold of people's hearts and minds - conservatives, liberals, and independents alike

(I have conservative Republican friends who have expressed a strong interest in Obama). One reason Obama is having such a powerful effect on America, and the reason he is attracting support from everywhere, is because of the dark mood of hopelessness in the current state of American politics (see this NY Times Article). People know that the state of the union is poor (despite what Bush might say), they know that Partisan bickering is leading us nowhere fast, and they know special interests don't represent the people's interests. This year is a historical campaign. The Clinton's will NOT get away with their negative attacks and traditional campaign tactics; it hurt them in South Carolina, and it (especially Bill's lashing out), will hurt them on Feb 5th. Not to say that Clinton won't carry a few states on Feb 5, but Obama will break through. In the general election, if McCain is the Republican nominee, you will see a more civil campaign. The candidate who sounds most partisan, most negative, and most "Washington" will lose.

Also, Obama explains that the reason he chose to run now (as opposed to in 4 or 8 more years as many thought he would) is because of what MLK said is the "fierce urgency of now." Once again, he shows he understands the true state of our union.

I think Obama coming to KC was a smart move. He gets the most populous parts of two February 5th states. He got Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius' endorsement, and she is obviously a big star in the Democratic Party now. She is a star because she figured out how to win in the middle of the country, in a very traditionally red state. She represents the hope that a presidential candidate can break through too. Obama went to Colorada, Arizona, and New Mexico. He is obviously planning on getting delegates from all the small states. Clinton will get New York, and probably California. But what if Obama gets the rest of the country??? It shows he can win outside the biggest blue states. It shows he has a diverse coalition of supporters.

I was cynical at first, but I am feeling it now. I think we are in truly unique times. We are at a turning point in history. Our true test is now - can we as American's truly turn our country around, and put it back on the right course? Can we clean up politics, our economy, and our environment? Can we renew our status in the world? This is no easy task, but now is our opportunity. I feel an electricity in the air, a surge of real hope, that surrounds Obama. I figure either his candidacy will stand as a historical moment in history - or we have all been hoodwinked.

I was inspired the first time I heard Obama speak at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. I knew then he was different, but could not foresee the Obama "fever" that is taking hold of America. Real change is coming and his name is Barack Obama.

True Evil

2008-02-01T20:02:00.000-06:00

I read this article about Al Quaeda members strapping bombs to mentally disabled women and remotely triggering the explosion in crowded markets. I was thoroughly astounded at the horrific lengths terrorists will go. It is one thing to strap a bomb to one's self to blow up people - but to trick, coerce, or force an unwilling participant and blowing them up to in-turn kill others, is a whole new level of vile, senseless, and evil killing.

This demonstrates the lengths to which these Islamic radicalists will go to harm the free. We should not let fear control us and erode our privacy, but we should not underestimate those that wish to do us harm.

The Republican Playground

2008-01-31T11:54:00.000-06:00

Did you see that so-called Republican "debate," held at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley California, last night??? If not you can see it here and probably here soon.

I think the Republicans should be disgraced by how their candidates acted in this debate. Romney and McCain were like kids on the playground arguing over the tether ball. Frankly, arguing over what Romney did or didn't say a year ago is a waste of our time (see clip below for the Romney/McCain bickering) - the American people need to know how maintaining troops in Iraq keeps us safer, why the sacrifice of life and money are worth it, and how they intend to finance this war in the long term.

McCain was disrespectful to all the other candidates. He kept laughing and grinning at Romney and Paul as if he were superior to them, like a bully on the playground. McCain has, in every debate, laughed Paul down, dismissing him as a looney. I realize Paul has radical libertarian ideas, and his ideas don't fit the current Republican landscape, but he still has legitimate ideas that should be considered and respected. Overall I think McCain is a good guy, and he has a good record in the Senate and he is a true war hero. But this bullying is unbecoming and disrespectful. My advice to McCain - stop the playing around and ACT presidential!

In the end Huckabee came out ahead. Huckabee was humble, classy, and respectful. He stuck to talking about his positions, and he was elegant in doing so. I realize that Huckabee is a scary candidate as far as his policies, especially social policy, but he the only one actually acting presidential. He has intelligence, wit & charm, and charisma, this is why he is still in the race.

And the media - a total bias towards "front-runners" - they gave Paul and Huckabee very little airtime, and did not ask them the same questions they asked Romney/McCain. During one of the other Republican debates one of the hosts literally picked on and laughed at Paul. Again, I'm not supporting Paul, but their should be a better system of fair play for candidates to get out their message. Let the voters decide if Paul's ideas are over-the-top or not. More candidates should be given a fair and equal chance to make their case. If the so-called "fringe" candidates are truly on the fringe, let the voters decide, not the media. I don't care who the candidate is - Paul, Kucinich, Nader, or even Alan Keyes. Let them debate, and let them debate at the same level as the front-runners. One shouldn't have to have a ton of money like Ross Perot to get noticed.

Ronald Reagan would be ashamed...

South Carolina Primary

2008-01-26T08:53:00.000-06:00

Obama will win, and big!
Clinton will come in second, but don't be surprised if Edwards gives her a challege.
If Clinton falls to third, it will be her (and Bill's) extremely rotten negative campaigning that did the trick.

Nevada Goes To Romney and Clinton

2008-01-19T18:43:00.000-06:00

The South Carolina results are starting to come in, but no winner yet. The big news - I PICKED correctly the winners in Nevada! With 97% of precincts reporting in Nevada, Mitt Romney wins for the Republicans and Hillary Clinton wins for the Democrats; both candidates getting approximately 51% of the vote in their respective parties. For the Demmocrats Obama comes in second with a strong 45% of the vote. Edwards comes in third with a weak 3.76% showing. I was a little surprised Edwards didn't do better and at least get 15% of the vote; without 15% he will not be awarded any delegates from Nevada. On the Republican side, the BIG surprise is Ron Paul coming in second with nearly 14% of the vote. The Republicans do not have a 15% threshold, so this means Paul will receive some delegates. McCain comes in third with close to 13% of the vote.

More to come...

Presidential Politics - Nevada & South Carolina

2008-01-19T11:25:00.000-06:00

First, I apologize for missing Michigan! The Michigan Republican primary was a tough one to call - I'm not sure who I would have chosen anyway. Mitt Romney won, and I can certainly see why with hi s father being a former governor and Mitt himself having big ties to the state. Romney's win mixes up the Republican race once again, with three different candidates winning primaries, and goes to show that the Republicans are torn about who they want for President.

The Democratic primary in Michigan was for all intents and purposes void. Obama and Edwards did not bother putting their names on the ballot. Because of a state party dispute with the National Democratic Party, Michigan delegates won't be seated at the National Convention. I'm not sure what it's all about, but I know it had something to do with Michigan deciding to hold their primary earlier than national rules allow.

Now, for today - South Carolina Republicans are holding their primary (Democrats are next Saturday) and Nevada has both Republican and Democratic Caucuses today.

Here are my predictions:

South Carolina:
Republican -

1. Mike Huckabee - South Carolina Republicans are religious voters and they will vote for the most evangelical candidate. Huckabee is that man.
2. John McCain - For everyone else, there is McCain.
3. Fred Thompson - Thompson is the second most conservative candidate for the Republicans. He's also a big fan with gun owners.

Mitt Romney will be upset in South Carolina, as he just doesn't hold much appeal in the South. Look for this to hurt his "electibility" factor nationally.

Nevada:
Republican -

1. Mitt Romney - Republicans haven't spent much time in Nevada (instead focusing on South Carolina), so Mitt Romney leads in polls.
2. John McCain - A solid second place for McCain.
3. Mike Huckabee - Squeaks into third, as Nevada voters aren't big fans.

Democrats -

1. Hillary Clinton - In a super close race, Clinton will squeak out the win over Obama.
2. Barack Obama - He has lots of support in Nevada, including the largest union in the state, but he just can't stop Hillary's organizing power. Obama fans, don't despair, I am positive Obama will win in South Carolina next Saturday!
3. John Edwards - Edwards will get a very strong third place finish and he could potentially upset Hilary or Obama in Nevada.

In closing, today will be a big day for the candidates, but don't look for anything to be decides. This years race will go down to the nominating conventions in August and September.

Also, I have some more thoughts about Edwards, and about Vice Presidential politics in this race. Tune in later.

Watch/Listen/Read All the Presidential Debates

2008-01-10T21:44:00.000-06:00

Hello Friends.

Check this out - you can find all the Presidential debates in one place!

2008 Presidential Debate Series

Best of all - they are closed captioned for the hearing impaired. But don't worry, the audio is working too.

New Hampshire - Hillary wins Democratic primary, and John McCain wins Republican primary. I was totally wrong about Democrats in New Hampshire, and so was the force known as the "media" and so were the polls. This, ladies and gentlemen, is why we vote! Here is an interesting article by Politico.com media journalists about "Why Reporters Get it Wrong."
Or you could just take Stephen Colbert's explanation:
"If you keep voting the way you want, rather than the way we tell you you want, then pundits are going to stop telling you how to think!"

