Angry

I’m angry. Deeply, profoundly, angry.

I’m just a guy. A sixty-year-old, white, middle-class, American guy. I’m married, I work for a living, and I pay my share of withholding, Social Security, and Medicare taxes every two weeks. I spend more time than I should looking at my 401K, calculating and re-calculating how much longer I have to work before I can comfortably retire. I have privilege, no doubt, but I’m not special. I’m just a guy.

I have a couple of work deadlines this week, I need a haircut, and tomorrow, I’m driving a friend to a medical procedure. On Saturday, my husband and I are going to a friend’s baby shower, and on Sunday, I’ll probably pay a few bills and do a load of laundry while I’m watching the NFL playoffs. There are a few other chores around the house I need to do this weekend, and I definitely won’t end up doing them. 

I’m just a guy and those are the petty details of my life. I imagine they aren’t so different from yours. Maybe you have kids to manage or an out-of-town trip to plan, maybe the details of your errands, pleasures, and commitments diverge a bit from mine, but at the core, we’re probably more alike than we are different.  We do our best each week, and we hope it's enough. 

Here's the thing—on top of all that, we shouldn’t have to wake up each day and wonder what fuckery our nation was up to overnight. We shouldn't find ourselves hesitant to turn on the nightly news after work, because we worry that it will drive up our blood pressure. We shouldn't have to keep our government in sharp, constant focus, every single day. It’s exhausting, unnecessary, and hurtful, and it leaves me angry. Deeply, profoundly, angry.

I am angry at Donald Trump for his blatant depravity and at the GOP for its craven soullessness. I am angry at the Democratic Party for its ineptitude, for the collective inability of its leadership to recognize that this moment in history is not like others, for its failure to see that this moment calls for something deeper, wider, and bolder than politics as usual.

I am angry with those who have told me since 2015 that I was overreacting, and I am angry with myself for not reacting like our government could actually become as horrible, shameful, and dangerous as it has.

I am angry at America for not knowing better, not doing better, and not being better. 

I’m angry. Deeply, profoundly, angry. But that is not enough.

I’m just a guy. A white, middle class, American guy, who throughout his sixty years, has seen and heard and learned about life, human nature, and America. And now, when I’d rather be pleasantly preparing for retired life, I must instead spend countless days putting this knowledge to use, figuring out how I can best help, and contributing, in whatever ways I'm able, to the effort to defeat hatred and tyranny, and to restore democracy and decency.  

One last thing that's become clear to me—no one is coming to our rescue. So, be angry. Be deeply, profoundly angry. Be dismayed at the horror, outraged at the unfairness, and be afraid, if you must…and then do what you can do. I can make this better, and so can you.

Hey Democrats - We Need All the Friends We Can Get

Republican Senator John McCain (AZ) released a statement yesterday criticizing President Trump's pardon of former Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In his statement, McCain noted that the pardon of Arpaio, who was "found guilty of criminal contempt for continuing to illegally profile Latinos," undermined Trump's claim to respect the rule of law. This was maybe not the strongest condemnation of the pardon (McCain didn't call the President a racist as many others have), but the Senator's statement was criticism nonetheless. And, of course, this also wasn't McCain's first public opposition to some of the President's most disgraceful decisions. McCain was also among the first to speak out against Trump's Muslim ban, and when the President tweeted his intent to bar transgender Americans from serving in the military, McCain responded the same day opposing the ban and saying that transgender soldiers "should be treated as the patriots they are."

Trump and Arpaio (Photo: Mary Altaffer/AP)

Since the release of McCain's statement about Arpaio, I've had discussions with other liberals, both online and in real life, who argued that Senator McCain's repeated condemnations of Trump were essentially just "hot air." In these conversations, my fellow liberals argue that McCain, and others in the GOP who periodically speak out against the President, are all talk, and that when the rubber meets the road, when it comes down to Congressional votes, these anti-Trump GOP windbags simply fall in line the President.

Well, okay. There's truth to the accusation that GOP Trump critics frequently, if not almost always, vote in line with the President's policy positions. Check for yourself in this FiveThirtyEight.com Congressional vote tracker. The tracker shows the "Trump Score" (the percentage of time each member of Congress votes in line with the President), and various columns in the chart allow you to sort by political party, ascending or descending "Trump Score," etc.

