Blogging Self-Nudge Update

Starting on August 1, 2009, I engaged in an experiment to try to hold myself accountable to an average of one blog posting for each day of every month according to the terms outlined here. I am proud to say that I have kept faith with my self-nudge pledge since then. However, in accordance with the rules that I outlined in my self-nudge experiment, I am hereby announcing that I am relieving myself of the obligation to adhere to the self-nudge conditions. This means that if I don't make the monthly average of postings the self-nudge requires, I am not obliged to pay the penalties for failing to do so. But, I should say that I plan to continue blogging at the same pace. I just want to see if the "self-nudge" has created a sustainable habit. If I find that my blogging really slips off, then I will likely reinstate the self-nudge arrangement. But for now, I think I am ready to test whether or not my blogging habits have really taken root such that a nudge is no longer required. For those who have followed my self-nudge journey and have been holding me to it, thanks for being part of it. Again, this doesn't mean the end of blogging for me, not by a long shot -- just that the self-nudge experiment is suspended. So, please keep coming back for more Upchucks. I promise they'll keep coming. Oh, and Happy Halloween!

Vitter Is A Criminal

Watch this



Notice how Vitter point-blank refuses to answer a very simple question: When he committed his "sin" did he break the law? He refuses to answer because everyone with half a brain knows the answer. It's "Yes" he broke the law. And the family values hypocrite lawbreaker criminal has the nerve to go after "illegal" immigrants. Every time I see this Yahoo it makes me sick to my stomach. Here we have a guy who writes laws that he expects us to follow, and yet he thinks he is entitled to break the law himself and still get to write laws that he expects the rest of us to obey. Here's a fact: I voted against my party and put Joseph Cao, a Republican, in office because I couldn't stomach sending William Jefferson back to Congress because of his criminal malfeasance, even before Jefferson was actually convicted of criminal wrongdoing. And conservatives all across the country made Jefferson's criminal behavior a point of disqualification of his running for legislative office. Even before Jefferson was convicted of any crime, I looked at the evidence in front of my nose and I agreed with Jefferson's conservative critics. And so I voted against the man for precisely this reason, and voted for a moderate Republican to replace him. But now Louisiana's conservative Republicans are about to engage in their own disgusting display of hypocrisy by voting this criminal Vitter back into office. Again, it makes me sick. Vitter is a shameless, hypocritical, and venal coward and opportunist. He's a low-life criminal scum who thinks he is above the law or that his lawbreaking can simply be washed away as part of the past. I have no respect for anyone who votes for him, especially since there is a perfectly acceptable and honorable option in Charlie Melancon, even for conservatives. If I can vote for a moderate Republican on the principle that criminal behavior is simply a deal-breaker, irrespective of prosecution and conviction, then conservatives should be able to vote for a conservative Democrat on the very same principle.

Vote Vitter Out of Office

Stop the Politics of Hate from JoLu on Vimeo.

Sen. David Vitter claims to be a good Catholic Christian. One who is a sinner, but one who supposedly acknowledges his sins and benefits from the forgiveness of God, his family, and his fellow human beings. Well, I call on Sen. Vitter to live up to his supposed Catholic Christian values in terms of treating others the way he expects to be treated. I call on Sen. Vitter to live up to the Catholic social teachings which emphasize solidarity with the poor and respecting the dignity of his fellow human beings. His reprehensible and disgusting ad does nothing but vilify and demean the dignity of his fellow human being. He should live up to the Catholic Christian values that he claims and not live down to the baser nature of human beings just to tap into this baser, hateful nature to secure votes.

Vote for Charlie Melancon! He's not a great choice for progressive liberal Democrats, but at least he's a decent human being who respects his fellows and who doesn't resort to such reprehensible depictions of others for his own electoral gains. He's certainly not a family values hypocrite like Vitter is.

Conservatives - you need to know that whatever authority you have in the federal Senate involves a willingness to accept the immoral, vile, and hypocritical character that is David Vitter. Know it and own it.

