Uncle Sam, are you feeling Standard and Poorer?

Uncle Sam is going through the same thing many of the rest of us have already experienced. His credit score has been downgraded and financial experts are saying he may be at higher risk of not paying off his credit card bills.

Oh, sure, he was still paying his debt. He hadn't missed a payment. Shouldn't Standard and Poor's cut him some slack? Yea, I said the same thing to Chase and the other credit card issuers who jacked up my interest rates and dropped my credit limit. It didn't go me any good. It's some small consolation that Uncle Sam didn't get much better treatment either.

Now, we will see if he learns the same lesson some of rest of us have had to learn. Will he figure out that some of the things he thought were necessities are really luxuries?

I don't know about you, but I'm not holding my breath.

Less is more and enough is enough

I'm fed up with this political game of financial chicken taking place in Washington, D.C. If these idiots that the rest of us idiots elected to represent us can't prevent the federal government from defaulting on its debt, I'm not sure what we are paying those morons for.

However, it is equally infuriating is the simplistic language being used to describe the debt problem, the proposed deals and the language of who will "pay" or who will feel "pain" pisses me off to no end. And perhaps worst of all is the press lets these idiots get away with it.

If you only pay half-assed attention to this crisis, you could easily assume that the solution is simple. One side wants to cut benefits to the old and poor and the other side want to increase taxes on the rich, and it would be possible to assume that either idea would net the same amount of money. It would not. As I pointed out in a previous post, our government couldn't tax the rich enough to fix our debt for this year, let alone the total national debt. So, I won't belabor the point here. Can't someone just speak the plain truth?

Apparently not. Just look at the language of the proposed debt reduction packages. The truth of the matter is the "debt reduction" plans won't reduce the current debt at all, it will only reduce the amount of future debt our government will obligate us to pay. So, if the "big plan" would reduce the deficit $4 trillion dollars over 10 years, that means, if we are currently overspending at a clip of $1.5 trillion, we would only at another $11 trillion to the $14 trillion we already owe. Do you think that's going to make your social security benefits any more secure 5 or 10 years from now? Or your Medicare? Or your food stamps? Or your community development block grants? Or the funds for whatever pet federal project you absolutely think Uncle Sam should pay for?

The most urgent priority is that the government needs to prevent a default next week. However, we have to stop putting this problem off for future Congresses and presidents to deal with, and future generations to pay for. It is completely true that the government needs to learn to do what many of us have already had to figure out in this recession, which is to live within our means and only spend money on essential needs. Not wants. Just needs. And for those of us in the public who haven't learned the lesson, it is time to learn about personal responsibility. Pay as you go. You are responsible for yourself and your family's welfare. The lottery jackpot isn't coming to bail you out. The financial settlement is not coming to give you something for nothing. Uncle Sam is not our mommy and daddy, here to powder our butts and wipe our noses.

Millions and billions of dollars sound like lots of money. And it is. But what both Democrats and Republicans are telling us all is that they fully intend to keep spending trillions more than comes in to Washington on an ongoing basis. It's basic government math, where a reduction is actually an increase.

Our economic tsunami

I heard on the Today Show this morning that the current estimate on the damage caused by the Japanese earthquake and tsunami is $300 billion.

The amount of money the U.S. government is overspending this year is 4 times that much.

That's a massive tidal wave of economic destruction caused by Congress and the president.

Are you starting to get a feel for the enormity of our financial problem?

Politicians arguing over pennies on the debt dollar

The more time I spend agonizing over my own budget, and my own debt, the more I get irritated with governments' handling of public money.

We are hearing a lot about government spending in recent weeks and we will hear a lot more about it now through the end of next year's presidential election. Sadly, what we are hearing is a lot of slogan-like sound bites, but little of substance. The two major parties are doing a lot of finger pointing and arguing over tiny chunks of the budget that won't do a damn thing to get the federal government any closer to merely spending the money the government takes in each year.

All the chatter about whether or not to fund OPB, Planned Parenthood, the Obama healthcare plan, farm subsidies, or whether to raise taxes on the rich or corporate taxes amount to spit in the ocean. Billions here or there won't fix the massive problem. The deal the parties made to cut $38 billion to avoid a government shutdown is 1/35th of the deficit the feds have already overdrawn the bank account this year. There is a $1.35 trillion deficit so far this budget year.

Millions and billions are hard enough for most of us to fathom, but a trillion-plus for just this year's deficit and a $14 trillion total deficit? That's $14,000,000,000,000. That's way too many digits. So let's look at it another way.

Let's say you earn $21,820 this year. However, you spent $35,825 for the year. So you put some of that on a credit card. So you added $13,504 to your debt this year. That would be a little scary, since the debt you incurred was more than half your income. So, soon, you will have to either get a huge raise, or seriously cut your lifestyle to deal with this year's credit card bill. But the really scary part is, the total credit card bill is already $143,125. Do you know anyone that makes $22,000 a year with a $143,000 credit card limit? So, if you spent all your earnings on your credit card bill, it would take you 6 and a half years of earnings to pay that off, not counting interest. And there is always interest. And, of course you still have to eat and pay the bills somehow.

