Great Ann Coulter clip

This was a great Ann Coulter clip from satirist Leah Hoffman, the same girl behind the Obama Girl video. Enjoy!

The Right-Wing Facebook

Sometimes, you just need to laugh. The People for the American Way & RightWingWatch.org know this. Thus, they created "The Right-Wing Facebook", a facebook complete with profiles, status updates, groups, etc., of prominent conservatives, including several Presidential candidates.

Check out these status'. Currently:

Mitt Romney is learning the "lingo" of the "information superhighway."

Fred Thompson is napping.

John McCain is looking for spare change between couch cushions.

Brilliant. I love it.

More Press for Campus Dems

Campus Dems have been all over the Daily Nexus this week (or at least in two articles). We can stay there too if we continue to build and maintain coalitions with other organizations on campus. I know Mandy is working on a rally for the Employee Non-Discrimination Act in conjunction with Queer Student Union, Queer Commission and other groups. Let's keep it up.

http://www.dailynexus.com/article.php?a=14873

Know Your Right Wing Speakers: Domino's Pizza

If you've ever wondered why Campus Democrats don't buy Domino's, check out this article at Campus Progress about Tom Monaghan, the Domino's founder and uber catholic-conservative who has poured millions into pro-life organizations, founded radically conservative schools, and supported several other conservative ventures.

http://campusprogress.org/rws/2026/know-your-right-wing-speakers-tom-monaghan

Corporate Democrats?

Paul Krugman's op-ed piece in the NYTimes today pointed out what hass been on my mind for quite some time now: despite the "progressive" platforms and lavish talk put forth by the top presidential candidates, will the system really change? Or will we just see the same old-same old politics again? Personally, I'm tired of all the BS inside the beltway, and want politics in this country to change dramatically.

"I’d put it this way: many progressives, myself included, hope that the next president will be another F.D.R. But we worry that he or she will turn out to be another Grover Cleveland instead — better-intentioned and much more competent than the current occupant of the White House, but too dependent on lobbyists’ money to seriously confront the excesses of our new Gilded Age."

When the Democratic President is inaugurated in January of 2009 (road trip anyone?), there needs to be sweeping changes to the way this country is run. In order to effectively handle the climate crisis, provide universal healthcare, and take care of the situation in Iraq, the political machine must change. Like Krugman says, we need a new New Deal. But, with Democrats getting deeper and deeper into the pockets of large scale corporations, will we really see that change?

Hillary Clinton seems to be the corporate darling during the primaries, and it unnerves me how much money she is raising from these big time lobbyists... John Edwards on the other hand, doesn't accept any money from federal lobbyists. Hmm...

the House didn't have the votes to overturn the veto

Pelosi is so awesome. Even after they couldn't override it she is going to keep fighting for it!

Good opinion piece about next week

You may have noticed I'm a little passionate about this issue. As it applies to this campus, "Terrorism Awareness Week" will include a filming of the propaganda piece Obsession on Tuesday night and speaker Dennis Prager on Thursday. There has been a significant outcry on campus regarding these events and there will be several counter-events which will focus on educating students about the true nature of Islam. Anyone who would like to know more about these counter-events, shoot me an email at amw01@umail.ucsb.edu . Also, there will be a meeting regarding the planning this Sunday.

Stephen Colbert Running For President?!

Stephen officially announced he is running for President in South Carolina as a favorite son. What's going to happen next?!

'Islamofascism' Awareness Week

Next week, the College Republicans, along with several other organizations, are hosting Islamofascism awareness week. 'Islamofascism' is a made up thing. This week of awareness cites the oppression of homosexuals and women in Muslim countries as main points to draw attention to their events. In reality, this is a weakly veiled attempt to spread fear and hatred, while promoting propaganda for an invasion of Iran. I urge anyone who reads this to just take a minute to stand up to these injustices in any way you can. There are several counter-events hosted by the Multi-Cultural Center, Muslim Student Association, and other Muslim student groups. On a more basic level, there may be an increased hostility toward Muslim students on our campus surrounding these events, and as fellow human beings, it is our responsibility to stand up for justice. Thanks for listening, and if you are free Monday October 22, or Tuesday October 23, please stop by one of the counter events.