This video is also a funny, yet scary, Colbert interview with Republican Mike Huckabee. I say scary because people might actually vote for Huckabee simply because he promised Colbert the VP position!

An interesting fact about NH. While Hillary did win the highest percentage of votes with 38.99% of the vote, both Obama and Clinton actually get the same amount of "pledged" delegates for New Hampshire. There were 22 pledged delegates, and because Obama got only 2.6% less of the vote (36.39%) then mathematically they both ended up with 9 pledged delegates a piece, and John Edwards gets the other 4. You have to receive at least 15% of the vote to get delegates and John Edwards got 16.91%. I am not an expert on the process, but I know that the way in which a candidate is technically chosen as a Party's nominee is by getting the most delegates in her/his name at the Party's nominating convention. Thus, technically Obama and Clinton are very close (if not tied) with total delegates after Iowa and New Hampshire. I only say close because I don't know how Iowa assigns delegates exactly and they didn't assign them right away. So while both Clinton and Obama might not be that far apart in delegates, in reality it is the perception that one candidate or the other is "winning" that actually matters the most!

John Edwards - What should do John Edwards do? Well, it's no secret that if John Edwards dropped out then Obama would have a greater chance of beating Clinton as inevitably Edwards would put his weight (and votes) behind Obama. Obama and Edwards have been very close in philosophy, and actually have been known to team up on Clinton (see New Hampshire ABC debate from link above). While this may be true, I believe Edwards should keep fighting for multiple reasons - 1) He is a very strong candidate by himself. Unfortunately, he is being overshadowed by the popularity of Obama and Clinton, and it doesn't help that he is the "old white guy" in this race. 2) To keep Clinton and Obama honest and on their feet. 3) To show he is a viable VP candidate in 2008 (I think he would make a strong addition to the Obama ticket) and 4) Anything can happen!

Presidential Politics New Hampshire Style

2008-01-08T09:57:00.000-06:00

Turns out I was right on with my Iowa predictions for Democratic presidential hopefuls. With Republicans, I knew that Ron Paul was a long shot for third, but I got Huckabee and Romney correct. Now for some news -

If you don't already know - Democrats Chris Dodd and Joe Biden drop out of race.

New Hampshire primary is today -

My Thoughts:

Democrats: Obama "fever" has struck and his momentum is too strong to stop. Hilary Clinton is self-destructing - read this article in today's New York times about some very out-of-line comments from Hilary. Furthermore, this article in Politico describes the "panic" mode at Clinton campaign headquarters. The polls show Obama in first, Hilary in second, and Edwards in third. The real question is, can Hilary hold on to second? Look for Edwards to make a surprise second place showing.

Republicans: The media says John McCain has a big lead in New Hampshire. I imagine that the New Hampshire Republican is a different type than the Iowa Republican, so it makes sense that Huckabee would not be a front-runner in NH. Huckabee's conservatism and religious appeal played better to a midwestern state than to a north-eastern state. Futhermore, the X-factor in NH is the independent vote - Obama, McCain, and Paul will all try to court the independents. Look for McCain to come out with the win. Romney will come in second. The real question will be, who will come in third. Most polls show Huckabee with the advantage, but a Reuters/CSpan/Zogby poll shows a virtual tie between Huckabee, Guiliani, and Paul. Huckabee is the most likely to get 3rd, but I still think Ron Paul could make a surprise showing in one of the early states.

Predictions...

Dems: 1st - Barack Obama
2nd - John Edwards
3rd - Hilary Clinton

Reps: 1st - 1st - John McCain
2nd - Mitt Romney
3rd - Ron Paul

Tonight we will see...

2008-01-03T09:40:00.000-06:00

Today is the BIG day - the Iowa Caucuses. I can not believe this day descended upon us so quickly (the earliest in history). Here are my predictions:

Democrats:

1st: Barack Obama - Obama has the momentum and newfound star power.
2nd: John Edwards - Edwards plays well in living rooms and is talking about issues more openly than others.
3rd: Hilary Clinton - For Democrats and Independents Clinton represents politics as usual and all Americans are fed up. Clinton's fall will help Obama and Edwards who have both vowed not to accept corporate donations, unlike Clinton.

Republicans:

1st: Mike Huckabee - Huckabee seems to have a late lead, and the popular choice with conservative voters.
2nd: Mitt Romney - A moderates moderate who has the money and good looks to get second (and possibly first).
3rd: Ron Paul - Paul is the sleeper. People love him because his libertarian ideals are not politics as usual. If the youth show up today, expect a surprise showing from Paul.

Blowing Up Satellites

2007-04-24T04:03:00.000-05:00

Yesterday's NY Times article titled, "U.S. Knew of China’s Missile Test, but Kept Silent" is a very troubling look at the US response to China's anti-satellite experiments.

I ask you - should we not be very scared of China's ability to blow up satellites? Should we not also be worried that the US is simply watching them do it?

In today's interconnected digital world the American economy is literally driven by communications technology. I can not even begin to imagine the destruction and disruption in our way of life that could be caused by the destruction of key communication satellites. Even more frightening is the fact that the government and the military relies heavily on satellites for intelligence, communications, missile guidance, operations, imagining, and more. Our ability to gather intelligence and to use key military operations could potentially be crippled with the blast of a few anti-satellite pop-shots in outer space.

I only hope that behind the scenes our intelligence and military are developing anti-anti-satellite technologies, because the inaction displayed by the President is simply unacceptable.

Emergency!

2006-10-22T17:46:00.000-05:00

There is something seriously wrong with the American psyche. I submit - this "problem" was the reason we failed to see 9/11 coming, and is the reason we will be equally surprised by 9/12. You see, we Americans have a problem - we are stuck on fantasy island and we can not escape because we are trapped by paradox.

You see, we are both extremely fearful, and yet exuberantly positive. We believe we can achieve anything, and complain that we are limited to nothing. We are both proud and ignorant of our past. We are optimistic about our future and yet we passively await its demise. We can dream big, but forget quickly.

What does this mean? What does it have to do with my subject? Well, it means we Americans have a dissonance of inaction. Our vision only extends as far as our willingness to believe, and our willingness to act falls even shorter. It means that we are failing to see the big picture and act long term. Let us take the topic of emergency planning. Let me ask you, do you know what to do in the case of an emergency? Are you prepared? How many Americans are prepared? Is our government prepared?

The CIA did not see 9/11 coming, air traffic controllers did not know how to respond, and the military was not ready to scramble jets. FEMA was not ready for Katrina, and they did not act accordingly following the disaster. These are just the shortcomings of our government, but the American people are equally to blame. How many of us have extra water and food stored, an emergency crank radio, flashlights and extra batteries, candles, matches, a corded phone that does not require electricity, exit plans, and rudimentary knowledge of what to do in different types of emergencies? From my interactions with others it seems not many. I personally have most of these things, and the things I do not have I am in the process of gathering. Some might see this as paranoia, but I see it as preparedness, awareness, and foresight. Am I fearful? Not at all; in fact, I am less fearful because I have taken action in the areas that I can have control.

It is this type of foresight that our government must have, and the American people must begin to develop. We must imagine the unimaginable, and then believe in possibility. Then we must use our ingenuity and creativity to be prepared. The capacity to believe that I speak of will surely help combat terrorism and help us be better prepared, but it does not have to be focused merely on doom and gloom topics. It can be focused to determine positive solutions for issues like health care, out of control spending, homelessness, global warming, etc. The point being, that if we fear the unknown and the unimaginable, then we become slaves to a future of uncertainty. If we dare to imagine, believe, and then take action, we can control our future for the betterment of all.

Why I Can't Support MoveOn Any Longer

2006-08-22T20:50:00.000-05:00

When MoveOn.org first started gaining momentum after September 11, 2001, I was happy to have found the organization, because I felt their "progressive" values really spoke to me and my political views. MoveOn talked about peace in the face of angry nation bent on revenge. Next, during the 2002 and 2004 elections MoveOn talked about giving every person a vote and spreading democracy (and not necessarily Democrats). They talked about giving a voice to the people, helping the oppressed, and gaining real equality for all in America. Even now their web site still claims - "With over 3.3 million members across America from carpenters to stay-at-home moms to business leaders we work together to realize the progressive vision of our countrys founders. MoveOn is a service, a way for busy but concerned citizens to find their political voice in a system dominated by big money and big media."

MoveOn, progressiveives have lost my support, because they do not truly uphold the values they claim. Indeed, MoveOn has turned into an organization just as hypocritical as both parties, and even more interested in letting money do the talking.

