Fighting Over The Definition Of A Word

Ever since Gov. Eliot Spitzer's extra-marital rendezvous came to light back in early March, it seems that New York has had a streak of making national news. Yesterday was no exception: Gov. David Patterson instructed all state agencies to recognize same-sex marriages that are legally performed in other states and countries. It's like a social conservative's nightmare -- no law, just a directive.

To be honest, I have no strong opinion on whether or not gays should be allowed to marry. In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion that the issue of "gay marriage" is simply a red herring, intended to rally the base of support and distract others from the real issue: equal rights. Two women or two men who decide to commit to each other for the rest of their lives should have the same rights and privileges as a man and a woman who decide to do the same. I don't care what they call it, as long as it happens. I'm talking about healthcare, and tax credits, and social security benefits, and adoption privileges, and more.

150 years ago, slavery was the acceptable norm. 50 years ago, segregation and legislative racism was commonplace. Today, we look back on these times and (most of us) wonder what the country's leaders were thinking, and how this kind of thinking was acceptable. It is laughable to think how the country was when in came to something as simple and obvious as equal rights for those of a different skin color.

Perhaps in 50 years, the next generations will be laughing at us, because we were fighting over the definition of a word.

A Remarkable Life

This big news in the world of politics this week was obviously the health of Sen. Edward Kennedy. His seizure earlier this week led to the diagnosis of a malignant brain tumor, and has brought into question not only his future, but also the future of the United States Senate: what will its make-up become? What direction will it take once this giant of politics is lost?

But this week's news has started me thinking about the journey that Sen. Kennedy has traveled. It truly has been a remarkable life, no matter how you view the man politically. He's a Kennedy -- a name that has been held in the highest esteem in the eyes of Americans for more than 50 years. He comes from the era of Camelot, which many of us know only through the words of history books. He has been able to stand up and stand out among a group of larger than life personalities.

People's lives fascinate me -- how long they've lived, what they've done, where they've been. Sen. Kennedy is a member of an extraordinary family, and more specifically a member of a group of three brothers that have not only changed this country, but the world as a whole (his eldest brother, Joseph, was killed during World War II). His second eldest brother John held the highest office in this land. His brother Robert was John's closest confidant, and made his own run for president. Both were cut down by the bullets of assassins, 45 and 40 years ago, respectively. That amazes me. Losing one brother in such a fashion would be traumatic enough, but losing two, and then choosing to continue to live the same kind of public, exposed lifestyle that led to their murders clearly shows the depth of commitment that Sen. Kennedy has for this country. He has served in the United States Senate since 1963 -- 45 years.

Sen. Kennedy has truly lived a blessed life, despite the trials and tribulations -- both professional and personal -- that seem to come along with the name 'Kennedy.'

I wish him nothing but the best as he deals with this new crisis.

"This is bulls**t!"

Two weeks ago I posted a blog about the preposterous "gas tax holiday," and how the issue had made me truly angry with politicians for the first time in a long time. Well, just two weeks later it has happened again.

Yesterday, President Bush spoke to the Knesset (Israel's parliament), and here is the quote (and it was not off-the-cuff): "Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along...We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

I don't believe that I have ever heard President Bush say anything so ignorant or dangerous. He claims to be a student of history, but he obviously is not -- of the world, this country, or his own presidency. But that's alright, because everyone wants to have a beer with him.

President Bush believes that the art of diplomacy is equal to weakness. He believes that entering into diplomacy with an enemy is equal to allowing the Nazis to run rampant over Poland. He believes that keeping your friends close and your enemies closer is a strategy for lesser mortals, and non-divine countries. He is wrong.

The truth is that aside from being free (which should be a big plus for a conservative), words save lives. I seem to remember words keeping two superpowers from annihilating each other ten times over during the course of more than 40 years. Words are what kept the Cold War just that -- cold. Even Secretary of State Rice and Secretary of Defense Gates have acknowledged that the United States needs to engage in a dialogue with countries such as Iran. After all, they are not going anywhere, and we all inhabit the same planet. But, oh no, says the "decider."

I personally believe that it is President Bush, and not his target, Senator Obama, who is weak. It is he who prefers taking the easy way -- the low road -- as he has done his entire life. It is so easy to drop a bomb. It is so easy to resort to violence. The opposite is the more difficult, more disciplined pursuit. But the president simply does not possess the depth of character to follow such a course. He never has, and he never will.

And the kicker is this: it is President Bush's administration, and not the Democratic leaders, that is actively engaging in the policy of appeasement. Merriam-Webster defines 'appeasement' as: "to buy off (an aggressor) by concessions usually at the sacrifice of principles." And as it turns out, this is exactly what the Bush Administration is doing in Iraq -- they're bribing certain groups in the country to no longer target American soldiers and infrastructure. They're buying allies and support.

President Bush has clearly lost all touch with reality and is, quite simply, pathetic.

Senator Joe Biden said it best: "This is bulls**t!"

The Tax Advance

Today I received the money designated to me by the U.S. government in the 2008 Economic Stimulus Package -- $300. But for all the talk of it being a "rebate," it is not -- it is an advance, and here is why:

As of May 7, 2008, the total outstanding public debt for the United States of America is $9,359,720,592,641.80, according to the U.S. Department of Treasury. That number is so big that you can't even look at it without getting confused, and you have to break it down comma by comma. It is a number that is almost impossible to even comprehend, and yet there it is -- over $9.35 trillion.