Salam,
Amanda

Bad Blood

Breaking news!!!! Apparently Barrack Obama and Dick Cheney are cousins. Not that this matters at all, but I thought it was kind of hilarious. My favorite part is the comment that Obama's publicist made in response to the whole thing.

Strike in Paris

Yo! It's your Publicity Chair checking in from Paris! I'm kind of upset because this thursday, 18 october, I have to walk to school. And it will probably take an hour. and I hate waking up early! gah. But it's cool because I get to experience one of Paris's famous strikes! RAPT (the paris metro/bus workers) and SNCF (the train), along with gas and electricity workers, are going on strike because Sarkozy, the new president, is trying to take away from their rights! They are striking for their right to strike (apparently they now have to notify their employer 48 hours in advanced if they plan on taking part in a strike), and for their "special regimes," which include being able to retire at 55! None of the busses/metros or trains will be running.
But I guess waking up early is worth it. Vive la socialisme!!

http://www.workersliberty.org/node/9332 (it's a petite article, I promise)

"Nightmare with No End in Sight"

From the Center for American Progress Action Fund Progress Report

AND the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/12/washington/12cnd-general.html?_r=2&hp&oref=login&oref=slogin

Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, now retired, was the top American Commander in Iraq from 2003-2004. He has declared the war in Iraq, a "Nightmare with No End in Sight."

Not so coincidentally, Sanchez is also featured in the new documentary, "No End in Sight", which I was able to catch at a special premier in Washington DC over the summer.

Let's just say if you're having a good day, don't go out and see this film. But you should go out and see the documentary. (In fact, it is rumored that Campus Dems are hoping to bring the film and speakers to UCSB in winter quarter....shhh)

Sanchez is quoted: "There was been a glaring and unfortunate display of incompetent strategic leadership within our national leaders... National leadership continues to believe that victory can be achieved by military power alone. Continued manipulations and adjustments to our military strategy will not achieve victory. The best we can do with this flawed approach is stave off defeat.”

While painful, exposing how this war has been utterly mismanaged and led by GW, is essential to catch a glimpse of the "true" situation in Iraq and attempt to figure out where, oops, I mean, WHAT to do next. That was either the coffee or the Republican rhetoric talking.

"Poor Kids First." Wait, what?

At least Jon Stewart can make Dubya's frustrating veto of expanding SCHIP, entertaining. Compliments to the folks at http://www.losethelabel.org/ that brought this clip to my attention. Enjoy!

Bush makes false claims about Congress' attempt to shore up SCHIP

As you all are probably aware, one of the most contentious and relevant issues to Americans today is the issue of healthcare. There's a good chance you've all heard the statistics about how many American families do or do not have coverage of any kind. Well, as expected, the rhetoric from both sides of the issue has begun to heat up in this latest partisan debate as the Democrats attempt to provide coverage through a variety of forms of legislation(many now calling for universal coverage not unlike many European states and other modern industrialized countries like Canada or Australia), while the Republicans continue to espouse the notion that increasing government spending of any kind in the way of health care, is a step in the direction of "socialized medicine," a position anti-thetical to their principled "smaller government."

However, not suprisingly, the Republican rhetoric about "socialized medicine" being the first step toward what I can only imagine to be a totalitarian regime run by a dictatorial surgeon has been expanded now to include even moderate expansions of existing federally funded state health insurance coverage for children, whom (I'm guessing in the minds of at least this Administration) are clearly planning a communist revolution now that they are going to grow up healthier thanks to greater access to health services.

Now I'm the first person to claim that I know little about the various plans put forth by even the most ardent Democrats regarding healthcare. When you are unable to afford it, it really doesn't matter what the plans are... they are still out of your price range. I imagine I'm not unlike many Americans in that sense (despite the most basic of services that are admittedly available to me as a UCSB student -most services of which I am still relatively ignorant of). Not being either an expert or one of the insured, I've taken it upon myself this year to truly understand how health care works, why it doesn't, and whether or not the Democrats are in fact what the Republicans would like to make them out to be - power hungry, immoral corrupt bureaucrats whose interests include taking freedoms away from the American people and threatening our very way of life. Now again, I'm no expert... but if any of you thought I just described Alberto Gonzales, the Department of Homeland Security, or anyone else in the existing Administration, then you're as reluctant as I am to buy into the criticism pointed at the Democrats for their latest moves to fix the State Children's Health Insurance Plan - SCHIP.