If you drill down to the specifics in the tracker, you'll find that out of 52 Republican Senators, only Senator Susan Collins (ME) votes AGAINST Trump more than John McCain. By contrast, no Republican Senator votes more WITH Trump than Florida's Marco Rubio. Other GOP politicians who have been regularly outspoken against Trump, Senators like Ben Sasse (NE), Jeff Flake (AZ), Lindsey Graham (SC), and Bob Corker (TN), tend toward the bottom of the Republican "vote in line with Trump" list, but even among these more "independent-minded" Senators, the percentage of time they vote with Trump tends to be in the low to mid 90s. It's true, then — when voting on bills in Congress, these Trump critics tend to vote in favor of policies the President supports. So, what do we make of this? Maybe all this public Trump opposition is just GOP politicians talking out of both sides of their mouths? Maybe their criticism is nothing more than grandstanding for the cameras? Maybe they take principled positions on CNN, but not in the halls of Congress?

Or as one Twitter friend proposed, maybe most of the bills that have come up for votes in the Senate, excluding the healthcare bill which was defeated, have been on "standard line Republican legislation." More importantly, maybe the bills upon which the Senate has voted don't reflect the most heinous and reprehensible things the President has said or done. Let's face it, when the President has thrown the real red meat to his base (things like exiting the Paris Climate Agreement, attempting the Muslim ban and the transgender military ban, the Joe Arpaio pardon), he has done so unilaterally through executive power. He has not enlisted the support of Congress for such actions because he knows he wouldn't have it. In fact, when he's attempted to make good on the most despicable and hurtful elements of his campaign rhetoric, and when he needed Congressional approval to do so, he has failed. That's why Obamacare is still the law of the land, and there is little, if any, progress on a border wall, paid for by Mexico or anyone else.

I've dedicated a fair amount of this article to "defending" some Republicans in Congress, but that is not my ultimate intent. The bigger picture is this....

When the President supports traditional GOP positions, Republicans in Congress will, of course, vote in favor of those policies. When the President unilaterally takes executive actions that fly in the face of core American values like fairness and equality, some Republican leaders are vocal in their opposition to the President and we should not criticize those efforts.

When Republican opponents of the President speak out against his most egregious social, cultural, and political transgressions, those of us on the left must resist the urge to hurl "hot air" or hypocrisy accusations. When someone from the GOP steps forward to criticize the President for something appalling, outrageous, and un-American that he's done or said, we need to recognize and appreciate these rebukes for what they are, statements of disapproval and condemnation.

Are there enough Republicans, Congressional or otherwise, stepping forward to oppose the daily attacks and abuses we suffer from Donald J. Trump? Hell no. And that's exactly why we can't afford to alienate those who do. We need to help more Americans recognize Trump's assault on democratic institutions (voting rights, the free press, the judiciary, need I go on?), and we must act in ways that encourage Trump opponents of all political stripes to speak out.

There will, no doubt, be countless future attempts by this Administration to enact into law things that those on the left (and many on the right) find unequivocally wrongheaded, unfair, and even disturbing. There is also an increasing likelihood that ongoing investigations of potential Trump campaign violations of federal law will escalate and possibly lead to criminal prosecutions, and even Presidential impeachment. In all cases, it will be helpful to have voices from across the political spectrum who are not afraid to speak truth to power. When it comes down to it, our most fierce and robust opposition to Trump exists not because he represents traditional Republican values, but because he tramples on fundamental American values like equality, decency, and democracy. In our fight to salvage these principles, we need all the friends we can get.

What Would You Take?

Salma (name changed) fled Syria with the ring her mother
gave her on her death bed more than 80 years ago.

Posted By: Jeff McKown

In March 2011 the Syrian people began to gather and demand the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad, whose family has ruled their country for forty years. After the government responded to the protests by open firing on demonstrators, the uprising grew into a full-fledged civil war.

In the two years since, more than 70,000 people have lost their lives in the civil war, and more than one million Syrians have sought refuge in other countries.