Using that ratio, the deal to cut the budget that Congress reached early this month to avoid a government shut down would cut spending by $380 for the year out of our $38,000-plus spending.

The only way to get a raise would be to raise taxes. And of course those big meanies in corporate America should be the ones to pay, right? I see lots of people sharing stories on Facebook and other sites about how little corporations pay in income taxes (and they all seem to ignore all the other taxes corporations pay). So let's just make the Exxons and GEs of the world pay higher income taxes.

Well, according to USDebtClock.org, where I'm drawing all these budget numbers from, puts total corporate assets at $13 trillion. The current debt is $14 trillion. So even if the federal government liquidated everything corporations owned, it wouldn't pay off the existing debt, and of course there would be no corporations left to pay any taxes next year.

The total value of all goods and services produced in the country would be barely enough to pay existing debt. The current debt is 97.5 percent of the total Gross Domestic Product. There is no amount of tax on corporations or the rich that can cut the debt without some dramatic cuts in spending too.

As those of us working to get ourselves out of debt have learned, the first step is to quit digging a deeper hole. I realize that the government is going to need to raise taxes to get out of this hole. But even that won't stop the bleeding. Massive spending cuts will have to happen too. And we will have to do major surgery on some sacred cows to get it done, namely social security, Medicare and defense, not to mention a lot of other welfare-type programs.

I don't relish the thought of people who have suffered  having to suffer more, but I also realize that we all have to take more personal responsibility for ourselves and our own families financially. Everyone will need to pitch in on this deal.

It's time to get radical. Raise the retirement age immediately. Freeze or reduce social security benefits going out each much. Freeze or reduce Medicare and Medicaid benefits. Raise the retirement age for government workers (at all levels of government). End fixed pension benefit levels for government workers (at all levels of government). Reduce government payrolls at all levels of government and since taxpayers are fully funding public employees pensions, then government workers can help bolster social security and Medicare even though they, theoretically, won't ever tab into it. If it's a societal benefit, everyone, Congress included, should pay into it. Put an end to never-ending unemployment benefits. Reduce food stamp spending and other government assistance. Reduce/eliminate tax credits, tax deductions and subsidies for all manner of social engineering projects that benefit the poor and the wealthy, individuals and companies.

Oh, and there is speculation that Obama will raise and spend $1 billion or more for his re-election campaign next year. State, and even some local races, raise and spend millions. How about we tax political campaigns too. That's something Democrats and Republicans would both have to pay and its funds that would come, in large part, from wealthy individual and corporate donors. And maybe if the tax rate was high enough there would actually be some incentive to keep campaign budgets from getting ridiculously out of control. Maybe we can get some of these aspiring candidates used to frugal financial management before they get into office.

If we do some of these radical things, to cut spending and increase government revenue, then, maybe we can start getting the governments' spending more in line with what it brings in. At the state and local level, we can't continue to give government employees raises, cost of living increases and step increases and guaranteeing benefits they will receive regardless of whether the pension funds or state revenues can afford it.

We should also decline an increase in the debt limit, the limit on the federal credit card. But we won't.

We may want to help everyone, but we can't. We, at the very least have to help everyone we are helping  less. We all need to get our own financial houses in order, pay our own bills and expect our governments to do the same.

If nothing else, at least when you hear the ongoing political rhetoric about tax increases or budget cuts at the federal level, I hope you realize that if the amounts discussed don't top a trillion dollars, the windbags spouting off are only talking about a small fraction of the problem. If they aren't talking about at least hundreds of billions, then they are talking about pennies on the dollar of our current debt. This is not about paying for Big Bird vs. tax breaks for the rich. It's far more complex and far more serious than all that. And it will cost us all far more than we care to admit.

Uncle Sam isn't doing my financial reform many favors

Congress passed a financial reform package today, and President Obama is expected to sign it, perhaps as early as next week.

I'm nervous about what this will mean. That's not because I'm some big-wig investor or mega-bankers. I'm just a schmuck swimming in credit card debt. And the reason I'm scared is because the last time Congress clamped down on banks for their abusive practices on their account holders, the banks retaliated by becoming more abusive, raising interest rates even more and lowering limits.

And people wonder why consumers haven't started spending again to buy the country out of this recession. The answer is simple. We can't afford it.

There was only one beneficial piece in the last consumer protection bill as far as I can see, and that's the provision that requires the credit card companies to print some very useful and important information on the credit card statements. That key information tells us some very important things about what our credit cards are really costing us. In that information we can find out how long it will take to pay off our balances -- and how much we will eventually pay -- if we don't charge any more and only make the minimum payments. We can also see how much we would have to pay if we quit charging on the card to pay it off in three years.

That's important information to know. Of course the other actions the bank took have made it harder for me to dream of paying off the cards I have in three years or less. Credit card issuers have raised interest rates, and lowered limits which increases the proportion of debt you have, which lowers your credit rating, which then puts you at risk of getting rates raised again, and limits lowered again, and further erode the credit rating. It's feeling like a vicious, and expensive, cycle.