MBH Pottery at the Palmer Park Arts Market Tomorrow

Well, it's once again that time of the month when my lovely bride will again be out at the Palmer Park Arts Market setting up her booth to sell her pottery. The market will be running tomorrow, Saturday, from 10am-4pm, and the weather forecast looks perfect. It promises to be a beautiful day and ideal for a visit to the Arts Market. My B-2/3 has been hard at work all month and has added significantly to her inventory of pieces. So, if you want to support a great cause and pick up some wonderful pieces of handmade, high quality pottery as wedding gifts, birthday presents, early Christmas or Hannukah gifts, or any other kind of gift, please get your umbrella and do come out to the Arts Market today at Palmer Park on the corner of Claiborne and Carrollton Avenues and look her up. I think she's assigned to Booth 117, but you can find out for certain where she is at the information booth at the Market. MBH Pottery or Michele Benson Huck Pottery is what you should look for. Of course, as usual, Michele will also be doing live demonstrations at her pottery wheel, so please come out, enjoy the market, and stop by to visit Michele to see how pots are thrown (and hopefully not at you!)

Vitter vs. Melancon

To me, this election is a no-brainer. Melancon is the obvious choice. And that should be true for conservatives, too. The fact is that Melancon is not an ideal candidate for liberals. He voted against the Health Care Reform legislation. He's pro-gun, anti-abortion, and anti-illegal immigration. Things that you would think would make him very appealing to conservatives. But what sets Melancon apart from Vitter is that Vitter is a moral reprobate and an unreconstructed, misogynist hypocrite, while Melancon's moral and ethical character is unassailable. I just don't see how anyone who embraces character and integrity as fundamental campaign issues wouldn't vote for Melancon over Vitter. And yet, Vitter is likely to be re-elected because the antipathy towards Obama in Louisiana among conservatives is so strong that anyone, even the devil himself, could likely be elected as long as he was anti-Obama and Republican. I think it says volumes about the electorate in this state -- and the volumes it says is not flattering.

Anyway, The Washington Post has a lengthy and well-written piece on the differeing campaign strategies and styles of both Vitter and Melancon.

Halloween/Day of the Dead Mask: Don't Be A Cabrón: Vote!

From Don't Be A Cabrón. Posted with permission.

More Tea Party Thuggery

A woman gathers outside of the place where Republican candidate for U.S. Senator in Kentucky, Rand Paul, was scheduled to arrive to debate his Democratic opponent. She has a sign and appears to be engaging in a bit of peaceful protest. What happens? She's wrestled to the ground and her head is stomped. Click here for video. A few comments.

First, Rand Paul is not responsible. He had nothing to do with this. So any efforts by liberals to try to link Rand Paul to this incident are simply engaging in a bit of disingenuous demagoguery themselves.

Second, there is no justification for these Tea Party thugs to do what they did. This was clearly an assault on this woman and a violation of her Constitutional rights to freedom of speech. There was no indication at all that she posed a threat to anyone, much less to Rand Paul. It is unconscionable; and the guy who stomped her head needs to go to jail and feel the full weight of a punitive lawsuit against his sorry ass self.

Third, let me pull the chivalry card that conservatives so often like to play: what kind of honorable, decent man does this to a defenseless woman?

Fourth, conservatives who like to reference questionable act of SEIU violence against a black Tea Party protester have no moral high ground to stand on any longer.

Fifth, in my mind, this is just yet another example of an extremist, violent impulse unleashed and encouraged by demagoguic leaders of the Tea Party movement. I point to Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and all others who stoke a kind of "Real Americans take back our country" mentality. It's the same kind of mentality that encourages bringing assault weapons to political speeches, putting liberal candidates in rifle scope targets, citing blood-spilling patriotic slogans, etc. This example kind of gives the lie, literally, to the whole "Don't tread on me" mantra, doesn't it? Unless, of course, the only people who are exempt from being tread upon are "real" Americans. We liberals, being not truly American, don't really merit the protections of the Constitution, do we?

The conservative thuggery, in an electoral environment that is very positive for conservatives, is astounding. You'd think that folks would be jeering and laughing at this woman, if not simply ignoring her, and not assaulting her and stomping on her head. It's not only astounding, but repulsive and disgusting.

Another Reason I'm An Exodus Catholic

Taliban Catholicism. These self-righteous orthodox Catholic bloggers who distort the church's teaching toward their own political ends ought to take the plank from their own eyes before noting the speck in the eyes of others.

NPR's Funding

It makes for a great populist soundbite by Republicans, who now have a cause celebre in Juan Williams, to rant against the supposedly taxpayer funded National Public Radio. But the problem here is that NPR receives ZERO direct federal government funding. And to the extent that NPR receives any indirect taxpayer funding, whether from state or federal governments, it amounts to a measly 5.8% of the organization's operating budget. Even cutting out NPR from indirect state or federal funding would do absolutely nothing to ameliorate the budget deficits of federal or state governments. In fact, it seems that GOP efforts to demagogue NPR essentially amount to a campaign to use the threat of force by the state to punish what is essentially a non-state financed operation.