Please let me give you an example of grave circumstance. As a person with a physical disability I understand the importance of being able to vote independently, privately, and equally with the entire electorate. Today, I see the following new bulletin from a disability newsletter I subscribe to:

"California Sued Over Inaccessible Voting Machines-In a case with nationwide
implications, a number of disability rights organizations including AAPD,
the California Council of the Blind and the Paralyzed Veterans of America
have filed suit against California election officials, challenging the
accessibility of voting systems in a number of counties. The complaint
asserts violations of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and
the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002."

You can read the entire legal complaint filed here: http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/blogs/tokaji/complainingly.pdf

The HAVA Act required that by January 2006 all precincts in America have at least one accessible voting machine to allow people of all disabilities the ability to vote independently and private, and with an option to verify their vote. Direct Recording Electronic (DRE), or computer, voting systems have been certified as accessible and are also universally recognized by the disability community as being accessible to both people with visual and physical impairments. The machines are accessible, certified, and secure. However, it is the disability community that has to undo MoveOn.org's "success" and fight for our right to vote.

Under MoveOn.org's "success stories" I found the following talk about their "accomplishments" in regards to "election reform."

"In North Carolina, Colorado, Hawaii, Connecticut, and California, we won legislation requiring electronic voting machines to print paper records. Phone calls by MoveOn members played a big role in these victories showing legislators that the public was watching. This year, 19 more states required a paper record of every vote, bringing the total to 27. More than half the states now guarantee reliable voting machines."

As you can see, MoveOn.org takes credit for getting California to change the law to be incompatible with HAVA and reverting voters with disabilities backwards.

The issue at stake, and a noble one at that, is the issue of verifiability of electronic voting machines. MoveOn.org believes that DRE voting machines are not secure and therefore are advocating for a Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) as a backup system in case of a mandatory recount of votes. I have been told that DRE machines are secure and have triple redundancy built in; however, I can still understand why there is uncertainty. I even share some of the skepticism. The reason VVPAT is not accessible is because the printed paper backup ballot is not verifiable to people with visual impairments - remember the words of the acronym VVPAT or "Voter Verified." Visually disabled voters can not verify the paper ballot and are effectively left in the dark.

I think MoveOn has a laudable goal, but it is their aggressive tactics that are despicable. I have received every MoveOn.org e-mail and never has MoveOn.org even recognized the rights of people with disabilities. Never have they acknowledged that their stance on the issue was a tough one to make considering the disenfranchisement it causes people with disabilities. Never has MoveON.org expressed a willingness to compromise on the issue and find a solution that truly makes sure every single voter can vote and every voter's vote is counted. Instead, MoveOn has ruthlessly campaigned for VVPAT and reversed the progress of new DRE machines, even as people with disabilities are testifying in the same room. MoveON - where is the compassion in denying the vote to a minority group of Americans?

I have other beefs with MoveON but this is the most egregious.
For more information on accessible voting, visit: http://www.aapd-dc.org/dvpmain/dvpindex.php

Writer's Block

2006-08-20T22:32:00.000-05:00

I have been wanting to write a new blog entry for awhile, but I have been unable to find any inspiration. In the news it seems like the same old depressing stuff: no one knows where Fidel Castro is; Israel and Hezbollah are still fighting despite a peace truce; it is uncertain if the U.N. can hold together the truce and get an international troop force deployed in time; New York City does not know how to count and calculate costs on pensions; Democrats are getting more liberal, and Republicans more conservative while the general electorate is more independent (and apathetic); Federal deficits continue to grow and so does the dollar amount that the United States pays in interest; the U.S. still relies to heavily on Middle Eastern oil and their is little hope that Congress will actually do anything to promote energy conservation and alternative sources of energy; travelers still can't take liquids on planes and probably never will; apparently snakes are allowed on planes and they were #1 at the box office this weekend; the U.S. and Britain are still fighting a "war on terror"; and still no one knows what that means exactly.

Partners

2006-08-12T19:15:00.000-05:00

I have a special place in my heart for the Partners In Policymaking experience and all the many great people I have met through the program. For those that do not know what I am talking about, Partners is a skill building program for people with disabilities, and parents of children with disabilities designed - according to the web page of the original Partners in Policymaking program in Minnesota - to achieve two main goals: To teach best practices in disability, and the competencies of influencing public officials. To achieve these goals, you and a small (about 20 to 25 people) group of Partners (who will inevitably become close friends and allies) meet for two days each month (Friday and Saturday) for eight months to listen to expert speakers, discuss issues, and learn best practices. Of course Partners is so much more than that - it is one of those experiences where you come out the other end as a resurrected human force of good.

I graduated from Partners in 2002, but recently I attended a Partners post graduation training. Through this two day addendum to my Partners training I was able to rejuvenate the spirit of Partners that I felt four years ago. I did not learn much, but I was able to re-connect with old friends and meet some new friends (from other classes). I remembered how Partners is a place where self-actualization, enlightenment, and discovery occurs. It is also place for group camaraderie, struggle, caring, and understanding. Partners learn together, love together, grieve together, advocate together, celebrate together, and grow together. As we come together, we empower ourselves, teach each other, and communicate to the world.

If you are interested in learning more about or joining Partners you can go to the Minnesota Partners page to get more information. If you live in Kansas, you can go to this page to find more information and get an application. To find information about Partners in your state Google "Partners in Policymaking" + your state name.

Intelligence Success or Just Another Starburst Plot?

2006-08-11T16:15:00.000-05:00

You may not have heard the big news, so please allow me to inform you that the British Foiled a Terrorist Plot to Blow Up Planes. It sounds like this was a major success for British Intelligence service MI5, American Intelligence, and world intelligence. This Washington Post Article outlines - at least according to the many leaked sources they borrow from - how these suspected terrorists were tracked for many months. Apparently, British authorities received a tip right after last year's July 7 train bombings in London about suspicious activities of a Muslim friend in the British Muslim community. Authorities followed up on the tip, and "By late 2005, the probe had expanded to involve several hundred investigators on three continents." If this is all true, it was a major operation that spanned many continents, and was a coordinated effort by British Intelligence, US Intelligence, and other countries' intelligence services, as well as their governmental cooperation. In my opinion, this is a great success because it demonstrates how intelligence is SUPPOSED to work. Intelligence services should all work together to corroborate information and survey suspected terrorists and criminals. If intelligence and law enforcement operatives have reasonable suspicions that someone is planning something, then I have no problem with getting a warrant and putting people under heavy surveillance. I was glad to hear that in this case MI5 followed the suspects for as long as possible - "British and U.S. law enforcement authorities decided against breaking up the cells right away in the hope that they could learn more about the origins of the network and assemble evidence for prosecutors." This is good for two reasons: 1) As the article points out, it allows authorities to gather as much information as possible about all aspects of the plot, and possibly other plots, and of course connections. 2) It allows law enforcement to have more substantial evidence that a real and impending plot to kill was going to occur. The lesson learned here is that when intelligence services are vigilant, careful, collaborative, and well resourced they can stop terror before it occurs. This means that the old school rules of war - IE, tanks and bombs - are obsolete and the underground war is at hand. Please take note Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld!

What I am concerned about, however, is the degree to which we have responded in order to beef up security. I wonder if we are losing freedoms and convenience and ultimately the war on terror by placing these restrictive rules on travel? How long are these "liquid restrictions" going to last? As one article proclaims - "Liquid Threat is Hard To Detect.
It seems to me that if a person bent on terrorism has made it to the airport already with their weapon of choice, then they probably have a good plan to get through security. In addition, what is stopping them from doing the same thing on subway trains where something like liquid explosives would be nearly impossible with current technology and security to detect? This underscores an important point that this article makes clear - "Their [Al Queada on 9/11] choice of weapons underscored the potential danger in seemingly benign items." The NY Times article about the liquid threat mention that "There are technologies that may do the job [of detecting liquid explosives] — without simply throwing all liquids into the trash." I am all for technologies that can scan or detect as you move through a security checkpoint, but in the meantime is it really necessary to have to throw in the trash everything from everybody? If you think about it, if someone did have a liquid explosive and it was just thrown in the trash, then isn't it possible it would blow up in the airport as personnel transport it to a dumpster?

Here is a plot I dreamed up that demonstrates why it might just be impossible to detect against everything. Have you ever carefully unwrapped a Starburst candy and then took the wrapper and folded back into a perfect replication of the original wrapping, but without the candy inside? (If you haven't, it is possible to make it look like you have a wrapped starburst w/o actually having any candy inside - it is a cruel trick to play on Starburst lovers) Then, what if one were to fill that wrapper with some sort of explosive material? I do not know if this is possible, but could you mix corn starch and water (or something like it) to a liquid explosive and make it into a crystallized form? If so, you put that into a bag of Starbursts and figure out a way to ignite it and BOOM! To mix it up, in case of a suspicious TSA agent (which is unlikely) you could even mix in some real Starbursts - say like all the yellow ones (since they are the best flavor) are real candy and not the explosive material. Whether my plan would work I do not know because I am not an explosives expert; however, I imagine that there are unlimited ways to mask explosives and weapons as seemingly innocuous items.