For me, though, there has been something of a silver lining. It has helped me to realize that I need to get out of debt as soon as possible and never get back into it again. I am tired of paying in blood to these legal loan sharks.

It is that conviction that brought me back to Digital Fishwrap again, after an absence of more than a year and a half. I feel like I've turned a corner in my financial life. After rounding that bend, I can see clearly the long, steep climb I face to summit this mountain of debt. I think the Fishwrap site can help me on this journey, because sometimes I need a place to confess my fear and frustration. I need a venue to vent my anger at myself and the assholes that helped me create this huge mess.

Learning to live without using credit cards has been tougher than I imagined. It's not that I lead an extravagant lifestyle. My couch and recliner are the two pieces of furniture I bought after getting my first job after college, bought on credit of course, because I didn't have the cash to buy them outright. And that's been the pattern of my life, buying items, large and small, on credit when there just wasn't the cash available. Gas for the car, gifts for others, travel to visit family when I lived far away, dinners for family and friends, all paid for on plastic.

I wasn't making much money in that first job, and had a series of low-paying jobs, but I make what should be a decent wage now, and I am still always broke, because nearly two-thirds of my monthly income goes to pay on credit cards. About one-third goes to all the core household expenses, like rent and utilities. Which leaves very little for everything else, like food, clothing, fuel and insurance for the car, etc.

I don't pretend to be a financial expert. If you saw my monthly bills and the checking account balance you would see that for yourself. I'm just a guy on a journey to get my life back. I've come to face the reality that another big raise or promotion is not just around the corner in this economy. There is no lottery jackpot coming my way to rescue me from myself and the banking bogeymen. It's going to take time, determination and tons of patience. I'm not sure I have that much patience, but maybe if I take the time to write about what I'm finding and learning it will keep me from running one and spending money on a lark just to avoid staring at the four walls or eating yet another home-prepped bargain-basement meal. And maybe you, dear readers, can help keep me on track.

Oregon's new Second City

I was reading this blog post today from blog called "Beaver Boundary" congratulating the city of Eugene for reclaiming its spot as Oregon's second largest city from the state's capital city of Salem, according to population estimates by Portland State University. According to PSU's preliminary estimates, Eugene had 153,690 residents on July 1 and Salem had 151,895.

"Kudos to the people of Eugene, who have once again saved the state of
Oregon from relative embarrassment by reclaiming its status as the
second-largest city from Salem. The populations of each city hover around
150,000, and the vibrantly crunchy Emerald City has just recently outpaced the
drab and dull Cherry City in growth. ... Even if you prefer Salem for cultural or provincial reasons, you may root for a faster-growing Eugene if your politics are left-of-center. Of course, Eugene is a liberal haven that almost always supports Democrats ...."

Forgive me, but the cultural factors are hugely important. Liberals maybe be well practices at talking a good game about issues like appreciation of other cultures, but it's not quite the same thing as true cultural/ethnic/racial diversity.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2003 population estimates, Oregon is 86.6 percent white. Salem is slightly more diverse than the state as a whole at 83.1 percent white. Portland, the state's largest city is not surprisingly more diverse than the state average at 77.9 percent white. Eugene, that bastion of liberalism, is less diverse than the state as a whole with 88.1 percent of the city's residents defined as white.

Portland's ethnic diversity comes from Latinos (6.8 percent) blacks (6.6 percent) and Asians (6.3 percent). Salem's diversity is largely because of the Latinos (14.6 percent) and 7.9 percent who report "other" ethnicity. Other races represented are Asians (2.4 percent), American Indian or native Alaskan (1.5 percent) and black (1.3 percent).

Latinos are also the largest minority in Eugene at a whopping 5 percent. The next largest group is Asian at 3.6 percent, 2.2 percent "other" races and 1.3 percent black.

White men, of which I am one, can be very empathetic or sympathetic to women and minorities, but it doesn't mean we can truly identify with the issues that are important to them. In order to have a diversity of views and ideas representing the cultural views of the state's residents and slowly growing minority population, Oregonians need to make sure minorities are at the table where and when decisions are made. This is growing increasingly important for Latinos in Oregon, as the largest minority group in the state at 8 percent of the overall population. This doesn't qualify as direct evidence, but I suspect the 2003 estimate of Salem's population being just about 15 percent Latino is low. If you want to see the future of the city, just look at the faces of the children getting on school buses any weekday morning in the city. That number will continue to rise in Salem and cities large and small throughout the state. Like it or not, immigration reform or not, the Latino train is on the roll.

As the father of a teenage daughter who has Latino heritage on her mother's side of the family, I want to make sure there are people who will not only hear her voice but seek out her and her family's opinions on the issues shaping the future of this state. Better yet, I want her and her family providing some of the leadership on those issue.

One other thing about which I would remind residents of Portland, Eugene, Salem -- or whatever city who want to play the population numbers game -- is that if you live by the numbers, you may get overwhelmed by them. The face of Oregon, whether liberal or conservative, is getting browner by the day. If Portland State's 2007 population estimate is accurate (3,745,455 Oregonians statewide) and Latinos still make up at least 8 percent of the population (and that number is probably low), then that means there are about 300,000 Latinos in the state. That's roughly equivalent to the populations of Eugene and Salem combined or more than half the population of Portland.

