Second Presidential Debate

As an Obama supporter, I was relieved that he did better in this debate and fought back on Romney's lies and misrepresentations. 

I thought Obama did well, but not as well as the pundits seem to think. For one thing, he could have done a much better job of tying Romney to the far right positions he's taken during the primary season. He could have done a better job of pointing out Romney's flip flops over the years as evidence that Romney seems to have no core beliefs and will likely be a pawn of the far right if he's elected President. Additionally, he didn't distill down the Republican position the way Biden did: given their history, who do you trust?  I also thought Obama had a tendency to be defensive about his administration rather than telling us what he would actually do in the next four years. What's Obama going to do differently if he gets re-elected? We don't know.

Following up on that, Romney's best moments were when he pointed out that Obama has had four years and hasn't improved things, that the economy is still not doing well.  However, I thought Romney came off as a bully. He started right off the bat, with the first question! He was arguing with Candy Crowley as soon as the thing started! I mean, come on, that's ridiculous.

I was disappointed that Obama didn't mention climate change in the discussion of energy policy and gas prices. I thought the argument about exploitation of natural resources on public lands was a bit obscure. Romney seemed to think everyone agrees that this is a good thing and Obama should have been doing this more. I thought it was a bit more controversial than that. No one mentioned that gas prices are highly dependent on the vagaries of a world market.  No one answered the actual question asked, either, for that matter.

I really don't understand what point Romney thought he was making when he pointed out that Obama said Benghazi was an act of terror the day after it happened. He acted like he was making some big "gotcha" moment. It made no sense. And what is the big deal anyway? I don't understand the supposed scandal over this. Does anyone really think there was some kind of cover-up? That's what the Republicans are implying, if not stating outright.

Romney had no answer to the question about pay equity for women. None. His response was that he tried to hire women in his administration in Massachusetts. Well, that's nice, but what about policies that will help women overall? Nothing. What about actually saying you support pay equity for women? Nope. Also, this phrase: "If women are going to be in the workforce..." Bad. Yes, Romney, of course they're "going to be in the work force"! Women have been in the workforce for a long time. Contrast this with Obama talking about women being breadwinners, which is a much more accurate characterization.

Romney's response to Obama bringing up contraception was terribly misleading. He said he thinks everyone should have access to contraception. "Access to contraception" is not the same thing as getting insurance coverage for contraception. You can have "access" to it, but it's meaningless if you can't afford it and your insurance doesn't cover it. That's the same thing as saying increased regulation of abortion clinics that essentially puts them out of business has no effect on women's right to an abortion. That right is meaningless if insurmountable hurdles are placed in front of it.

(maybe more thoughts later)

Excellent Rachel Maddow piece on John McCain and torture

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

CA Supreme Court upholds Prop 8 today

This is disappointing, but not unexpected and not all bad. Today the California Supreme Court upheld Prop 8, the ballot measure that limited marriage to straight couples. New York Times article here. The good part of the decision was that they upheld the thousands of same-sex marriages performed during the period before Prop 8 went into effect. This will surely throw a wrench into efforts to stop what seems like a steady march towards legality of gay marriage everywhere. There are now 18,000 valid gay marriages in California. These couples will demand recognition of their marriages by the federal government and other states, undoubtedly leading to many more lawsuits challenging anti-gay marriage laws in those jurisdictions.

Of course, Californians still can enter into legally sanctioned civil unions, with some attendant benefits, unlike residents of most other states, including the one I live in.

Here's the ad released by the marriage equality group Courage Campaign minutes after the decision was made public. Nice song by Regina Spektor.



Anti-Prop 8 demonstrators arrested in San Francisco, including two men who "stood for about an hour in the intersection calmly kissing while demonstrators all around them screamed, "Prop. 8 will go down, San Francisco (is a) big queer town" and other slogans." (emphasis added - these guys have stamina!)

Pam's House Blend (politically-oriented GLBT blog) links to a boatload of organizations' reactions to the decision.

Demonstrations across the country are planned for tonight. Click on that link for further info.