Considering this, have we not gone too far with restrictions? Is it not the goal of the terrorists to "inflict terror" and "disrupt our way of life"? Are we not scared and fearful? Are our lives not being disrupted? We should really step back and consider at what point have we gone too far, and at what point do we just need to realize that the possibility of a terrorist attack is inevitable. I stumbled upon this Video Log about this subject and was impressed by what this guy ZEFrank had to say. I have included it in my blog for your convenience.

the show with zefrank

Israel, Hezbollah, and Elevators

2006-08-02T15:41:00.000-05:00

Today, the conflict in Lebanon between Hezbollah and Israel continues as Israel moves 8,000 ground troops into Southern Lebanon, and Hezbollah fires over 200 rockets into Israel. This doesn't sound like very good news in a war that is likely to have very little good news, except for maybe if you consider that if Israel starts using more ground troops, and stops air strikes, then possibly less civilians will be killed. I do not pretend to know the answers in this horrible mess in the Middle East, but what I do know is that it does have a tremendous impact on the world, and it will, in some way or another, trickle back to the United States. Americans should be very concerned about the fighting, but I am afraid many times it only gets a cursory glance by television news media, and subsequently the general American public. Apparently, Mel Gibson's drunken tirade is more important.
Yesterday, Thomas Friedman, who recently visited Syria and Israel talked very candidly on NPR about the power interests involved in the fighting, most especially Syria. I found his comments to be very refreshing, and incredibly insightful, as well as informative. I recommend everyone listen to Thomas Friedman on NPR.

Of course, the most important news of the days is the crisis of the members-only elevators on Capitol Hill. Apparently, stupid people who can not read signs are inundating the Senators' members only elevators, and United States' Senators do not take kindly to that. I do very much admonish people who can not read signs and follow simple directions, but at the same time I do not feel too sorry for members of Congress. Personally, I think they should all take the stairs! A little exercise might actually help them get ready for the campaign trail. In full disclosure, I once took the members only elevator in a House office building, but in my defense, I was with a staff member of a Member of Congress, and the staff person ushered me into the elevator on our way to an event. Otherwise, I was very cognizant of when I could or could not use those elevators, and often just erred on the side of not using them. Also, I use a wheelchair, otherwise I'd take the stairs myself.

MTV Turns 25, Castro May Not Turn 80

2006-08-01T11:01:00.000-05:00

Today the Music Television Network known popularly as MTV turns 25 years old today after debuting with the video "Video Killed the Radio Star" by the Buggles in 1981. This is, of course, fun but trivial news, that is only useful in giving us all a feeling of nostalgia and reminding us how old we are.

More importantly - today it was announced that Fidel Castro is temporarily relinquishing power to his brother Raul. Apparently Castro is having surgery for some intestinal problems, but no one knows his exact status. Castro's 80th birthday is in two weeks and there is much speculation about the state of Castro's health. This is a story that everyone around the world, most especially Americans, need to follow closely. Cuba has always had much weight in Central and South America, and the balance of power in that region will shift dramatically after the de-throning of Castro. Some see the significance, see Peter's blog, but unfortunately many people do not even know that Castro is ill (or possibly ill). What I find interesting is that reports have said that Cuba has been promoting Fidel's brother Raul over the last weeks. This, coupled with the current incident of Castro reporting ill, has fostered many rumours about Fidel Castro. One theory is that Castro is seriously ill or possibly dead. Another theory is that this is a ploy to test-run Raul as a leader for when Fidel is actually seriously ill. I am more inclined to believe that Fidel Castro is actually in trouble, since he has always been known to have an extremely tight hold on power and control. He doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would give up any power for any reason. Therefore, it is very possible that he is currently dying in Cuba. My guess is as good as yours, but regardless, we need to keep a close eye on the situation. Even if Fidel is currently okay, or Raul is peacefully handed power, both men are very old and will eventually pass, with only an uncertain future for Cuba and the world leftover.

Vision For America

2006-06-23T13:09:00.000-05:00

This speech by Barack Obama engages the reasons why I participate so passionately in politics. I only hope that I can become half as principled, eloquent, and bold as Obama. You can accept or reject his "progressive" stance on the issues, but surely you can respect his honest passion to bring positive change to America. Here is an excerpt:

" She believed that we don't have to settle for equality for some or opportunity for the lucky or freedom for the few. And she knew that during those moments in history where it looked like we might give up hope or settle for less, there have always been Americans who refused. Who said we're going to keep on dreaming, and we're going to keep on building, and we're going to keep on marching, and we're going to keep on working because that's who we are. Because we've always fought to bring all of our people under the blanket of the American Dream. "

Inconsistency, Hypocrisy, and the Mis-informed

2006-06-17T23:03:00.000-05:00

Nothing bothers me in this world more than people who commit the following faux pas - Inconsistency, Hypocrisy, and acting on Mis-information (or none at all). This is especially maddening when it is policymakers, people in great power, or radical policy-pushers who commit these egregious errors.

First, consistency is a must in applying values, ideas, and dedicating yourself to a cause. Now, consistency is not the same thing as mechanical, habitual, or just plain monotonous. Nor does consistency mean you can't change your mind occasionally when you have gathered new information or you have found that applying information in a new way gains a new conclusion. What consistency does mean, especially in the idealistic sense (as in the application of ideas), is that one uses definitions to mean the same thing every time they use them, it means that one applies their values equally without picking and choosing when it applies, and it means that one has a system of beliefs that are reconcilable. Consistency is not always possible in all situations, and people are not perfect at application, but many, especially when it comes to policy and politics, pick and choose ideas, values, morals, belief systems, facts, assumptions, logic, etc as it meets the needs of the situation, without any real consistency. This type of inconsistency truly drives me crazy!!!

Secondly, closely related to inconsistency is hypocrisy! Hypocrisy involves action - one holding or talking about beliefs that they hold, but then acting in a manner that is totally contradictory and insolent. You know a real hypocrite when you see/hear one, because she/he will always say things they think that people want to hear and then go out and do whatever the hell they want. I have no problem with one who honestly changes their mind or heart based on new evidence or a new understanding. In fact, I applaud people who are honest enough and secure enough to be able to declare that they were wrong in the past. When one can't admit to past mistakes or admit to new understanding, they become arrogant, proud, and stubborn in the worst way. I have no room for blatant hypocrites. Please if you ever see me being hypocritical please let me know (politely) so I can fix my mistake.

Finally, acting on mis-information or no information at all is the most unnerving faux pas! Sure, it's not possible for most of us to have a complete grasp on most issues, but you at least have to try to understand what you are talking about. You have to have at least some basis for your beliefs. If you're going to write or criticize policy I would hope that you at least have some experience, knowledge, or understanding of the topic or issue. One example that really upsets me is when people say say the following about people with disabilities - "Oh - that is so horrible how he/she suffers like that - I would NEVER want to live like that?" How in the world could they possible know what it is to "live like that???" Why are people so quick to judge what it must be like to live with a disability with absolutely no understanding of the quality of life that people with disabilities enjoy. This also applies when people make the false assumption that it might just be better to abort a baby who will be born with a disability and "suffer" then to let them live. This view is often based on a completely erroneous conception that the only possible life one with a disability one can live is one of pain, inferiority, and diminished quality of life. It is true that many people with disabilities have historically (and still continue) to live sub-human and oppressed lives. Fortunately, many do not, and there is no law that says that it is the way that it has to be. The other group of egregiously mis-informed are the biblethumping Jesus freaks who have absolutely no idea what their religion or beliefs mean. They spew out bible quotes and repeat sermons, but without any clue what the words even mean. When you question or challenge them, they simply quip back, "it's in the bible it must be true." Please don't get me wrong - I have nothing against people who have a deep and affirmed faith or belief system. I just think that one must actually know what it is that they believe. It only makes sense that when one has questioned their ideas, beliefs, and values they will have a deeper and more profound connection to the belief, because now they have had the opportunity to internalize and reason these important ideas.

In the end I don't care what ideas and beliefs you hold as long as you faithfully apply all the above when arriving at your conclusion.

Liberty and Safety

2006-05-13T23:51:00.000-05:00

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. " ---Benjamin Franklin

Ever since Leslie Cauley reported in USA TODAY an NSA wiretapping database that keeps and monitors the records of domestic phone calls made by millions of Americans, there has been much talk about the legality of the program, and what this means for privacy and civil liberties of Americans. While I have been unable to read/listen to all the talk, I thought I would weigh-in on this important issue.

It seems that two equally important threads have started over this issue: 1) Is such a program by the NSA illegal? And if so, why are we not calling for President Bush's impeachment? and 2) What does surveillance of Americans mean for our privacy and civil liberties?

I'll say that I am not a lawyer, but this program seems highly suspect as to its legality. Without a warrant to investigate a citizen of the United States, I do not see how any law enforcement, intelligence, or government agency of any sort can search, wiretap, or obtain any information about citizens. And if this program is illegal, I am deeply concerned with what this could mean for the future of the Republic, especially if the President is not held responsible.