Oregon's new second largest community, by shear numbers, is populated by people with brown eyes and brown hair, amigos.

Put the front runners on the back burner

I consider myself a news junky, but I am so not paying any attention to the "campaigns" for president. The fricking general election is still a year away. I don't know what I'm doing for Thanksgiving yet, let alone who I will vote for next November.

I'm not happy with the development that so many states are pushing their primaries up so early next year. As a former Californian, I certainly understand why the nation's most populous state would want to be a player in the presidential primaries. But there is a this domino effect with every state out there wanting to get to the front of the line.

It is an odd irony that a nation with such a short attention span has now created a 2-year presidential campaign. But somehow I doubt I am the only person not yet paying any attention to presidential politics. Wake me up a little before the party conventions. Maybe by then I will care.

Where's my sticker, damn it?

It's almost Election Day here in Oregon, but I'm not a big fan of our state's vote-by-mail elections. I voted in my first election in this state when I was 18. I remember the pride of registering to vote and in going to the polls to cast my first ballot. I've felt that same pride many times since then.

When I was a California resident, it was common to get a sticker on Election Day that read "I Voted" with an American flag on them. Corny perhaps, but I was always proud to earn my sticker for practicing my right to vote. I even liked the electronic voting machines that have been so controversial. Preferred them actually to the little punch cards famous for hanging chads.

But I don't get that same feeling of pride voting by mail. It's rather an empty feeling dropping a ballot in a mailbox. The only time I felt anything even close to the voting experience was the one time I didn't mail my ballot in and had to drop it off at a county office on Election Day.

I still haven't mailed in my ballot for the Nov. 6 election. In fact I haven't even opened the election envelop. I guess I'll have to drop it off again. If there is going to be a system where you don't have to go to a polling place to cast a ballot, I'd just as soon vote online instead of having to vote by mail. I can't remember the last time I mailed anything. I don't even know what the cost of a stamp is now, because I don't mail anything. I still have stamps from whatever the postal rate was two rate increases ago. I just don't mail anything. I don't need to. I pay my bills electronically. If I write a letter, I sent it electronically.

In the digital age, voting by mail is sort of like foregoing use of your cell phone to call someone and sending a telegram via Western Union. I suppose you can still do it, but why?

They eat their young, and not so young

Republicans are wreaking more havoc on members of their own party than Democrats could ever dream of doing. Senator Larry Craig, an Idaho Republican, is expected to resign his senate seat in the morning just ahead of the GOP's inner-party political lynch mob.

Is it because Craig plead guilty to a misdemeanor? Or are they worried that Craig violated some ethical standard because he showed his business card to a cop, and may have been trying to use the power of his office to get out of an arrest? Doubtful.

Or could it be the stigma that maybe a conservative -- gay, straight or bisexual -- may have been soliciting man-on-man action?

Personally I could care less about Craig's sexuality. I do not believe homosexuality is a lifestyle. That makes it sounds like a choice, and it's not. I also don't think it's a preference. Again that has the connotation of someone choosing something over something else. People don't choose their sexuality any more than they choose their eye color. You can hide your eye color behind tinted contacts or sunglasses, but it doesn't change what's behind the colored lenses.

It's been estimated that about 10 percent of the population is homosexual. So, theoretically out of any random group of 10 people, 1 will be gay. If the U.S. Senate reflects the societal ratio, that would mean out of 100 U.S. senators, about 10 would be gay or lesbian.

I find it distressing that in 2007 a U.S. senator could be run from office for the fear that he may be gay, essentially.

What is disgusting about this whole episode is that there is still such a stigma about gay sex that men would need to have some choreographed bathroom stall ritual in order to find someone to have human, physical contact with. My dear friend Gene describes the ritual on his Logorrhea blog. This sad episode sends the wrong message to young men and women trying to come to grips with their sexuality that may not fit societal norms. It says it's not OK to be gay, and if you are it's not OK to be open about it and whatever you do, don't get caught playing footsy or worse under a bathroom stall.

But gays are not alone. While society has gotten more politically correct and is not at overt and blatant about its bigotry, the hatred is still there. The stated reason's for the attacks on Craig or the reason he will give for resigning won't list anything about sexuality. You'll hear things like criminal charge and ethics and lying and hypocrisy. It's not that he may have sucked cocks or let other men suck his cock, it's that he lied about it.

Blacks know discrimination. American Indians know it. Women know it. Jews know it. Latinos know it.

We hear a lot of clamor in the public and political arena about border security and illegal immigration. Why? Because terrorists are flooding over our borders and bombing innocent civilians regularly? No. Because illegal immigrants are taking American jobs? No, not based on unemployment figures. Because of the high price of social services illegal immigrants are costing us hard-working taxpayers? Well, that's a common claim, never mind the fact that as baby boomers start pocketing their Social Security checks, some of the dollars they will be collecting will have been paid in by people using phony Social Security numbers who will never collect Social Security taxes they have paid into the system from their wages. And in states with sales taxes -- which I think makes a good argument for Oregon to consider a sales tax at long last -- every dollar illegal immigrants spend for most goods and services is taxed.