Imagine that tomorrow you were forced to flee your home. You can take almost nothing with you. What would you take?

Photographer Brian Sokol posed that question to refugees from Syria, Sudan, and other troubled spots around the globe. Some of the profound images his question generated are shown below.

Alia (name changed), fled Daraa, Syria with her wheelchair.
Image: Brian Sokol 

May (name changed), fled Damascus, Syria with her bracelets.
Image: Brian Sokol

Ahmed (name changed), fled Syria with his cane.
Image: Brian Sokol

Ahmed Sadik, fled his village in Sudan with his pet monkey.
Image: Brian Sokol

You can see Brian Sokol's complete (and stunning) photo essay here.

Facts About Jobs Before and Since Obama (September 2012 - Election Edition)

UPDATE (NOV 4 2012): October 2012 employment results were released on Friday 11/2/2012. The 170,000 jobs created exceeded expectations and are a sign of continued consistent recovery.

ORIGINAL POST (OCT 2012)

While GOP conspiracy theorists (like former General Electric CEO Jack Welch) embarrass themselves with baseless allegations that the White House somehow manipulated the numbers, President Obama spent the day touting the undeniably positive facts included in the Bureau of Labor Statistics report.

1. September saw 114,000 new jobs added, making it the 31st consecutive month of private sector job growth. 
2. The unemployment rate dropped dramatically from 8.1% to 7.8%, the lowest point in four years. (Notably, this month's decline was NOT due to workers who "gave up" and dropped out of the workforce.)
3. The economy has added 5.2 million jobs since March 2010.

Chart created by Steve Benen of Maddow Blog, using BLS numbers

A few months of consecutive private sector job growth might be luck, but thirty-one consecutive months of increases is an undeniable positive trend that is evidence of a steadily improving economy and the directional correctness of our nation's economic policy.

Romney and his GOP supporters can (and probably should) continue to key on the unacceptable pace of the economic recovery, but results like these take much of the sting out of any election season barbs they throw at the President.

In a November 2011 post, I said that Obama only needed continued consistent forward motion in U.S. labor results to re-secure his place in the White House for four more years. With this year's employment trends, which have been capped off nicely by September's significant reduction in the nation's unemployment rate, I stand by my prediction.

SNL's Fox & Friends on Mitt Romney

What do these things have in common?

• Angelina Jolie, Drew Barrymore, Tobey Maguire
• Microsoft
• Saturday Night Live 

They were all born in 1975.

Last weekend, SNL kicked off its 38th season. The show has had its peaks and valleys over the years, but as the "Fox & Friends Morning Show" parody below shows, Lorne Michaels and company still deliver the goods when it comes to political satire.

Turn of Phrase - McCain Schools Sean Hannity on Foreign Policy

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)

"It was you and people on Fox that said in Libya, 'We didn't know who they were and let's not help these people.'

They had an election and they elected moderates. They rejected Islamists. 

And yes, there are al-Qaeda factors and there are extremists in Libya today, but the Libyan people are friends of ours, and they support us, and they support democracy.

So you were wrong about -- so you were wrong about Libya."

- From Senator John McCain, during an interview Thursday with Fox News host Sean Hannity. After Hannity bragged about his perceived correctness in predicting events in post-revolution Egypt, McCain disputed his "facts" and then set him straight on Libya.

What a pleasure to see McCain, a seasoned politician with a wealth of foreign policy experience, call out a hawkish Fox News simpleton. McCain's comments could also serve as a valuable reminder to his party's presidential nominee that conducting world affairs in the 21st century requires "careful calibration," not blowhard nationalistic rhetoric.

You can see the entire exchange (3 mins) below.

Romney's Gutless Foreign Policy Screw-Up

Mitt Romney's premature, inappropriate, and errant criticism of a statement issued by an American embassy outrages me.

Romney believed that the American embassy in Cairo had issued a a communication expressing regret for hurting "religious feelings of Muslims," after extremists attacked our consulates in Libya and Egypt on September 11.

The GOP nominee saw the embassy statement as a political opportunity to attack the President as a weak American apologist, and he pounced.