As for privacy, I have this oddly disconcerting thought - I was not surprised by the revelation that the NSA is listening to my calls because I already figured they were intercepting my communications. Yes, it scares me that I had already resigned myself to this reality, and without thoroughly considering the consequences. The truth is, I do not know the consequences, but I do know they could be heavy, and that spying on citizens is a serious subject. I do believe there is an important link between privacy and freedom - how can one be free if she is not allowed to have a domain of autonomy independent from the watchful eye of the government? Yet, at the same time I figure, why am I so worried, I am a law-abiding citizen, they can't charge me with anything, and I still have the courts right? I already realize that public space is incredibly not private, so why not have the cameras, satellites, and computers monitor everyone and find the bad guys for my protection? I'd say there is surely an argument for safety, protection, and security, but at what price? At what point does the government stop monitoring its citizens for their own protection, and start monitoring them for its own protection??? It is exactly this dilemma that can separate a democratic state from an authoritarian one, and I am not sure I am willing to take that risk. Which is why I refer to the Ben Franklin quote above. How much liberty are we willing to risk for safety? At what point do we realize that freedom comes with inherent risks and we must live with those risks?

That Anti-Civil Rights Editorial

2006-04-30T02:36:00.000-05:00

The following editorial appeared in the New York Sun on April 20, 2006:

The Anti-Disabled Act
http://www.nysun.com/article/31348:
New York Sun Editorial
April 20, 2006

Guess which piece of liberal-do-gooding may be at fault for bringing to an end the free steak dinners a famed Washington D.C. eatery was giving each week for wounded war veterans. That's right, the Americans with Disabilities Act. The restaurant is Fran O'Brien's Steakhouse, which has been making this wonderful

gesture for wounded GIs, many of them amputees, from Walter Reed army hospital every week for some two and a half years. But Hilton is refusing to renew

the restaurant's lease and given Fran's, a Washington institution for decades, until May 1 to leave.

The hotel is tightlipped about the reasons for the decision - a spokeswoman did not return our call for comment - but some are starting to suspect the Hilton has been scared off by the Americans with Disabilities Act. The restaurant sits in the basement of the hotel and is accessed via either of two staircases.

If neither of these is feasible for a patron in a wheelchair, the only alternative is the hotel's supply elevator, accessed via a locked coatroom at the lobby level and a long L-shaped hallway in the basement.

Veterans attending the free dinners have never actually complained about the accessibility problems, a co-owner of Fran's, Hal Koster, told us when we stopped by recently. But as part of an on-again, off-again lease negotiation, the restaurant eventually asked the hotel to make the facility ADA-compliant. At about that time, negotiations seem to have ended. The hotel and the restaurant exchanged letters about the conditions under which each party would be willing to renew (the hotel wanted a new carpet and a refinished bar, for example), most of which the restaurant was willing to fulfill. The only bone of contention, apart from handicap access, appears to have been whether to upgrade or replace the wonderful booths once enjoyed over the years by the likes of President Nixon.

The thinking among some of the restaurant's supporters seems to be that the landlord, given the potential burden of a suit under the ADA (although as far as anyone knows, no one has threatened such a suit at this point), figures it would be cheaper to evict a famous steakhouse and let prime commercial space in the heart of Washington lie fallow. The last any of the parties knew, Hilton has budgeted money in 2007 to install a lift, after which it will likely re-lease the space, although Fran's may be installed in a new home by then.

We're sympathetic to the restaurateurs, not to mention the vets, in their desire for an accessible restaurant, but there's got to be a better way than the ADA to accomplish that. Instead, the ADA makes it financially safer for the hotel to evict the restaurant and leave its location empty than to allow Fran's to operate in the interim. Another local hotel has agreed to host the veterans' dinners, and although they're grateful to their new hosts, the guests will miss the sports bar feel of Fran's. If it turns out that it was the ADA that put an end to Fran's great tradition, it's one of the most ironical results in the history of do-gooding.
--------

I am not sure whether I am more appalled by the ignorance of author, or the fact that such uninformed blasphemy was allowed to make it to print. However, there is obviously a major problem of understanding when it comes to the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). I do not know if this misunderstanding results from institutional and societal perpetuation of myths about people with disabilities or whether it stems from the inability of the disability community to communicate our position in society. I believe it is probably a combination of both, which is why I am taking the time today to remedy the latter.

First, it must be understood that the ADA was not a "piece of liberal do-gooding" legislation. The ADA was signed into law by Republican President George HW Bush in 1990 after receiving wide bi-partisan support by Congress. If the author meant "liberal" in the sense that it was a progressive piece of legislation that dared to override the status quo then he is surely correct. But he is incorrect in his labeling the act as "do-gooding" as the ADA was not about doing good or random acts of kindness, it was about doing right; about giving full civil rights, equality, and empowerment to people with disabilities.

Second, as a person with a disability who uses a wheelchair and who has had to endure a loss of dignity by being forced to ride in freight elevators and seriously bereft, shaky, forgotten elevators; being led on deleterious detours by kitchens. dumpsters, and Timbuktu; and forced to be segregated from peers in order to dine at a restaurant, watch my government in action, access businesses, participate in community events, watch shows (which I paid for), and generally participate fully and independently in all that America has to offer - I know first-hand the importance of the ADA. The ADA is a civil rights law and it was made law in order to give people with disabilities full freedom, choice, and access to residency, employment, education, and society without discrimination. It is pathetic that after 15 1/2 years of being law, only a minority of the public understands the purpose and intent of the ADA. Yet, if this author had called the Civil Rights act of 1964, Women's Suffrage, or the 14th Amendment a "piece of liberal do-gooding" and wrote that these important civil rights laws were ironically anti-rights there would surely be an uproar by women, blacks, minorities, and the population at large. So I ask, why is there not an equal uproar over slanderous rhetoric aimed at an equally important civil rights law!

An Example of Why I Love the Internet

2006-03-12T00:51:00.000-06:00

There are many reasons I love the Internet - and this is not the post to explain them all. However, I do think that we tend to get so familiar with the conveniences, entertainments, and positives that we become droids in our own cycle of complacency.

Today I broke that cycle and remembered why I love the Internet. I stumbled across this web site: http://the39dollarexperiment.com/.

Yes, every now and again I come across a web site that truly entertains, inspires, or is just plain unique. I would not classify this guy as original or even genius, but I would definitely say that he is witty, clever, and motivated. He had way too much fun coming up with stupid dog's name. I am not so sure, however, that begging for free stuff is the best way to get free stuff. I also do not think signing your letter "X enthusiast" is helping his cause either. On the other hand, this guy should be working for an ad agency because he came up with some truly clever (and funny) product testimonials.

Make Em Pay!!!

2006-03-05T22:49:00.000-06:00

Tonight I was reading my sociology textbook (Introduction to Sociology, edited by Henry L. Tischler) and was intrigued by the following line: "The government has estimated that white-collar crimes cost more than $40 billion a year - more than 10 times the total amount of all reported thefts and more than 250 times the amount taken in all bank robberies" (page 195). Unfortunately, the textbook did not cite their source; however, I have heard similar statistics about how "white-collar" crime is more costly than "blue-collar" crime. It is also a fact that people who commit white-collar crime are more likely to get let off the hook, and not go to jail. Considering the costs to employees at companies and to society it is a crime that we let this bias perpetuate. Therefore, I submit the following solution, which I believe will dramatically reduce "white-collar" crime.

The key is that we hit them where it hurts -- in their pocketbooks!!! The fine for any non-violent crime "white-collar" crime -- such as tax fraud, misrepresenting company accounts, insurance fraud, election fraud, embezzlement, and anything that involves cheating w/ money -- should be extraordinarily high. The fine should be so high that anyone thinking about cooking the books or cheating on their taxes will think twice. I propose that the government impose a fine of at least 1/3 of the offender's total wealth. The only assets that would be immune are 1 home and 1 car, and an estimated number for basic necessities like clothes, furniture, and appliances. If the offender only has one car and one home, then the fine will be 1/3 of one years salary, and the person would have to give back to their company any bonuses earned. In addition the offender would NOT go to jail unless they have committed multiple offenses. This stipulation will help with our overcrowded prisons. Furthermore, the fine for a second offense could come with a fine that would be even heftier than the first, say like 1/2 of total wealth. Then on a 3rd offense the person needs to just be locked away, because they are an obvious threat and burden to society.

The money from the fines can be used for fixing the damages caused by "white-collar" crime, and for other useful purposes like building prisons for violent offenders, fixing the insurance system and making sure everyone has access to healthcare, incentivizing saving, and many more things I'm not thinking of right now.

America has been soft on "white-collar" criminals for way to long. Ken Lay, Tom Delay, Bernard Ebbers, Martha Stewart, and their cohorts owe the American people a large sum of $$$!