Most of the noise about illegal immigrants -- maybe not all, but the majority -- is about bigotry, pure and simple. It's a hatred of people with brown skin from Mexico, or Central America or wherever who don't speak English.

Straight white people, men in particular, need to be very careful about the venom and hatred they spout now. The tide in many communities in this nation has changed. The majority is rapidly becoming a minority. All those minority groups we white men have pissed off and offended will collectively outnumber us. Some day they may outnumber us at the election polls too. And white men better hope against hope that our system of government -- not a true democracy but a representative democracy -- with a balance of powers, will protect homophobic, bigoted white men from the pissed off masses who we've been kicking for generations.

Sometimes I think I should have studied political science more extensively in college. I only took one sequence of courses. My favorite poly sci professor used to have a line he used repeatedly. I may not have it work for word, but it went like this: Politics is pretty dull, dry boring stuff. Put it's pretty damn important stuff too.

He was right.

Senator Larry Craig didn't lose an election. He was cast aside like used toilet paper in a public restroom stall by conservative members of his own party and by some in the gay community too. What message are we all supposed to get from that signal?

My friend Gene, on his Take That... blog is much kinder to Craig and dares to dream of a better world where gay people can be "out and proud."

I'm not sure if I am as optimistic as Gene. But I am proud of my gay friends and family members who are out and proud. After this Craig incident, I am also learning just how brave they truly are as well.

How do you like your Chicks?

It is rare that I rush out the first day a CD or DVD goes on sale and buy it. It's usually not that important to me. But on Tuesday, when the Dixie Chicks' new album "Taking the Long Way" was released, I did make a special trip to the store to pick up a copy.

I had purchased and downloaded their new single, "Not Ready to Make Nice," from iTunes a few weeks ago. Although I had only listened to it a time or two, I had heard enough in the song to tell me that I wanted to hear the new CD. Lead singer Natalie Maines' vocals sounded as powerful as ever and I've been a fan of their music for years.

I didn't think too much about the controversy that had surrounded the group a few years ago. Maines, a Texas native, pissed off a lot of people with a comment during a concert in Europe where she said: "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas." Her comments came at a concert in London on March 10, 2003, just 10 days before Bush launched Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Country music radio and many fans reacted with outrage. Dixie Chicks music was pulled from the air on stations all over the country.

Now, here we are three years later and armed U.S. troops are still in Iraq, still fighting and dying, and Bush's popularity has faded tremendously, as has U.S. citizen support for the war in Iraq.

But the Dixie Chicks' music is still not back on radio. Not their monster hits from years past, nor their newest single. According to an article in the May 29 issue of Time magazine, country fans and radio stations are still holding a grudge.

One country music radio programmer who was quoted, but not named, in the Time magazine cover story said the new single is "a four-minute fuck-you to the format and our listeners. I like the Chicks and I won't play it."

Well, anyone who won't listen to the Dixie Chicks, or play their music, or buy their album because of their politics is welcome to their opinion, but I find it all pretty funny, is a sad sort of way.

I don't often talk about politics on my blog or in my personal life, because I think people get stupid when it comes to politics. Everything in partisan politics get painted with a very broad brush, but the real artistry of statesmanship, and life, is in the details.

Life doesn't fit in tidy packages. Republican or Democrat. Red state or Blue state. Conservative or liberal. Pro-life or pro-choice. NRA or anti-gun. Rock or country. Pop or rap. East or West. North or South. White or black.

The last few times I've registered to vote I have not picked a political party to affiliate with. The truth is, I don't feel either of the major political parties represents me. I can be quite conservative on some issues and quite liberal on others. I certainly don't fit into the base of support for either party. And frankly the parties don't seem to know what they believe in either. The Republican party, which austensibly believes in smaller government, has in the current administration eroded personal liberties and allowed government to snoop on its citizens in the name of national security. And Democrats can't seem to do anything to set their own agenda except to be against whatever Republicans are espousing.

But what I find most amusing about this whole flap over the Dixie Chicks and their music is that people get so fired up over it, and yet it's a safe bet that many of them who get so passionate in their support for, or boycott of, a singing group's music probably don't even bother to vote with regularity.

Entertainers, like the rest of us, are entitled to their opinion. And thankfully freedom of speech, though perhaps an endangered species, is still allowed in this country. However, that does not mean that freedom always comes without pain or sacrifice or the slings and arrows thrown from others.

Another irony of this whole Dixie Chicks flap is that before the whole dust-up over the comment about the president, the Chicks and singer Toby Keith also got into a running public pissing match starting in August 2002 over comments Maines made about Keith's song "Courtesy of the Red, White & Blue (The Angry American)" in which Keith tells terrorists that the United States will fight back and put a boot in their ass.

Maines called the song ignorant. Keith shot back at Maines' abilities as a songwriter.