"I think it's a -- a terrible course for America to stand in apology for our values. That instead, when our grounds are being attacked, and being breached, that the first response to the United States must be outrage at the breach of the sovereignty of our nation."

Unfortunately, in his blatant eagerness to sound like a bad ass and score political points during a still unfolding foreign policy tragedy, Romney lacked many of the salient details.

First, Romney was wrong about when the embassy statement was issued. The original statement was not in fact a post-event apology, but was instead a communication issued prior to the attacks as a preemptive effort to quell a swelling undercurrent of anti-American sentiment that threatened to boil over.

Second, Romney was quick to criticize the Obama administration for the "apology," when the statement had actually been issued by a local diplomat, prior to any State Department or White House approval of the message.

The White House has subsequently issued a formal statement in response to the attacks and disavowed the original embassy message. Additionally, President Obama expressed empathy for the onsite diplomatic personnel, who crafted the original communication from a soon-to-be besieged embassy, rather than from the safety of a campaign office.

In the last two days, I've read numerous articles and accounts about this incident, and I was grateful to see politicians from across the spectrum express disappointment in Romney's poor judgment. Nonetheless, my anger over Romney's actions has become palpable.

Facts About Jobs Before and Since Obama (August 2012)

The Bureau of Labor Statistics provided unemployment and job market numbers on Friday for the period of August 2012. With 103,000 private sector jobs added in August and 7,000 public sector/government jobs eliminated, the report reflected a disappointing net gain of 96,000 new jobs.

The Bureau's August release also shows a reduction in the unemployment rate from 8.3% to 8.1%. While this is positive news on its face, the decline in the unemployment rate results mostly from a decrease in the number of Americans who are seeking work, not from an increase in the number of newly created jobs.

The big picture bad news embedded in the August job statistics is that the economy and job market continue to recover at a pace which almost everyone, including the President, finds to be unacceptably sluggish.

The good news is we now have 30 consecutive months of positive job growth. Additionally, according to Steve Benen on the Maddow Blog, in the first eight months of 2012 the economy yielded 1.2 million new private sector jobs, which is already better than five of the eight Bush/Cheney years in their entirety.

Our choices in the upcoming presidential election are becoming increasingly clear. Some of us will decide that President Obama has made the right choices and opt to give him four more years to finish the job of repairing a devastated economy. Others will conclude that the speed of the recovery is simply unacceptable and will opt for the Romney alternative.

Regardless of your choice, I believe it's important to pursue and process the unadulterated facts. The graph above represents actual job growth results and trends (red = Bush, blue = Obama), which I believe illustrate simply and plainly the real world impact of the policies of the current and prior White House administrations.

By the end of the Bush administration, we were losing more than 600,000 jobs per month. Under President Obama job growth has been slow, but steady and positive.

My question for Mr. Romney is this - what specifically are you proposing that is different from the Bush-era policies that led to so much of the "red ink" and job loss in the chart above?

Gabby Giffords - What Real Heroes Do

In January 2011, six people were killed and U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) was severely wounded in a mass shooting at a Tucson area supermarket.

After being shot in the head at point blank range, Giffords "had part of her skull and brain removed, underwent intensive reconstructive surgery, and lost the full use of the right side of her body and half of her vision." (Salon.com)

 This is what Representative Giffords did last night.

If Only CNN, MSNBC, and Fox Could Do This

Politician Jon Huntsman on the Colbert Report

Former GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman appeared on the Colbert Report yesterday, and the ex-Utah governor's willingness to address the real substance of what's wrong in American politics was refreshing.

In just a few short minutes, Huntsman manages to tackle the worst corruptors of the American political process (Super Pacs and the absence of term limits), as well as policy issues related to jobs, the national debt, and the economy.

Huntsman also showed his humorous side, quipping about the polygamist ancestor he shares with Mitt Romney and telling us what he really thinks of Romney - but doing so in Mandarin Chinese.

It's sad that (1) Americans don't elect more genuine and thoughtful leaders like Jon Huntsman to national political office and (2) Americans have to rely on Comedy Central to showcase the kind of useful and honest conversation we should be able to see on "real" news channels.