Video of Joe Miller Campaign Thuggery

What defies belief here in this incredible video is that a private security detail refuses to identify itself, assumes authority as proper law enforcement, and pretends to have the authority to declare a public place off limits and to order private citizens around. There is no other words to describe this other than as Gestapo-like behavior. And even worse is the revelation that these guys are ACTIVE DUTY soldiers in the US Armed Forces. Even the police officer tells these goons that the place is a public space and yet this director of the security detail claims some kind of authority or ownership of this space. He claims that the space is private and that the reporters are trespassing, and yet he refuses to provide any documentation that what he even claims is true. It is abso-frickin-lutely, jaw-droppingly, unbelievable. Had a Democratic campaign engaged in some shenanigan like this, do you think the conservative punditocracy and blogosphere wouldn't be going ape-sh*t apoplectic? And I've scoured the conservative blogosphere to see what is being said about this outrage among conservatives. What have I encountered? Crickets.

Joe Miller - Thug

OK. It is commonplace for many, many conservatives to refer to liberal Democrats, and in particular the Obama administration, as a bunch of "thugs." But check out something that really constitutes thuggery: Alaska Senate Candidate, and Palinite Tea Party favorite, Joe Miller, uses active duty US military soldiers as a private security detail. Did you get that?!? ACTIVE DUTY SOLDIERS!!!

Meanwhile, the Army says that two of the guards who assisted in the arrest of the journalist and who tried to prevent two other reporters from filming the detention were active-duty soldiers moonlighting for Miller's security contractor, the Drop Zone, a Spenard surplus store and protection service.

The soldiers, Spc. Tyler Ellingboe, 22, and Sgt. Alexander Valdez, 31, are assigned to the 3rd Maneuver Enhancement Brigade at Fort Richardson. Maj. Bill Coppernoll, the public affairs officer for the Army in Alaska, said the two soldiers did not have permission from their current chain of command to work for the Drop Zone, but the Army was still researching whether previous company or brigade commanders authorized their employment.

These soldiers were involved in the unlawful detention of a citizen journalist. What in the hell are these active duty US soldiers doing serving the interests of a partisan campaign in the first place? Aren't they supposed to be non-partisan defenders of the Constitutional rights of all citizens? This is outrageous and blurs the lines between the military as an institution and partisan affiliations. Active duty US soldiers simply should not be paid by the taxpayers and then work on behalf of the GOP. Some of my conservative readers think my fears about the totalitarian and autocratic tendencies within the GOP are overblown. Some of my conservative readers would be willing to vote for someone like Joe Miller, who would put active duty US soldiers on his campaign payroll and then use these soldiers to repress and detain a citizen journalist, just because they think having to buy health insurance or to pay 5% more in taxes is worse. Well, here's just another example of the direction conservatism is heading. These are not isolated incidences. They are popping up more and more frequently. I simply can't believe it. Who are the thugs here? What aspects of freedom are being compromised on the altar of partisanship here? I can't believe what the GOP has become, and I certainly don't think the GOP of Joe Miller represents the values of our Constitutional democracy. Conservative defenders of the Constitution, of democracy, of freedom need to stand up strongly against this. It is simply intolerable that I, as a liberal, should feel threatened or fearful of my own service members for crossing some political/ideological line. Outrageous.

Patronizing Conservative Elitism and Voter Suppression

The only time I have ever witnessed direct and blatant efforts, similar to the recent one in Nevada, to consciously seek to suppress votes has come from conservatives, whether directly from the GOP or from groups allied to the GOP. One example from 8 years ago concerned the Louisiana State GOP's efforts to suppress black voter turnout in a Senate race pitting Democrat Mary Landrieu against Republican Suzanne Haik Terrell.

But why should this surprise me when there is a widely-held belief in conservative circles that there are too many ignorant citizens who shouldn't be voting in elections.

The patronizing tone that comes across in these voter suppression efforts or in this idea that we'd all be better off if the unwashed, unlearned masses just stayed away from the voting booths underscores the real elitist disdain in the conservative movement for democracy and for the participation in our electoral system of the most vulnerable and marginalized, who are the most likely not to satisfy the knowledge threshhold that certain conservatives think should be a precondition for voting in elections.