Word of the Day

The Word of the Day is "jejune": according to the American Heritage Dictionary, lacking in nutrition, insubstantial; not interesting, dull; lacking maturity, puerile; from the Latin, jejunus, hungry. What a great word! I love the sound of it. Yesterday, New York Times columnist Frank Rich described Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal as "jejune", which prompted me to look up the word. Jindal provided the Republican response to Obama's address to Congress this past week. Rich accurately described Jindal's speech as follows:

The Louisiana governor, alternately smug and jejune, articulated precisely the ideology — those G.O.P. “policies” in the Times/CBS poll — that Americans reject: the conviction that government is useless and has no role in an emergency. Given that the most mismanaged federal operation in modern memory was inflicted by a Republican White House on Jindal’s own state, you’d think he’d change the subject altogether.

But like all zealots, Jindal is oblivious to how nonzealots see him. Pleading “principle,” he has actually turned down some $100 million in stimulus money for Louisiana. And, as he proudly explained on “Meet the Press” last weekend, he can’t wait to be judged on “the results” of his heroic frugality.

Good luck with that. He’s rejecting aid for a state that ranks fourth in children living below the poverty line and 46th in high school graduation rates, while struggling with a projected budget shortfall of more than $1.7 billion.

The Ecstasy and the Agony

It's hard to believe the Republicans think their position of rejecting the stimulus bill has any appeal. We've been living with 8 years of government "non-intervention," resulting in our current crisis. More of the same isn't going to cut it. That seems insane.

Change continues - Obama Reverses More Bush Policies

Obama has already made some great moves to undo Bush's policies. It's exciting to see a new announcement practically every day.

1. Obama Directs Regulators to Tighten Auto Rules. During the Bush years, some states wanted to pass more liberal laws than the federal government. The feds argued that federal law superseded state law in these instances. Now, Obama has enabled states to impose more strict regulations on vehicle emissions than required by federal law.

2. "President Obama repealed rules...that restricted federal money for international organizations that promote or provide abortions overseas, sweeping aside a pillar of the social policy architecture of George W. Bush’s presidency." Obama Reverses Rules on U.S. Aid for Abortion This policy has been batted about by Republicans and Democrats since Bush I, I believe. It was sad to see Bush 2 reinstate it. Now it's a relief to see Obama restore sanity to US aid in this area. From the NYTimes: "The restrictions Mr. Obama lifted on Friday barred the United States Agency for International Development from providing money to any international nongovernmental organization that “performs or actively promotes abortion as a method of family planning” in foreign countries, and covered a wide range of activities, including providing advice, counseling or information regarding abortion. The restrictions did not apply to counseling for abortions in the case of rape, incest or danger to the life of the pregnant woman."

3. I mentioned these earlier, but it's worth mentioning again, as this is a huge development. Obama Reverses Key Bush Security Policies "Mr. Obama signed executive orders closing the detention camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, within a year; ending the Central Intelligence Agency’s secret prisons; and requiring all interrogations to follow the noncoercive methods of the Army Field Manual." An open democracy with a bill of rights should not have implemented these policies to begin with - it was embarrassing.

Here's the Washington Post's rundown of Obama's changes: Effort to Roll Back Bush's Policies Continues

The Further Adventures of Joe the Plumber

Joe the Plumber becomes Mideast war correspondent for a conservative website. Incredible. What are his qualifications?

Illinois Senate Seat Circus Continues

Burris is Blocked from Taking Senate Seat This is so dramatic. Apparently Roland Burris, appointed to replace Obama by alleged felon Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, walked into the Senate today and presented his credential to the Senate Secretary, who denied him the Senate seat. What a mess! It was also the day the new Congress was sworn in.

This is depressing

Bill Richardson withdrawing from Commerce Secretary cabinet appointment This is disconcerting. I've always liked Bill Richardson. There must be some pretty bad evidence if he's withdrawing completely. Or Obama didn't want to fight for him.