"Death By Denial"

2006-02-24T23:08:00.000-06:00

I recently saw this report (note this video only works in IE) (read about it here) on a local news channel about a man who was denied treatment from his health insurance for possible life-saving procedures to rid his cancer. The insurance company's denial cost Tracy Pierce his life. I was absolutely appalled and angry when I saw this report.

This story reminds me of this (below) Non-Sequitur cartoon I used to laugh at - now it is no longer funny knowing that it is morbidly true.

*Since this graphic may be hard to read - the insurance man says, "We have a saying in the front office... A dead patient is a cost-effective patient. So I'll be handling the nurses duties from now on." The statement on the right says, "Your HMO caring for you 'til your dying day.'"*

It is sad enough that in America over 45 million people (approximately 1/6 of the population) do not have health insurance. Yet it is even more ludicrous to think that one who has insurance can not even get coverage of life-saving treatments! I realize that the treatments were not guaranteed to work, but every person should be given the CHANCE to LIVE. Americans pride themselves on the fact that we have the "best health care technology" in the world, the best hospitals, the best doctors, with the shortest waiting periods. But I ask you - what good does the best MRI machine in the world do if you can't use it? What good does it do to have the smartest, most experienced, and most skilled doctors in the world if the insurance company can over-ride their plan for treatment? What good is a break-through, advanced, life-saving treatment if one can not be treated with it?

Normally I do not believe in using a single, possibly isolated case, to exaggerate or make a greater point, which often happens on the 10pm news - but this is different. The issue at hand is human life - and one person dying at the hands of the insurance companies is one too many! Everyone should have the opportunity for life - no trial or tribulations required. It is especially appalling when it is happening in the wealthiest nation on earth. And doesn't our Constitution say something about how no person shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property..."

The health care system in America has a multitude of problems, with this being a single example of how off-course our country is heading in matters of health-care. The bottom-line here is that insurance companies should not ever have the final say about "life or death" matters. More generally, we need major health-care reform or else we will become a mockery to the rest of the world (if we have not already.) I can truly say I am absolutely disgusted...

Freedom, Freedom, Freedom

2006-01-31T21:34:00.000-06:00

If I were to sum up President Bush's 2006 State of the Union Speech, it would go something like this:

Freedom, Good.
Terrorism, Bad.
Freedom, Good.
Isolationism, Bad.
Freedom = Prosperity.
Taxes = Bad.

First, I want to sincerely thank the President for acknowledging the death of Coretta Scott King, and recognizing the contribution of the King's to American society. The legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr and Coretta Scot King shall endure!

Next, Bush's foreign policy rhetoric can be packaged into one word, repeated constantly - Freedom. Admittedly, Bush talks strong on foreign policy and American security. With words like, "Every step toward freedom makes our country safer," it is hard to not be mesmerized by idealistic word-flinging. The problem is that you absolutely can not wield the word freedom like a sword in a Quentin Tarantino movie. Freedom isn’t something you can walk into Wal-Mart and buy in a plastic package with a yellow smiley face sign posted above. Freedom can not be given, and it surely can not be forced upon a people. Bush talks about Freedom as if a little fighting, a little encouragement, and a helping handful of encouragement will magically transform the Iraqi people, and subsequently the Middle East, into a thriving democracy of freedom. As nice as Bush’s words sound, they do not honestly portray the realities of freedom at its purest. Freedom is a power that can only be realized, and it can only be realized when it is desired.

Any ideal worthy of greatness can only be desired once it has been demonstrated as a positive alternative to the status quo. I offer this explanation as a warning to my fellow American citizens, and a thought for consumption to all the people of the World. As Americans, we must be mindful of the soil in which our President is trying to grow freedom. Americans may implicitly understand that liberty, freedom, and justice are inherently good things, but in a desert of chaos, others do not understand the same thoughts. When the mighty American Army occupies your back yard with guns blazing, it might just be difficult to tell the difference between enemy and foe. When the oil is cleaner than the water, it might not seem like fertile conditions for a new ideal to spring forth. This does not mean that freedom can not bud in the polluted waters; it simply means that we must be mindful of our own actions, our biases, and our hypocrisy. For the roots of freedom to truly grip the landscape, patience, imagination, belief, compassion, and nurture must be the key ingredients. The answers are not clear and they are not easy, but they will only come with a clearer view of the picture.

In finale, I do not believe that we should pull our troops rapidly out of Iraq. As egregious and inexcusable as President George W. Bush’s lies were that got us into the war – the United States can not abandon what it has started. One thing I have learned in my short life on earth is that you can’t abandon what you’ve started, especially when what you’re trying to do could bring needed empowerment to others. The U.S. may have gone into Iraq for all the wrong reasons, but it has the opportunity to leave for all the right ones. Bush speaks distinctly about these reasons day by day, and his challenge is whether or not he is taking the right steps to make sure Iraq does become a land of freedom, choice, and equality. Practically speaking, from what I’ve read and heard, I am skeptical that the President is taking every possible measure to ensure stability and transfer sovereignty to the people of Iraq. Americans must demand, not that troops be withdrawn, but that they be used efficiently, protecting and securing the right places. I have not seen this level of effectiveness coming out of Iraq, which is why you can count me as a skeptic. I hope that I will be proven wrong by the Bush administration in the coming year.

The Power of Imagination

2006-01-21T01:19:00.000-06:00

On page 442 and 443 of his book, The World Is Flat, Thomas Friedman illustrates the power of imagination. He shows how it can go both ways - positive and negative – by contrasting the events of 11/9/89 and 9/11/01. His final thought urges us to work toward cultivating positive imagination. I agree with his sentiments 100%, which is why I’d like to take the time to explain and discuss this important concept.

Friedman starts by talking about 11/9/89 when East Germany opened up the gates of the Berlin Wall and let East Germans pass into West Germany, which ultimately lead to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Friedman also refers to the forces, of imagination, that lead to 11/9/89, such as Hungary removing border restrictions with Austria. Next, the pressure on East Germany not only to opened up passage through the Berlin Wall but also opened up travel restrictions to Hungary. The significance being that traveling through Hungary to Austria, just as crossing into West Germany, led to the "free world." Friedman writes, "Someone there in Hungary, maybe it was the prime minister, maybe it was just a bureaucrat, must have said to himself or herself, 'Imagine - imagine if the Soviet Union were frozen in place. Imagine - imagine if East German citizens, young and old, men and women, were so emboldened by seeing their neighbors flee to the West that one day they just swarmed that Berlin Wall and started to tear it down?'" Also, as background info, in the rest of the book, Friedman talks about how 11/9/89 was a "flattener," meaning that the tearing down of the Berlin wall made the world smaller because it allowed more people to have access to freedom and democracy. It allowed more people to have access to information, to the tools of capitalism, and the chance to follow their dreams; the ability to live in hope and not fear.

Friedman then contrasts 11/9/89 with 9/11/01 by showing that imagination and a smaller world can benefit the bad guys to. The terrorists have a cause and they can use the same imagination, along with tools of the free world (which he talks about in the book), to cause great terror. Thus, he writes a faux conversation that Bin Laden may have had where he imagined the great destruction that could happen if they flew planes into the World Trade Center.

I think one of the two most telling lines of this section is in the next paragraph - "There is one thing, though, that has not and can never be commoditized - and that is imagination."

By commoditized he means simplified and transformed into a commercial package. It also can't be turned into a mathematic formula that can be done with a computer or by a Chinese person or Indian behind a computer. It is the "imagination" he is saying that really makes a difference in the world. It makes a difference between a good service and a plain old service. It is the difference between a vanilla idea and one modeled after Rocky Road. Thus imagination is true and it can't be faked, it can't be outsourced, it can't be digitized, it can't be - commoditized.

Finally, and probably my most favorite paragraph of the whole book, Friedman writes, "Therefore, thinking about how we stimulate positive imagination is of the utmost importance. As Irving Wladawsky-Berger, the IBM computer scientist, put it to me: We need to think more seriously than ever about how we encourage people to focus on productive outcomes that advance and unite civilization - peaceful imaginations that seek to 'minimize alienation and celebrate interdependence rather than self-sufficiency, inclusion rather than exclusion,' openness, opportunity, and hope rather than limits, suspicion, and grievance."

I especially like the last part because it is what people with disabilities have been saying for a long time. This really underlines what I believe in. To use positive imagination to "stimulate...productive outcomes that advance and unite civilization." To "encourage people to...seek to...minimize alienation and celebrate interdependence..." To "seek...inclusion rather than exclusion" and "openness, opportunity, and hope rather than limits, suspicion, and grievance."