The irony is that Keith and Maines and the rest of the Chicks may be a lot closer in their politics than one might imagine. Keith, who is a Democrat, has also expressed reservations about the war in Iraq, even though he has been unflagging in his support for U.S. troops and was supportive of the U.S. action in Afghanistan.

Not all country music singers are Republicans. Tim McGraw is another high-profile Democrat in country music. And believe it or not, not all country music fans are Republicans either.

And that's the whole point. Stereotypes don't always fit.

Now the question is, where will the Dixie Chicks fit in the American music landscape. The group features a Southern twang and country instrumentation, but will country music accept them back? Or are they pop now? The Time magazine article says their new album "may be the best adult pop CD of the year." But the magazine also asks the question "Will anyone buy it?"

Well, sure some people will buy it, but will it sell millions of copies like previous albums have? That still remainst to be scene. The Chicks themselves seem prepared to accept a smaller fan base.

"I'd rather have a smaller following of really cool people who get it, who will grow with us as we grow and are fans for life, and people that have us in their five-disc changer with Reba McEntire and Toby Keith," said Martie Maguire of the Dixie Chicks. "We don't want those kinds of fans. They limit what you can do."

Well, Martie, I have news for you. I've retired my five-disc changer, but my iPod does have Dixie Chicks, Toby Keith and Reba McEntire in it. Of course it has other stuff too, like Foo Fighters, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Aerosmith. There rock, pop, blues, alternative and country
music.

For me, I don't pick my music based on politics any more than I vote for politicians based on their musical tastes.

I still need to listen to the album a few more times to determine whether it will become a favorite, or whether it will fade into the background amid the hundreds of other CDs in my collection. But for now, it is in high rotation on the ol' iPod. If I like it enough I may even consider buying a ticket to their concert when they come to Portland in November. And if I don't like it enough, my music and concert money will be spent elsewhere, based on how the music resonates with me and my life, not pampered singers want me to vote.

Technorati tags: Music
Dixie Chicks
Country music
Politics
Toby Keith

Who is watching who and why?

You see the debate all over the news. Did the Bush administration overstep its legal authority to monitor telephone calls involving Americans without court oversight in the name of combating terrorism?

Then there is the story that the government has been asking Google for information on what all of us Internet users are using their search engine to look for on the Web. Ostensibly, the subpoena is an attempt to see if efforts to protect children from accessing porn sites are working. But the request isn't about porn, it asks for everything everyone searched for in a certain span of time.

Given those two news stories, I got to thinking about a string of commercials I have been seeing a lot on television lately for a company offering Internet phone service. Just how might the government tap internet phone calls? And if the government taps the Internet to monitor voice, what else might it monitor? And how?

Those who say the Patriot Act and all of its provisions are necessary to fight the war on terror are missing the point about why some Americans are worried about what the government might snoop into if given too much power.

Our system of government and society works precisely because we have a balance of power in the branches of government, preventing a system where the president becomes too powerful. It is more important than ever to maintain that balance of power in an era where citizens are giving up their role in our society in droves by not exercising their right to vote. As the citizenry becomes disengaged from the process and media consolidation means fewer people are monitoring government, the ability for government to abuse its power is great. And I'm sorry fellow blogger, but the proliferation of blogs doesn not qualify as providing in-depth coverage of the inner workings of government. Yea, a lot of that stuff can be pretty boring to people who would much rather watch the latest hot reality TV series, but it's an important part of making sure government does the people's business, not the business of protecting those in power, from whatever party.

Government
Domestic spying

They do eat their young

I finally figured out why ultra-conservative Republicans are opposed to abortions. They would rather eat their offspring.

As proof, I offer the Harriet Miers nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. Miers withdrew her nomination today because members of the Republican party torpedoed her nomination because she is not known to be conservative enough.

Not long ago, Republicans were lambasting Democrats for not allowing President Bush's judicial nominees to even get to a floor vote in the Senate, and here the Republican part, using different tactics achieves the same result.

Hurricane hypocrisy is flooding the capitol.

No matter who Bush nominates now, Democrats will surely fight the nomination to the death.

I almost feel sorry for Bush.

Almost.

Politics

Unwelcome birthday card

I opened the mailbox yesterday expected a larger than normal volume of mail since Monday was Columbus Day and a federal holiday so there was no mail delivery. What I was most hoping to see in the mailbox was my ticket to the Sheryl Crow concert, which is now less than a week away. What I found instead was junk mail, advertisements and a postcard with a yellow sticker on it, indicating that it was mail forwarded form my old Palm Springs address.

The postcard was from one of the city council members of Palm Springs. It had a simple message. "Happy Birthday from your Councilmember Ginny Foat" with a handwritten note with my first name saying "Happy Birthday, Ginny."

I think I've mentioned I'm not a big fan of birthdays, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't appreciate a birthday card as much as the next person. But this card annoyed me. Why the hell is a city council member, particularly one in a city where I no longer live, sending me a card for my birthday?

There is small type on the card making it clear that the card is "not produced printed or mailed at government expense." It goes on to say it was "printed and produced on (a) home computer."

Well, at least Foat isn't using taxpayer funds for her little folly. However, she was quite obviously using public records, most likely voter registration records, for her little card mailing campaign.