Blagojevich Picks Obama Successor

Wow, this is incredible. What hubris! I'm surprised Blagojevich got anyone to agree to be appointed by him. I'd think everyone would be afraid of his taint. Defiant Governor Picks Obama Successor

Truth is Stranger than Fiction: random odd news

* Caroline Kennedy interested in Hillary Clinton's N.Y. Senate Seat

For some reason, I find this annoying. Is she qualified for Senator? Does every Kennedy have to run for office? She’s a lawyer – so is everyone. She’s on a bunch of boards, she’s written a few books that don’t sound very weighty or important. Her main qualification seems to be that she’s JFK’s daughter. This quote sums it up: "United States Representative Gary Ackerman, a Queens Democrat, said last week that he did not know what Ms. Kennedy’s qualifications were, “except that she has name recognition — but so does J. Lo.”" Trivia note: she went to a private high school in my home town. I recall seeing her once with long, shaggy 70's hair parted in the middle.

* Iraqi Journalist Throws Shoe at Bush and Denounces Him on TV as a "Dog" I'ts hard to know what more to say about this, except a giant LOLOL. But I actually like Bush's plug for free speech: "He also called the incident a sign of democracy, saying, “That’s what people do in a free society, draw attention to themselves,” as the man’s screaming could be heard outside." Reaction among Iraqis was varied, as this N.Y.Times article thoroughly documents.

Dick Cheney says Guantanamo should stay open as long as the "war on terror" continues. As victory in the "war on terror" is undefineable, which Cheney admits ("Nobody knows [when the "war on terror" will end], I guess that means forever. He also doesn't think harsh interrogation techniques such as waterboarding went too far.

McCain now says he can't promise to support Palin for president . Just further evidence that his pick of Palin for VP was pure politics and he really didn't think she was qualified to be president.

First bees, now acorns. More environmental creepiness: a shortage of acorns in some areas of the East Coast. (Still plenty where I live.)

Superficial Me/ Hillary Clinton

Why do I start losing interest in politics as soon as the election is over? My eyes are starting to glaze over when I look at the political headlines. Apparently I'm one of those superficial people only interested in the horse race. Sigh.

Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. Well, this is very interesting. Somehow I hadn't anticipated Obama would appoint her to his cabinet. And in such an important position! I guess we all have to hope flying into Yugoslavia under non-existent gunfire was adequate preparation. Thomas Friedman had an interesting column about how the best secretaries of state had very close relationships with the president they served, such that other countries would know that whatever the Secretary of State said was the president's position, that the SoS had the president's full backing. He wondered whether Obama and Hillary Clinton could have such a relationship. Madam Secretary?, November 18, 2008. I guess we'll find out.

Sarah Palin Gets Weirder and Weirder

Palin Blames Bush Policies for GOP Defeat, A.P., November 10, 2008. Ya think? Swift turn-around there.

Obama's Position on Gay Marriage is Disturbing

“If Elected: Hopefuls Differ as They Reject Gay Marriage”, New York Times, Nov. 1, 2008.

I’m a supporter of gay marriage. I have a same-sex partner and children, so the issue directly affects me. I’ve never looked carefully at Barack Obama’s position on gay marriage. I’ve always supported him and knew I would vote for him in the primary and, with luck, the general election. His position on gay marriage was not going to change my mind on that score. However, this article in yesterday’s New York Times gives me pause. The article describes Obama and McCain’s positions on gay marriage and why they hold them. I knew that Obama opposed gay marriage and this didn’t surprise me. I don’t think any candidate for national office could support gay marriage and expect to be elected in this country, sadly. But apparently his reasons for not supporting it are religious and I find that kind of disturbing. I suppose because it seems irrational. And Obama seems supremely rational – that’s one of the things I love about him (after 8 years of irrational floundering in the White House). But you can’t reason with “God”. It’s like passing the buck, particularly for an attorney and former constitutional law professor.