The fact of the matter is that the U.S. government cannot afford to be giving out "rebates," and any high school economics student would be able to understand why. And yet, here comes the money anyway, in a federal attempt to stimulate an economy that is in serious trouble. But with a national debt that exceeds $9 trillion and an Iraq war cost that currently exceeds $518 billion (both of which are growing every second), it is more than obvious that the U.S. government cannot afford this "stimulus," which totals $152 billion. And therefore, the government will soon need to ask for that money back -- which makes it not a "rebate," but an advance.

I urge you to not spend the money you receive on frivolous things you don't need and can't afford. The leaders in Washington are hoping that you will take this "rebate" and -- despite the stack of bills that you may have -- buy a new TV, or lawnmower, or pair of jeans, or any of the other millions of products that are made outside the U.S. It is a fantastic plan, to say the least. But don't spend it -- save it instead, because it's not really yours anyway.

And soon they will come collecting.

"Well, Tim..."

Just to illustrate how exhausting the presidential campaign trail is on a candidate, I caught the Barack Obama interview this morning on The Today Show.

Obama was being interviewed by Matt Lauer. However, Obama continually kept saying, "Well, Tim..." Now, the first time it happened, I was expecting him to realize his mistake...but he didn't. After the second time, I started to feel kinda bad for the guy. After the third time, I was laughing and wondering where his communications assistant was, and why this person was not holding up a piece of paper that simply read, "MATT," in big, black letters. I was waiting for Obama's eyes to dart away from the camera for just a split second while someone off-camera alerted him to his mistake, but it never happened.

In the end, Matt Lauer simply informed Obama that he was, in fact, Matt Lauer, and not Tim Russert. They both had a chuckle (as I'm sure everyone else in the studio did as well).

So, these candidates are exhausted, and who can really fault any of them for mistaking who they are hearing in their ear when they have been going on no sleep for the past 15 months? I know I can't.

And besides, after the interview Matt Lauer proceeded to call Al Roker, "Ann."

Infuriating

I don't remember the last time I felt this angry with politicians. Sure this campaign has obviously gone on too long, and seeing the same candidates make the same speeches and the same points over and over and over and over can make me annoyed and weary, but not angry. But this week, I'm infuriated. This "gas tax holiday" scam has gone on long enough, and it has to end.

First off, let's dispell any idea (Sens. Clinton and McCain) that the sweetly-coined "gas tax holiday" is a good idea. When you consider any policy or legislation, you have to weight the pros, the cons, and the X factors that you can't control.

Pros:
-Gasoline will be 18.4 cents cheaper than it normally would be.
-Diesel would be 24.4 cents cheaper than it normally would be.
-The average consumer would stand to save an estimated $28 between Memorial Day and Labor Day. (That's a savings of $28 over the course of 94 days, or roughly 30 cents per day.)

Cons:
-The federal government would lose an estimated $9-10 billion in revenue that go toward fixing our national infrustructure (i.e. roads and bridges to drive on)
-Thousands and thousands and thousands of contruction workers would see a reduction or lose in their jobs due to the lack of money (I think I heard the Today Show estimate about 300,000 workers would be effected, but it was early in the morning and I can't be sure of that figure.)
-People will be encouraged to drive more, which would use up more gasoline, driving the prices even higher. Also, it is the wrong path to take in terms of protecting the environment.

X-Factor:
-The oil companies may simply raise their prices an extra 18.4 cents per gallon, thus nullifying the savings of the "holiday." And for Sen. Clinton's proposal of a new tax on windfall oil profits, the companies can simply raise the gas prices even higher to pay for the new tax.

Now, it was obvious what Clinton and McCain have been trying to do: use a pointless policy that sounds good (but really isn't) to influence some voters into supporting them. However, it wasn't until today that there arguments really got my furious.

John McCain said, "The lamentations of people about the draconian consequences of giving Americans just a little relief for the summer continues to amaze and amuse me...I’d like to see families in America have a relief from ever increasing costs of gasoline, so maybe at the end of the summer after this tax holiday they could buy school supplies for their children as they start the school year.” According to John McCain, if you're against the tax holiday, you're against families and children going to school.

Hillary Clinton said, "I believe it would be important to get every member of Congress on record: Do they stand with the hard-pressed Americans who are trying to pay their gas bills at the gas station or do they once again stand with the oil companies? I want to know where people stand and I want them to tell us, are they with us or against us when it comes to taking on the oil companies?” According to Hillary Clinton, if you're against the tax holiday, you're for the oil companies having whatever they want.

The "gas tax holiday" is a terrible idea, and Clinton and McCain know this, but are blatantly playing on the struggles of Americans. For 30 cents a day. Please. For some reason they think that I am stupid and will swallow and believe any dribble that comes out of their mouths. But here is the kicker: Come Labor Day, when the "holiday" would end, in addition to the prices set by oil companies that will continue to rise over the summer, American consumers will be hit by a 1-day 18.4 cent increase. This will force people, in the end, to take all the money they save and poor it right back into their gas tanks.

We need serious alternative energy sources, not 3-month boondoggles. The truth is that high gas prices are the best thing that have happened for the energy-independence movement. Now that gas prices really are unaffordable for a lot of Americans, perhaps progress will be made toward breaking out reliance on the Middle East for energy, as well as protecting the only planet that we have.

In the mean time, a number of expletives come to mind.