You can watch the clip of Huntsman on Colbert here.
(Just wait out the advertisement - it may play twice.)

Turn of Phrase - Lessons From a Rape Survivor

ReneeDeVesty.com

"I can’t stand by and watch these men who have no personal experience with sexual assault pretend to know so much about it.

I do know about rape. I received an education of the highest degree, and now it’s my turn to teach."

- From Renee DeVesty who was raped when she was 19 years old. DeVesty has subsequently become a lecturer, activist, and an advocate for rape survivors.

Like most Americans, Republican and Democrat, DeVesty was appalled by the hurtful and ill-informed comments of Missouri Representative and U.S. Senate candidate Todd Akin, who during a recent interview stated that women's bodies have natural defenses against pregnancy in cases of "legitimate rape." 

I've struggled for two days to identify exactly what it is that I want to say about Akin's ignorance, but when I read Renee's poignant account of her rape experience today, I realized my perspective is not the important one to share.

Women like Renee have bravely stepped forward to tell us everything we need to know about rape. All we need to do is listen. You can (and should) read Renee's story here.

Making Sense of the Chick-Fil-A Debacle

Call me naïve, but I don't believe the vast majority of people who work for or dine at Chick-Fil-A restaurants actually hate gays and lesbians.

I would argue instead that most members of the right-wing crowd, particularly those who rushed in this week to eat a deep-fried chicken sandwich in support of Chick-Fil-A and traditional marriage, simply don’t understand gayness. And maybe, they even fear it.

Many “family values” supporters earnestly believe that the normalization of gayness in our society somehow threatens their way of life, and so those individuals see their motivation in supporting Chick-Fil-A as protection, not hate. 

A natural by-product of these conservative efforts to defend Judeo-Christian values from perceived attack is the necessary discrimination between hetero and homosexuality. If conservatives believe their biblical interpretation of family values and marriage is right, then any other way must be “wrong.” And who doesn’t like to stand up for what they believe is right?

This is where the problem begins. What is the real value in standing up for religion when doing so genuinely damages other human beings? How does it further the cause of Christ, or even the cause of humanity, when our actions harm others?

I am a grown gay man who has been out to my family and friends for more than two decades. At nearly fifty years old, I know who I am and what my life is worth. But there are many, many gay people who are younger than me, still coming-of-age, still learning about life, still so very impressionable – because they are children. These people, these kids, are the ones who pay the price for the “Godly values” espoused by others, and in far too many instances they pay with their lives.

As a mature fairly self-actualized gay man, whether or not Chick-Fil-A customers believe I am an equal and worthwhile human being has little impact on my emotional well being.

For vulnerable young gay people though, this isn’t so.

Young women and men who grow up confused and frightened by who they are, find the world around them offering not a helping hand, but a punch in the stomach. Young people who live in the shadows, whose very existence brims with doubt, are offered not the light of Christianity, but the dark aloneness of dismissal and rejection. Young people who search, yearn, and beg for understanding, suffer instead the destructive sting of judgment. Young men and women, and sometimes boys and girls, are told by their families and their churches – you are not the same, you are not enough, you are not right.

I don't believe it is the intent of my Christian friends to do devastating emotional injury to children. I know that they are simply working to preserve the way of life that they hold dear and striving to defend their biblical values. Nonetheless, the reactionary public outcry in favor of Chick-Fil-A (and against gay marriage) ultimately reinforces the feelings of isolation and worthlessness that afflict fragile young gay people.

Turn of Phrase - Paul Ryan Is Good For America

Paul Ryan, Republican VP nominee

"He’s what a Republican should be: an honest, open-minded, solution-oriented fiscal conservative."

- From Slate columnist William Saletan, who plans to vote for Obama but who appreciates the candid, legitimate, fiscally conservative voice that Paul Ryan brings to the political arena.

In an excellent Slate article this morning, Saletan rejoices at Romney's choice of Vice Presidential running mate, praising Ryan in large part because the GOP congressman from Wisconsin is obsessed with fiscal conservatism, rather than social conservatism, and for all the right reasons. 

Regardless of political loyalties, reasonable Americans agree that sustaining our current level of deficit-spending and debt-building is a losing strategy. 