It's silly stunts like this that lead people to privacy concerns about what information about this is part of the public record. Personally, I'm a vigorous defender of public records. I think the public's right to access public records is very important. We need to know what information government holds about us and our neighbors.

I don't mind that people knew I was a registered voter in Palm Springs. There are legitimate reasons for that to be known. However, a council member using that database of information to send a personal birthday card for obviously political purposes of keeping her name out there for reelection is an inappropriate use of public records.

But there is some small comfort. Ms. Foat wasted her 23 cents postage on me, because I don't live in her city any more.

Public records
Palm Spring
Politics

They eat their young don't they?

President George W. Bush appears to be drawing more fire for his Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers from within his own party than from Democrats.

I was just listening to some GOP wag on the "Today" show suggesting that Miers should decline the nomination.

Isn't it ironic that Republicans were giving Democrats grief for holding up Bush's judicial nominations and now this nominee is facing the biggest threat from members of Bush's own party. Will the Republicans give Miers an up-or-down vote in the Senate?

Big time politics could be high comedy if all these idiots from both parties didn't have control over our taxes and weren't responsible for our national security.

Politics
Supreme Court nominee
Harriet Miers

Aspiring pill pusher

Pssst. I'm looking for a new connection. I need someone to hook me up with drugs. It's not an emergency, but I'm figuring by July 2006 I'm going to need a fix.

The Oregon Senate approved a bill over the weekend that has already been approved by the House that will require prescriptions for certain over-the-counter cold and allergy medications in the latest effort to combat methamphetamine labs. Gov. Ted Kulongoski has indicated that we will sign the bill, which will ban the sale of medications containing pseudoephedrine.

And you think it's hard to get in to see a doctor now? Does that mean everyone with the sniffles or an allergy attack with be bombarding doctors' offices and emergency rooms?

Well, no, probably not. But I think it's safe to assume that there are going to be a lot of pill runs to towns like Vancouver and Walla Walla, Wash., Weiser and Couer d' Alene, Idaho, Crescent City and Tule Lake, Calif., and McDermitt and Denio, Nev.

If a cold sneaks up on me, I may have to call friends in Southern California and have them FedEx me some NyQuil.

I don't do colds without my NyQuil.

How do you fight a cold? Get plenty of rest and drink lots of fluids, right? That what my mom told me. Well, I can't sleep for shit coughing and sleeping all night. NyQuil is to be worshipped when the cold bug invades.

Oregon already requires pills with pseudoephedrine to be kept behind the pharmacy counter. You know that Sudafed commercial, the one where all the people come in to talk to the pharmacist to find out what to take for a myriad of symptoms, and they are all told "Sudafed: Aisle 5"? Well, that shit don't happen here Poncho. Aisle 5 is reserved for extra condoms, or feet cream, or extra Ibuprofin. But you already have to get a pharmacist to hook you up in Oregon. And next year you may need a doctor as well. Unless, of course you sneak across the border.

Law enforcement experts are saying this won't solve the meth problem, which comes as not big fucking surprise since most of the meth on the West Coast is coming from mega labs operated by Mexican gangs. So, we'll just turn ordinary allergy and cold suffers into illegal drug seekers or abusers of the medical care system, if not criminals.

Possessing Sudafed would be a Class A misdemeanor, which would make it subject to up to 1 year in jail a $2,500 fine and suspension and/or revocation of driving privileges.

Do you think insurance companies will cover your doctors visit and prescription costs so you can score a box of Claritin? No.

Jesus Christ.

It will be easier to find meth than it will be to find a box of Sudafed. There is no doubt that methamphetamine is a major problem in Oregon and all across the country. But because no one can figure out how to fix the problem in the normal, war-on-drugs, tough-on-crime, lock-'em-up-and-throw-away-the-key mode, let's just make people with colds and allergies either suffer needlessly, incur unnecessary medical expenses or do something illegal.

House Bill 2485 is headed for the governor. And I'm headed to the drug store.

I need to stock up on NyQuil before the new law kicks in. While I'm at it I'm going to start scoring Sudafed and Claritin as well. It's time to start my next career as an over-the-counter drug pusher. I may still get a shot at retiring early.
Oregon legislature
New law
Pseudoephedrine
Methamphetamine

Who shall judge?

Hoss had a post that got me to thinking. He's been taking state mottos and rewriting them for the fun and amusement of himself and his blog readers. I learned on his blog that the state motto for the state where I was born, Nebraska, is "Equality Before the Law."

I probably knew this before. I wrote a report about Nebraska when I was in elementary school. I remember that I did the report, but I don't remember a damn thing that was in it.

But anyway, reading that motto reminded me of how Nebraska has been in the news because a federal judge, U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon, struck down a state constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage.

Now, having family in Nebraska, and having spent the first few years of my life there, I have no trouble believing that Nebraskans would vote for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. But I do find it very ironic that a state with a motto "Equality Before the Law" would attempt to outlaw equality.

So Judge Bataillon is merely making Nebraskans live up to their motto.

That's the bitch about mottos, slogans, mission statements, constitutions, etc. Ideology is hard to practice.