According to the article, “Mr. Obama believes that marriage is a sacred union, a blessing from God, and one that is intended for a man and a woman exclusively”. This just seems very inconsistent with his generally liberal views. I’m a little skeptical that his position is simply politically advantageous rather than sincerely held. I’m not sure what to think about the whole thing. Anyway, if one believes in gay rights, that people shouldn’t be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, that people should be able to realize the full potential of their lives, including long-term committed relationships and procreation, why does Obama believe that “God” suddenly draw the line at “marriage”? It’s even more strange when you consider that his own parents were personally affected by anti-miscegenation laws that prevented them from marrying in certain states. The article quotes Obama as saying “Look, when my parents got married in 1961, it would have been illegal for them to be married in a number of states in the South...So, obviously, this is something that I understand intimately. It’s something that I care about.” The article goes on to say that, “At that point, [Obama} veered onto legal rights, saying that — both in 1961 and today — it was more important to fight for nondiscrimination laws and employment protections than for marriage.”

Well, in my opinion, that’s fudging it a bit. That issue goes more to tactics rather than being a rationale for not believing in gay marriage. It’s certainly legitimate to argue that now is not the time to fight for gay marriage. But what Obama is saying is that, for him, that time will never come, he doesn’t believe in gay marriage.
Going back to the religious basis for Obama’s position, the article describes an encounter Obama had with a lesbian: “In one of his books, “The Audacity of Hope,” however, Mr. Obama describes a conversation with a lesbian supporter who became upset when he cited his religious views to explain his opposition. “She felt that by bringing religion into the equation, I was suggesting that she, and others like her, were somehow bad people,” he wrote. “I felt bad, and told her so in a return call. As I spoke to her, I was reminded that no matter how much Christians who oppose homosexuality may claim that they hate the sin but love the sinner, such a judgment inflicts pain on good people.”

Well, duh. And I agree. The “hate the sin, love the sinner” argument is utter crap and completely hypocritical. So...Obama, what gives? How does he square this “God” argument with his reasoning mind, or is he just a typically hypocritical politician who actually does support gay marriage, but isn’t about to say that publicly?

And McCain? Who really cares? Hopefully all of his positions will be moot after Tuesday.

Guest blogger Dr. Carla Seal-Wanner on voting absentee in NYC

Guest blogger Dr. Carla Seal-Wanner has a report on her experience voting absentee in New York City. Sounds like she had a wonderful experience! And, based on my personal experience, performing any bureaucratic activity in New York City is not usually pleasant, so kudos to the state employees at 200 Varick St. (Photo was taken by someone voting in 2008 primaries in NYC, unfortunately at 45 Wall St., not at 200 Varick St. Posted at New York Times Polling Place Photo Project.)

Trivia about 200 Varick St. I was unsuccessfully looking for a photo of this building to spice up this post, but I did find out that the building also houses B & J Magazine, Designers and Illustrators Christmas Card Co., a Chipotle Grill (when I lived in NYC a million years ago, there would never have been a chain restaurant at this location!), Debs Catering, Omnicom Advertising, H&H Woodworking, and is the mailing address for S.O.B's, a world music club across the street where I went for a couple of dates in the early 90's! Also, this item appeared in a police blotter from 2003: Varick St. fire:
A man working on aviation instruments in a laboratory at 200 Varick St. just south of Houston St. spilled a small amount of a highly flammable chemical onto a hotplate on Sun., Nov. 30, causing temporary evacuation of the building. The man sustained minor facial burns when about two ounces of the spilled liquid, benzyl peroxide, flared up.


Today I had the exhilarating experience of voting absentee in New York City. Yes, exhilarating! I applied for an absentee ballot when I decided to take the month off and work for the candidate of my choice in a battleground state through Election Day. Alas, it did not arrive in the mail so I drove back from New Hampshire to pick up an application and cast my vote. I could not have anticipated the uplifting experience I had ahead of me.

As I walked into the old marble lobby of 200 Varick Street and attempted to sign in at the front desk, an older African American gentleman with the impossible task of directing the steady stream of people called to me, pointing to the elevators, “No need to sign in today…Tenth Floor, Board of Elections?” I replied; “How’d you guess?” “It’s all the rage these days, My Dear!” he exuberantly responded. As I laughed and sardine-squeezed into the elevator he said, “Now get your ID ready, because I’m sure they’ re going to make you prove you are old enough to vote!” “Well, thank you for making my day,” I flirted back, knowing his gift of cordial flattery would be bestowed on many other delighted woman who had been voting for at least thirty-four years. As the heavy doors closed, sending this multicultural gaggle of New Yorkers to do our democratic duty, I muttered that I was surprised to see a crowd early in the morning. They concurred with a tone tacitly admitting that our plans for getting in and out fast were doomed.