And yet we liberals are the ones who are supposed to be the discriminatory elitists here?! Pshaw!

Christine O'Donnell's Constitutional Knowledge

It would help a Tea Party candidate who shouts to high heavens the sanctity of the Constitution and who claims reference to the Constitution as the sole means for legislating to actually, you know, know the Constitution. Christine O'Donnell's constitutional knowledge leaves much to be desired. In fact, I wouldn't put her in front of a first grade class to discuss the Constitution. She apparently has no clue what the 14th, 16th, and 17th Amendments to the Constitution are -- which is surprising given that these Amendments are very much the subject of critical scrutiny among a strong contingent of the Tea Party, which she claims to come from and embrace. But it's her apparent obtuseness about the First Amendment's establishment clause that really is the shocker:



What a joke!

Where Was Anh "Joseph" Cao?

This morning I was proud to stand behind my friend and colleague, Lucas Diaz, Executive Director of Puentes - New Orleans, at a press conference in protest of a repugnant and reprehensible campaign ad mounted by Sen. David Vitter about illegal immigration. The Press Conference got some good local media coverage and there was a great diversity of representation present in that audience and on the stage. One of the attendees in the audience was Cedric Richmond, the Democratic candidate in the race to represent Louisiana's US Congressional District 2 on Capitol Hill. Richmond was a great legislative ally in the Louisiana State Congress last spring when it came to confronting anti-illegal immigration legislation in Baton Rouge. I won't forget his clear position of opposition against this legislation. At this press conference, Richmond didn't seek out the spotlight. He didn't try to coopt the event for himself. He was just another citizen sitting in the audience in support of our grass-roots efforts to protest Vitter's campaign ad. That means something to me.

And guess who wasn't in the audience: Anh "Joseph" Cao. Cao should have been there. He could have been there. And as an immigrant from Vietnam himself, his presence would have been a strong symbol to Vitter and the Republican establishment backing him up that such vile demonization of immigrants is unacceptable regardless of partisan affiliation. But Cao wasn't there, and I'd bet any amount of money he wasn't there because it would have cost him among his GOP support base. Cao could have made a principled stand against the racist pandering and demagoguery of Vitter and the party that supports him. But he didn't. And that's just about enough for me in making up my mind come election day in November. It's a stark reminder that the "R" behind Cao's name makes him untrustworthy when it comes to standing up to bigotry that reflections poorly on what that "R" stands for. It's a wake-up call about the nature of partisanship in this current environment and that even someone like Cao is not immune to its pernicious effects.

Another View on the Motivations of Tea Partiers

Just to be fair, I'd like to point out to my readers this article written by Jonathan Haidt explaining what is really at the root of the Tea Party phenomenon. It's not exactly what I postulated in a previous posting, but it does reinforce somewhat the notion that there is a "feeling" fueling the Tea Party movement -- it's just that Haidt thinks it has less to do with liberty and more to do with a feeling of Tea Partier grievance at the short-cutting of "karma," while I think it's also less to do with liberty (and even small-government memes) but more to do with a feeling of discomfort with the disappearance of a idealized notion of a non-miscegenated, culturally-homogenous "real America." Anyway, it's a very intriguing article and definitely worth a read. It paints the Tea Party movement essentially in a sympathetic and positive way; but it does highlight differences between the socially conservative Tea Party constituents, their sympathetic libertarian colleagues, and even liberty-loving liberals. The patterns of alignment between these three groups are really quite interesting and, I found, quite surprising in terms of what they revealed. I appreciate the article because it at least provides evidence that liberals are not the anti-freedom demons that many Tea Partiers like to project. Here's how Haidt ends his article:

The rank-and-file tea partiers think that liberals turned America upside down in the 1960s and 1970s, and they want to reverse many of those changes. They are patriotic and religious, and they want to see those values woven into their children's education. Above all, they want to live in a country in which hard work and personal responsibility pay off and laziness, cheating and irresponsibility bring people to ruin. Give them liberty, sure, but more than that: Give them karma.

Notice that Haidt links current Tea Party motivations to a reaction against the topsy-turvy consequences of the cultural revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, as opposed to the redistributionist welfare state propensities of the 1930s and 1940s (although Haidt notes that this is also a part of the topsy-turvy consequences of the 1960s and 1970s -- albeit a less important part). I think Haidt sees the Tea Party movement, as I do, as much more of a phenomenon wrapped around cultural concepts as opposed to liberty or size-and-scope-of-government concepts.