Honesty Is Hard to Come By

2006-01-13T23:38:00.000-06:00

In my search for Personal Care Attendants (PCAs) I have learned much about the nature of people, and I did not like what I saw. The most troubling is that honesty is a rare virtue these days. As part of the hiring process I have prospective PCAs meet me at the local Borders bookstore for an interview after I pre-screen them on the phone. Of the 16 people I have set up interviews with over the past 2 weeks, only 6 have shown up - that is a miserable 37.5%!!! Of the 10 that did not show up, only 2 called me before their appointment to say they couldn't make it, and 1 let me know afterward why they missed. After the first round of interviewing I had two very qualified people in mind to hire, both with seemingly outstanding personalities, and both turned me down because they found other jobs. Now, I realize that withholding truth isn't always considered lying, and I realize looking for multiple jobs at once is common practice. However, what isn't honest is the way in which people lead me on. They show up and act as if this job is this great opportunity that they are excited about. The one guy that I really thought was good for the job, I told he had the job, and he said he was REALLY EXCITED about making a change in his life and coming to help me out. Then I asked him to come over for training on the weekend so he could start by the next week. On Thursday night we set up a training time for Saturday morning - no problems so far. Saturday morning comes - he doesn't show up. I call him, he says he slept in and he has outstanding tickets, he needs to take care of on Monday, but that he could come by later, since his friend could drop him off. Being the understanding and forgiving guy that I am, I let this by as he seemed to be telling the truth. I asked that he just come by sometime on the weekend for a training and then start work on Tuesday. It is not until Sunday night that I call and he FINALLY tells me he got another job. He dragged me along all that time when I could have been looking for someone else.

The second time around, I find two more people that I want to hire. I called one girl back, and that was on Thursday night (it is now Friday night), and then called her again tonight - NO REPLY. Keep in mind that this girl was very chatty and had a cell phone, which went off during our interview. She struck me as the type of girl who doesn't miss calls or messages. No answer, no callback, no nothing. Not even a courtesy call.

Now, just so we do not give up on the entire human race, there were some honest people. The second lady that I wanted to hire, wrote me back (in e-mail, because she had responded to an online ad) immediately after I said the job was hers and let me know she needed to think about it because the drive and pay might not be worth her time. This is very much understandable considering the price of gas, the distance she would have to travel, the number of hours I was offering, and the seemingly low pay. Also, another lady told me straight out after she missed her interview that she transposed her appointment times for her appointments for the day and asked nicely for a re-do but understood if I refused. Another lady called before to tell me she was sick and asked nicely for a re-do if possible. Was she sick? She sounded sick, but I guess you can never tell. Regardless, she had the courtesy to actually give me respect by calling me before her interview. This was especially nice because I was about to embark on a 1 mile trip in my wheelchair in 30 mph winds to get to the Borders.

In sum, hope is not all lost, even though true honesty, respect, and common courtesy is in short supply. I depend on PCAs to live my life and be independent. It is important that I hire a PCA ASAP since my life, independence, and dignity depend on it, and people are playing me as if I was McDonalds. If it wasn't for my girlfriend working overtime without pay, I would surely have either had to 1) move in with my parents or 2)move into the nursing home because I would have had no help. If I do not find someone by Tuesday and Wednesday I might have to drop some or all of my classes at Rockhurst! So as you can see this position isn't just any old job, and I try to let people know that, and yet they still can't be upfront with me. As I said, true honesty is hard to find.

My Favorite Show

2006-01-11T00:01:00.000-06:00

The best show on television right now is hands down - Scrubs! I received (well, actually bought with Christmas money) Scrubs season 2 for Christmas. Just as with Season 1, I am constantly amazed at the depth, hilarity, and cleverness of this refreshing show. I also watched new season 5 episodes and they are just as witty as ever.

I am actually a late bloomer to Scrubs, as I only got into when Michael J. Fox made his guest appearance for a few episodes. I am ashamed that it took MJF to get me hooked, because this show was apparently always good. Actually I was afraid to watch it at first because the commercials made it look like a lame slapstick napfest. However, the commercials do not, and can not, give this show justice, because the each episode is so tightly woven together that taking out 30 seconds can not say much about the show.

What makes this show so good? The writing is the most clever, cunning, and FUNNY on TV today (or ever for that matter). The characters are believable, lovable, and real. The storyies are intricate with real-life themes and issues. The themes and issues are so subtly inserted into the show that sometimes you do not even know you are getting a lesson; you just think you are getting a good laugh. Some of my favorite shows also take a nice balanced step into seriousness too. Be warned, Scrubs can make you cry and laugh and think -- all at the same time. If you haven't given Scrubs a chance, you need to give it a try. If you can get a hold of season 2 "My philosophy" it is hands down the best episode I have seen so far. "My Old Lady" from season 1 is a very close second.

The music is an integral part to each episode. The writers and directors do such an amazing job of picking songs the capture the mood and setting of the characters and story of each episode. Whether they want you to laugh, cry, think, or a little of each, the music just picks up the story movement and takes it for a smooth coast along a wave, and always lands perfectly on the beach. Here is a great review of the music of Scrubs. I agree with everything in this article!

Good Help Is Hard to Come By

2006-01-10T01:27:00.000-06:00

Today I had to restart my search to hire a personal care assistant. I had a candidate for the job and had offered him the job, and today I learn he is accepting a new job. So, after an exhaustive search that started around December 20th, I have to start over now on January 9th. I have one week to find potential candidates, interview them, check their references, organize our schedules, train them, and hope they do not find something else better first. By the way, if you live in Kansas City and are interested, send me an e-mail at jason@ibelievedesign.com.

For those who do not know what a Personal Care Assistant (PCA) is - A PCA is someone who helps a person with a disability with the tasks that they can not do for themselves. Since I have Muscular Dystrophy and use a power wheelchair I need help with many tasks. Some of the tasks my PCA would do - clean, cook, take/place stuff on shelves, assist me in organizing, vacuum, transfer me on/off the toilet, drive me to school, drive me to do errands, and much more. A great candidate would even be able to be my hands on fixing my computer when the hardware has problems, but unfortunately it can be hard enough just to find someone to cover the basics.

Why is it so hard? Because in a job rich environment such as Johnson County Kansas is, it is hard to pay $8.00 an hour to have someone work non-traditional hours doing a non-traditional job. You don't need any experience to do this job, but apparently you do need to have nothing better to do. Medicaid sets the reimbursement rates for personal assistance in Kansas (and most states that are lucky enough to have a community based WAIVER (we'll talk about waivers another time)) and they don't set it very hard. I actually could start my PCAs at a slightly higher $8.50 but then I would have no way of rewarding them for good work. So I start them at $8.00 so I can give them a raise, since I can't on Medicaid to do so. As a matter of fact, I have seen the reimbursement rate go backwards instead of forward. Besides choosing whether to start my PCAs at $8.00 versus $8.25 or $8.50, I do not have much flexibility in paying my PCAs.

Why is a PCA necessary? So I can live independently in the community. So I can continue my studies at Rockhurst. So I can graduate and get a job and pay taxes. PCAs are the vital tool that help many people with disabilities take control of their lives and contribute to society. In my case, if I don't have PCAs I am stuck, and would end up in a nursing home - a very bleak outlook for a twenty-five year old with great aspirations.

The intent of this post is not solely to gripe about Medicaid or the "system" but to educate. Money that goes towards helping people live independently in their own homes and communities is an example of social tax dollars put to good use. On average hiring help at home is cheaper than nursing home care, and it preserves the dignity of the person needing help, while also allowing them true freedom. Also, is the benefit of the PCAs who are hired to do the job and the money they give back to the community and the government; it is a domino effect. Unfortunately, the system needs some work, and even I admit it could be run better.

How can we help cut down Medicaid costs and make sure individuals keep their dignity and have true freedom and independence? Many ideas can go a long way, but I'll throw one out today. Give beneficiaries more freedom in hiring their care. Once you've met the requirements that you have a disability and need assistance, you should be able to spend the dollars as needed. Furthermore if the "reimbursement" came straight to me, instead of through the "payroll" agent, I could have more flexibility in how much I pay my PCAs and what hours they work. The more rules and bureaucracy that stands between the individual needing help and the tax dollars, the more the waste, and the less efficient the system. Let's start giving the money to the people who need it, and give them the freedom (with minimal restrictions) to use it in the way that best fits their needs. We can achieve maximum efficiency in Medicaid by not blanketing everyone with rigid one-size fits all stereotypes, and instead transforming to a more elastic all sizes fit every single one (who needs it) approach.

Syriana, Corruption, and Oil

2006-01-08T23:23:00.000-06:00

I do not consider myself a very harsh critc of movies, but Syriana has to be one of the worst movies I have seen in a long time; it is a wonder it got a fresh rating on rottentomatoes.com. I do not know who the film reviewer Nick Schager is, but he writes a good review of Syriana. I generally find movies with multiple storylines converging in the end intriguing, but Syriana overextended this plot device by offering too many characters and plots at once. No one character is on the screen long enough for you to get to know the character, care about the character, or even remember the characters name. What is even worse is that you realize in the end that most of the characters weren't even needed in the first place!