These worries were confirmed as I turned in my absentee ballot application to wait for it to be processed and took one of the last empty seats in a room full of -- I’m guessing … 8 rows across by 12 chairs deep … approximately 100 voters ? Yikes! One hour and a half later, I had read the NYT’s thoroughly, along with Michael Chabon’s perspicacious Obama & The Conquest of Denver and Joseph Lelyveld’s shrewdly disturbing John & Sarah in St. Paul in The New York Review of Books (fair and balanced reading?) while actively eavesdropping on the fascinating reasons folks revealed to each other about why they were voting absentee.

Sitting around me in the laminated chair-desks we all suffered numb buttocks from in our student pasts were lawyers who were going to be poll watchers across the country; students and other citizens of all ages who, like me, were going to battleground states to work for a certain candidate; workers whose time shifts prohibit them from voting; executives who will be out of town for a meeting; elderly voters anxious about navigating the long lines anticipated with an unprecedented turnout; a Columbian man that recently became an American citizen who has to leave town to care for an ill relative but is determine to cast his vote for the very first time; and many others who offered up exceptional reasons for voting early. By the time my name was called to collect the precious approved ballot and cast my vote, we had shared salient life stories related to the hopes and dreams we have for this election. Extraordinarily, in a room full of busy New Yorkers no one complained rudely about the long wait!

The fellowship I discovered in this room packed full of citizens from all walks of life was not the only unexpected delight of this civic endeavor. The Board of Election Officials, notoriously (perhaps unfairly?) gruff by reputation, fulfilled their critically important administrative responsibilities with a reassuring competence and grace. Without patronizing they dutifully instructed us to be careful to follow directions exactly when filling in our ballots and properly seal the envelope afterwards. Listening so intently I may have momentarily transitioned into slow motion, determined not to make a stupid error that could cancel my vote. Complicit in our raw awareness that getting this election correct is paramount, both the teacher and student exhibited a generous dose of patience, respect and warmth. This alliance producing confidence that there will be no hanging, butterfly or any other sort of rejected chads at 200 Varick Street, NY. “Not this time, not this year…there is too much at stake,” to paraphrase one of the presidential candidates.

As I handed in my sealed ballot, the cheerful (I’m not exaggerating) official who took it from my hand, smiled and thanked me. “No, thank you, for the good work!” I returned, pleasantly disarmed. Walking back toward the elevator, dodging the next rainbow-colored crowd arriving to repeat my democratic exercise, the pride I felt was reflected back at them in my tear-filled eyes. Man, my inner choked-up voice was saying, this election really is like none other in my lifetime.

I exited the building under its downtown shadow, reached for my cell phone and called my college sophomore daughter to make plans for our drive back to Belknap County, New Hampshire to help Get Out The Vote.

Dr. Carla Seal-Wanner, children’s educational media expert, formerly Director of Columbia University’s Graduate Program in Instructional Technology and Media, current Education Director of ClimateCartoons.org.

Counting Your Eggs Before They Hatch: Poll

poll by twiigs.com

I live in a swing state for the first time!

I can't believe it. I live in a swing state for the first time in my life. I live in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C. Amazingly, Virginia is actually a swing state in this election. I've lived in Massachusetts, Chicago, New York City, (all liberal), and Atlanta, Georgia (Atlanta votes Democratic, whereas Georgia as a whole is obviously extremely Republican). So my vote in presidential elections was always relatively pointless - it wasn't going to change the outcome. It feels kind of weird to have my vote actually make a difference. Perhaps that explains why my Obama yard sign was stolen the other night, at the same time that several McCain yard signs appeared on the other side of the road. Not a coincidence, I'm thinking.

McCain Forced to Fight for Virginia, Washington Post article, Oct. 17, 2008.