Rand Paul Has A Point

Of course, I want Democrat Jack Conway to defeat Rand Paul in the Kentucky Senatorial race. And I think Rand Paul's views on the Civil Rights Act and his support for merchants to deny access to their stores on the basis of race to be very troublesome. But, that said, I think Rand Paul had a point in his debate with Jack Conway about Conway's ad attacking him (Paul) for some anonymously sourced, unsubstantiated charge about some atheistic cultist college behavior. Rand Paul is right that attacking the basis of his faith from such a seedy, unsubstantiated source is gutter politics at its worst. So in that sense Conway is behaving like a heel. But what kinda bothers me much, much more is the realization that the issue really at work here is the attempt to play the "who is the real Christian" game. Conway is trying to one-up Rand Paul using the Christian card. I find the whole theocratization of the political environment to be really depressing. I would much prefer secular campaigns. Pointing to someone's religion or faith is a distraction from the real substantive issues we face as a country.

Ken Buck Puts His Foot In His Mouth: Twice

Well, Colorado Republican Senate Candidate Ken Buck believes that homosexuality is a choice. Foot-in-mouth insertion number one. I wonder, then, if he thinks that heterosexuality is also a choice? But I'd bet not. I'd bet he thinks human beings are hardwired for heterosexuality and that we have no "choice" in the matter. But if that's the case, he's got to admit that sexuality is something that is hardwired -- which logically must lead him to the possibility that homosexuality is also something that can be hardwired. Worse, though, he equates the genetic predisposition towards homosexuality as akin to the genetic predisposition towards alcoholism. In other words, homosexuality is a genetic perversion just like a disease. Foot in mouth insertion number two.

The Fruits of the Tea Party and Palinism

This is simply astounding. Yeah, yeah ... I know there are folks on the left who did (and do) similarly crazy and reprehensible things; but I have never seen so many of these kinds of things being done on such a scale as I have seen from conservatives regarding Obama. The nastiness seems to be rather endemic.

I know some of my conservative readers will write this off as the rantings and behavior of an unrepresentative fringe; but I can't help but continue to believe that this "unrepresentative fringe" is being implicitly coddled and tolerated by a much more broadly felt antipathy towards Obama, an antipathy emerging from the bowels of the Tea Party movement that more and more is scratching at the center of the Tea Party's anti-Obama narratives. I certainly don't see any conservatives raising a finger to actually discourage the kind of demeaning of Obama (not to mention the presidency itself) that these things represent.

The "Feeling" Fueling the Tea Party Movement

Andrew Sullivan has very astute blog posting up on his website today in which he tries to make sense of what are the cultural and psychological underpinnings are of the current day Tea Party movement. He essentially argues what I have also been saying to people these days: the Tea Party movement represents what I like to call the "last gasp" of a dying notion of America. What is that notion? It's the America of baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, and Chevrolet. It's an America of an unmuddied/unmiscegenated racial/ethnic identity, whether white, black, or brown. It's an America of Christianity. It's an America where there's only one publicly-acknowledged form of heterosexual identity with any other identity tolerated as long as it's hidden in the closet. It's an English-only America where ethnicity is fully absorbed and integrated into the dominant cultural narrative of the WASP foundations of our country. But the simple fact is that our country today is simply not the Mayberry of the Andy Griffith show. And it never will be. And the uncertainty for many people, particularly of older generations, of what this means and the cultural discomfort that this causes is the socio-cultural roots of the "I want my America back!" meme so commonly heard from Tea Party faithful. Obama, as Sullivan notes, is the embodiment of this new America, which he argues accounts for the real visceral and passionate nature of the Tea Party's opposition to his Presidency. As Sullivan writes in a nutshell:

But the passion of opposition stems, I think, in part from a sense that the way the world once was is disappearing, that this is inevitable, and a repressed acknowledgment of the inevitability actually intensifies a resistance to it.

It will play out. It will be nasty and uncomfortable as it does so. It will be hyperbolic and impassioned. But it will pass.

Chuckle of the Day: "Rich Whit(n)ey" for Governor of Illinois

You just can't make this stuff up:

The last name of Green Party gubernatorial candidate Rich Whitney is misspelled as "Whitey" on electronic-voting machines in nearly two dozen wards -- about half in predominantly African-American areas -- and election officials said Wednesday the problem cannot be corrected by Election Day.

I feel for the dude. I really do.