Furthermore, Syriana tries to hard to take itself seriously. I don't need a bad civics lesson on how oil rules the world and makes men corrupt. Anyone who can follow the news a little deeper than Fox News knows the world is dependent on oil and lots of corruption is happening with oil and energy companies -- Enron anyone??? The United States has a dependency on fossil fuels and Americans like to consume. It's not a good combo, and the type of people who are going to give Syriana a chance don't need a bad lecture on what's gone wrong. What we need is some answers and story about how we get beyond the slimy mess of oil. And can anyone tell me what the name Syriana has to do with anything???

Finally, as I said, what is really needed, whether in American politics, American media, World media, or Hollywood, is a real debate about how the United States can become energy independent. We need to use our ingenuity and technology to discover new energy sources, invent new fossil-fuel-independent cars, find new transportation modes, and empower a new generation of Americans who conserve. If we do not have leaders who step up to the plate on this issue we will face a major crisis. A crisis of environment and energy of catastrophic proportions. Global warming is real and fossil fuels aren't going to last forever, not to mention that depending on countries that hate the U.S. does not help our security any. I believe if we start preparing now, by uniting in the name of energy independence Americans can be a leader on these issues! Write a movie about that and I'll be the first one in line to watch!

Rent the Movie - Reviewing the Reviewers

2005-11-27T01:17:00.000-06:00

Rent: the Movie has, as of this posting, has a 51% rating at http://www.rottentomatoes.com. I had heard throught the grapevine that there was a large outpouring of negative reviews for the movie version of Rent. I chose not to read any reviews before seeing the movie (which I find is generally a good idea, since movie-watching is a process of individual revelation and discovery) and kept my mind firmly open while watching and subsequently enjoying this powerful movie. While my mind was open, I do have an outstanding bias, as I have seen the musical on broadway, albeit not the original cast version. My review of the movie is that the movie definitely captures the essence of the stage musical and captures the same raw emotion. In sum, I loved the musical and I loved the movie.

After my enjoyable afternoon at the movies with my girlfriend and my high praise for the movie, I dared brave the negative land of film reviewers. I am happy, and at the same time disgusted, to report that the majority of bad reviews came from critics who never saw the musical and rejected the whole storyline, or those who saw the musical and hated it on stage and equally detest it now. Therefore I can understand if you give the movie a bad review because you can't handle the plot of the original, afterall it handles some awfully heavy subject matter. At the same time I think it is awfully close-minded of anyone to reject this story on highly superficial grounds. Sure, on the surface this is a play about a bunch of friends who have AIDs, many who got it from arguably irresponsible and unethical activites (like needle sharing), all whom refuse to pay rent, have lots of gay sex, and whine about capitalism all day - I mean, come on, what a bunch of lazy, fascist, pretentious pricks, right? And there lies the rub. I don't condone not paying your rent, but this movie is about so much more than that. It is about hope, redemption, life affirmation, love, friends, the evils of rampant commercialism, humanity and did I say life, specifically take time to enjoying life in the present. Not only are the themes deep and exploratory in nature, the characters are real people with true depth and connectivity. I was emotionally pulled into the musical, and expanded that connection after seeing the movie. Therefore it is safe to dismiss any review from anyone who rejects the storyline - they don't like the story and that is their perogative. Anyone who has not seen the musical really doesn't have much say in reviewing the movie, or at least with any pretense of giving the movie a fully honest review.

With that said, I think the main objection from critics who saw the broadway show but did not like the movie is that the movie fails to connect to those who have not seen the musical. This is a legitimate concern. Since I am obviously biased, and since I have an emotional bond with the musical, and now the movie, it is hard for me to make an objective evaluation of this claim. What I can say is that this is surprising to me, as I must admit I did not follow everything during my experience on Broadway as I got lost at a few points, and often got lost in the music. The movie was an excellent chance for me to fill in the gaps, and visualize some aspects of the musical that were harder to grasp on a stationary stage set. Indeed the movie added another dimension to Rent that was helpful. Since the music (which I I can't get enough of) is taken straight from the musical, I can't help but think that the movie would be a great way to introduce Rent virgins who are willing to accept the premises to this powerful story. At the least I would figure that one would get lost in the same way I did during my introduction to Rent. This by no mean makes the music, characters, and themes hard to detect or to get entangled in, it simply means that one might not "get" the story on all levels. Though this tends to be the mark of any good story, especially in the movies, as any movie that can keep you discovering new themes and aspects after many viewings is the mark of a multi-dimensional story. Any serious movie buff gets this and my recent favorite multi-dimensional movie is the movie Crash - a MUST see. Anyways, that is for another blog entry.

Finally, others just did not like the movie adaptation. This is a matter of personal preference, though I surely did not see it. Since six of the eight actors were members of the original cast, the acting was superb. The sets were vivid, raw, and for the most part believable. The music - well it was the music from Rent - you either love it or hate it. There is some question as to whether the added lines of dialogue detracted from the original or added a new dimension. Personally, I think they made the plot easier to follow at times. At the very least I did not really see it as a major mark on the movie since the musical numbers do the real speaking anyway.

So there you have it. My best advice is to go see it yourself and see what you think - then come back here and let me know what you thought!

Black Eyes For Black Friday

2005-11-26T00:11:00.000-06:00

I must admit that I have in the past beaten the roosters out of bed to hunt good deals on the day after Thanksgiving. There is indefinitely a certain rush and sense of satisfaction in finding a great buy. This year I stayed at home, and I am glad I did. The so called "Black Friday" shopping is by far capitalism at its extreme. It is amazing to think that retailers wait for one day out of their fiscal year to push profits out of the red and into the black. It is also amazing how Americans have managed to turn the beginning of a holiday season, meant to be a time for sharing, giving, and togetherness, into an individualistic competition and rush to see who can spend their money quicker than the next guy. It makes you wonder if capitalism has truly gone amuck.

This year the pushing, shoving, and fighting to get a super-deal was no different than years past. Here is a good example of what I am talking about. This year Wal-Mart shoppers took the award for most aggressive as they showed their unified spirit by proceeding to knock each other out on their way to grabbing at $350 laptop computers. It looks like Black Friday turned into a Black Eye for many, and definitely a black eye for our country.

Forecasters are saying crowds were bigger this year and so was spending. This surprises me as I thought for sure that with more money spent on gas and heating this year and money donated to Tsunami, hurricane, and earthquake victims that pocketbooks would be empty - I know mine is. Maybe this is simply an indication of how far Americans are willing to go into debt to acquire material comforts and to appear as if they are caring benefactors to their friends and families. Or maybe my economic sense is backward. However, I am also surprised considering that I thought for sure online shopping would lure many shoppers and keep them from the stores. I can only hope that online shopping will be a saving grace for out country and a check on the true blackness of Christmas shopping in the future. With online shopping people can peacefully look for good deals and make more informed decisions. Shoppers can avoid the temptation to get close to others by pushing and shoving to the electonics aisle. It will also lead to spreading the shopping over all Christmas shopping days and not bungling it all in one day. Maybe Americans are not trusting of online shopping just yet, but as more people get $350 laptops from Wal-Mart you will see many finding online shopping much more comfortable - AND SANE!

2005-10-22T23:58:00.000-05:00

Elizabethtown

A little cliché, a little slow at times, a little recycled, Elizabethtown still manages to be an emotionally fulfilling film. In the shadow of death, Drew learns about life. He also learns about the nature of failure, love, and freedom. Elizabethtown is one step away from being a great movie, without quite making it there, but nonetheless does a great job of reminding you why you love life in the first place.

To be free is partly the idea that one is not burdened by the expectations of others. Drew, with a little help from his new friend Claire, contemplates the overrated nature of "success" and discovers the weight of following what "they" expect. Somewhere in the mess of spontaneous encounters with Claire, getting lost in his otherworld family and their Southern hospitality, and his aimless mental wandering Drew manages to cast aside the expectations of they. In doing so he discovers love, life, and freedom.
Carina Chocano of the LA Times says of Elizabethtown (click here for review):

"The movie gets lost sometimes, wandering down several stray paths to nowhere, only to suddenly change course and wind up in an unexpectedly exhilarating place. In this sense, it's the opposite of the quick commute of the average commercial movie. It's a meandering road trip instead."

It may be a recipe for feel-good mediocrity, but it is a feeling that I think we all need to get from a good movie every now and again. To walk away with a rejuvenation of spirit is a good feeling. At the same time, even if Elizabethtown doesn't meet the greatness test, it surely has smartness to it, as Chocano eloquently expresses, that pushes this movie beyond the average feel-good self-discovery film. Elizabethtown will remind you about the true pleasure of life, the important people in life, and what it means to be alive.

Finally, let's not forget the soundtrack. The music is pristinely woven into the heart of this movie. A good movie isn't complete without a good soundtrack, and Elizabethtown uses rock and folk music to its full advantage. Not only is each song wisely chosen, but each song is perfectly placed to add an extra degree of complexity of contemplation and emotion. Here is a soundtrack that weaves itself with compelling visuals, and one that you might just find fulfilling even without the moving pictures.