What I can say with some authority is that when you expand coverage by 3.8 million uninsured children with modest subsidies ($35-50 billion extra) in funding to existing infrastructure, you're probably not bringing down the market system, or drawing down the $11 trillion in GDP this country produces annually, or setting the foundations for a communist regime. (Keep in mind, the Democrats see the majority of this subsidy coming from increased cigarette sales tax to the tune of $.61 a pack - sorry smokers.) Seeing as how none of our current European allies and industrialized neighbors who endorse socialized medicine on a much broader scale haven't collapsed into Stalinist-like regimes, chances are neither will we. In fact, a good argument could be made that the healthier the children in this country, the greater the chance of increased productivity over the course of their lives. Another good argument to counter the claim by many Republicans that this funding is temporary since a .60 cent spike in cigarette packs might lead to fewer smokers thus eventually less funding for the program, would be that fewer smokers means fewer health-related diseases that in fact, cost the average taxpayer more (think cancer and heart disease) than it would cost them to pay .60 cents for everytime they drove their car.

But as is par for the political course, our rationally-challenged president, for the political interest of those who have the most to lose from ethical moves in this direction (i.e. the tobacco lobby), would have you believe that shoring up healthcare for children would somehow A: increase the tax burden for families who apparently don't already have worse financial woes relating to medical costs (though the bill doesn't actually place tax burdens on the average family, only the average smoker), and B: cause an exodus of existing privately insured families to give up their superior coverage (think Kaiser Permanente) through private insurance in favor of standardized government care (your local planned parenthood). If you believe this, you probably think Iraq is going smoothly. His views have thus far reflected the general Republican position on the matter, and since giving children greater health coverage is clearly the beginning of the end for America, Bush is "wielding his veto pen" in order to ensure the safety of our democracy. Now while I'd call "shenanigans!," perhaps it's best I provide you with some information to help you make your own judgements on the matter. So here's a couple of links to help explain Congress' attempt to shore up and increase the SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Program):

http://www.cbpp.org/9-17-07health.htm

^This is a site you'll see me reference often. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (http://www.cbpp.org/) These guys are amazing and are used by most economists and policymakers as a source of non-partisan or independent statistical modeling. I've personally met Paul Krugman, economist and columnist for the NYT, and asked him what site he and other colleagues used to source from. They go here. Their only competitor is a conservative thinktank called the Heritage Foundation, whom Krugman chastised for skewing their numbers in the statistical models they use to confirm partisan preconceptions. It's long, but you will be doing yourself a big favor by reading it. Where this site excels is that their analysis is not too thick to read.. high schoolers could get it.

http://www.factcheck.org/bushs_false_claims_about_childrens_health_insurance.html

^Here's factcheck's review. This one will pretty much tell you how Bush's press conference was one of the most misleading interpretations of the new Congressional bill. Again, an independent perspective of the facts.

http://www.cbpp.org/9-25-07health2.htm

^Another post from the Center that answers the critique the White House has made in the last week over this whole debate.


http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm1635.cfm

^Here's that conservative think-tank, the Heritage Foundation's position on the SCHIP. This will give you general arguments they have that somewhat concur with Bush's public criticism. However, as you read this, you'll note that even Factcheck.org dispels a number of the assumptions this site puts forth. Which is sad given that this article was put forth by a PhD. who doesn't seem to address the obvious misgivings that the non-partisan Factcheck researchers did. See what happens when you get tenure?

More to come on this one gang.. I'll stop now since my first post has become an abridged novel. I'll leave you with this thought. Why is the political party that advocates morality so without it when it comes to funding children's insurance programs that have been proven effective and efficient and simply need to be expanded through appropriate funding?