Republican Party mouthpiece and propaganda ho Sean Hannity, his guests and callers on his show have been whining about how this renegade judge could be allowed to overturn the will of the majority of Nebraskans. He has also lambasted "liberal" judges, like in the Terri Schiavo case for their arrogance at ignoring Congress.

But the other big topic of late on his show is the so-called "nuclear option" to end the filibuster in the Senate to block President Bush's nominations to federal courts. I can't help but wonder if Hannity ever gets confused talking out of both sides of his mouth.

Our system of government is not perfect, but it was designed pretty well in its imperfection. Congress, the courts and the president all have ways to check and balance the other, to hopefully prevent one branch of the government from oppressing the masses, or individual citizens. And the people also have a voice in who they elect. Not a bad deal, because lord knows there are many examples of the people, Congress, the courts or presidents doing things they shouldn't.

We are not a true democracy, and thank the forefathers for that! Because if we were many important things might never have happened. Slavery could still exist, or at the very least blacks may still not have the vote and segregation would still likely be the law of the land if the majority ruled. Women may ever have gotten the vote. Democrats may have swelled the size of government to the point of Big Brother or Republicans might be telling us all how to pray. Who knows what abuses, beyond those we already have endured, may have happened.

Personally, I think the Democrats should allow these judicial nomination votes to happen. Judges, whether liberal or conservative, are not anywhere near as partisan or politically motivated as politicians. Liberal judges have made some very conservative rulings, and conservative judges have been know to make some very liberal rulings. I doubt that conservative judicial nominees will be entirely beholden to Bush or Hannity or Republicans upon ascending to the bench. They don't have to raise massive campaign warchests every few years, and whore themselves out to special interests to keep their jobs. Or in Hannity's case, pander to advertisers and an audience for ratings.

We may have a difficult time, whether in Nebraska or elsewhere, achieving "Equality Before the Law", but it is a worthy and necessary goal. We need more practice at ideology and less partisan politics. And a little less whoring for cash might be a refreshing change as well.

But who am I to judge?

Politics
Blogging
Ideology

The governator

You've got to admire Arnold Schwarzenegger's pluck.

For those of you who don't live in California, the Terminator-star-turned-governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, delivered his State of the State address Wednesday night. It was a doozy.

Arnold wants to reform the way state legislative districts are drawn, wants to completely change the state budget system and wants to pay teachers, because education is such a big expense in the state budget, based on merit, not tenure. Oh, and he wants to make public pensions more like a 401(k) system than having a defined benefit. There are a few other reforms too, but those are some of the biggies.

The thing is, the things he wants to do are probably exactly what California needs. But the other thing is, none of it will probably ever happen.

Arnold is certainly no politician, because he still hasn't figured out how the game is played. And that's what politics are, just a game in which politicians, lobbyist and some public employees make too much money nursing off the public teat without doing much to earn it.

Thursday, the unions and others were screaming bloody murder before anyone really has much of an idea what the reforms might look like.

Good luck Arnold. You sure don't act like a politician. Now we'll see if your script can get out of development and into production.

It's going to be fun to watch!

Print no news before its time

President Ford is in the hospital. Or he was. He has been released already, according to what my newspaper is reportering online today. We knew he was there last night, but couldn't report it because we couldn't confirm it.

I say we knew it, because there were several strong hints and clues, but nothing solid enough to tell people in their morning paper. So, we had to hold off on the story until today.

Ford is the nation's oldest living former president, a position he assumed after the death of Ronald Reagan last year. Now there is plenty of speculation that Ford's health is rapidly declining. Hell, at 91, the man looks like he gets around pretty good to me, athough his doctors have told him not to travel any as much, if at all, anymore. He still gets around better than my grandmother who turned 90 last year. Ford didn't attend the opening of President Clinton's library in Arkansas, and he skipped out on a holiday tree lighting in Vail, which has led to the speculation about his declining health.

One article I found online has a writer predicting Ford will die this year.
Aaron Goldstein has a piece on the Web site www.intellectualconservative.com called "Ten things to watch for in 2005" and No. 9 is Ford kicking the bucket.

That all seems a bit morbid to me, predicting someone's death. But, with Ford's age, it's not like the guy is going out on a huge limb there.

I got the opportunity to meet President Ford a couple of years ago when he talked to our editorial board at the newspaper. This was after he had suffered a couple of small strokes at the 2000 GOP convention. His speech was a little slow and slurred, but he still had an amazaing grasp on world affairs and local issues. I hope I'm in half as good a shape if and when I reach my late 80s or early 90s.

I was too young to vote when Ford was in office and seeking election to the presidency in his own right in 1976. So, I don't know if I would have voted for the man or not. But I can say that I admire Ford and President Carter for the things they have done since they left the White House. Former President Gerald Ford and former first lady Betty Ford have been a tremendous asset to the Coachella Valley in particular and ambassadors of this community to the world. Rancho Mirage has the nickname "Playground of Presidents" but once Ford is gone the nickname will have to be the former playground of presidents, unless Clinton or one of the Bushes opts to start spending time out here.