While you might disagree with the difficult budget choices Ryan proposes (or "draconian measures" as Democrats would call them), you have to acknowledge that he brings a more educated, considered, and specific approach to solving our fiscal problems than almost any other national politician, most of whom simply spout unrealistic knee-jerk party-line rhetoric about tax cuts and national debt.

In his article, Saletan notes that Romney's selection of Ryan, a serious and focused politician, may also help to elevate our national discourse. 

"Unlike many of his colleagues, Ryan isn’t a wanker or a hater. He’s in it for solutions, not spite. 

Instead of bickering about Romney’s tax returns and repeating the obvious but unhelpful observation that the unemployment rate sucks, we’ll actually have to debate serious problems and solutions."

I know enough about Paul Ryan's beliefs and values to recognize that his addition to the ticket doesn't change my political affiliation, but like William Saletan, I'm excited about the possibility of an election that possesses the potential to re-focus Americans on critical issues and maybe even surfaces a solution or two.

Romney's "Next President" Gaffe

Oh, Mitt. Freudian slip? It's okay. We all get nervous when we get a new boss.

Oddly enough, President Obama made the same mistake, although with an immediate correction, during an introduction of Joe Biden in 2008. 

(Hat tip to Paul Gagne for the reminder.)

Risking Their Lives for Gay Pride In Uganda

Ugandan LGBT activists

Being gay is a criminal offense in Uganda, and if the Anti-Homosexuality Bill proposed by politician David Bahati passes the Ugandan parliament, then gays would face life in prison for homosexual activity, and the death penalty for acts of "aggravated homosexuality.

The international human rights community has exerted enormous pressure on Uganda in opposition to Bahati's bill, which has languished in parliament since 2009.

Nonetheless, being gay in Uganda, or being supportive of gays and lesbians, continues to be incredibly dangerous and even life-threatening.

In light of the immense anti-gay hostility in Uganda, this is the last place on earth one would expect to find a gay pride celebration, and yet last weekend, it happened.

About two hundred brave Ugandans, gay and gay-friendly, gathered to affirm their LGBT identities and celebrate life. The Pride festivities, which included film screenings and a parade, went off as planned for the most part, though police did raid one gathering to make a few arrests, take names and statements from attendees, and intimidate the crowd.

A few images from the Ugandan LGBT pride parade are included below (photos: David Robinson c/o Advocate). You can learn more about LGBT rights in Uganda in a short BBC documentary linked here (part one) and here (part two).

Facing risks of ridicule, arrest, and personal safety, LGBT Ugandans marched proudly. This is what real bravery looks like.

Turn Style - Female Saudi Olympians Debut

For the first time in modern history, Saudi Arabia has allowed women to represent their nation at the Olympic Games.

Sarah Attar ran the 800 meter race in track and field, and Wojdan Shaherkani represented the Saudi kingdom in women's judo competition.

The 19 year-old Attar, who ran her race completely clad from head to toe, finished last, but received a standing ovation as she crossed the finish line.

Photo: Daniel Ocho De Olza / AP

Shaherkani, who is just 16 years old, only lasted 82 seconds in her judo match, but she proudly made history, nonetheless. 

Photo: Chang W. Lee / New York Times

Reflecting on the praiseworthy accomplishments of these two women stirs up contradictory emotions. It is gratifying to see that a nation as fundamentalist as Saudi Arabia is at least beginning to move in the direction of women's rights, but it is simultaneously horrifying to imagine a place where half the human population still lacks the right to vote or even drive a car.

Imagine living in a land where religious traditionalists can deny even the most basic of human rights to a particular sect of the population, simply because of who they were born to be? Which reminds me, anyone visited Chick-Fil-A lately?

Congress Passes Bill to Restrict Westboro Baptist Military Funeral Protests

Members of Westboro Baptist protest
a soldier's funeral in 2006.

Congress has passed "The Honoring America’s Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012," and the bill now awaits the President's signature.

The legislation addresses a host of veterans' issues, including the proposal of significant restrictions on demonstrations at the funerals of military personnel.

Under the new bill, protests may not be staged within two hours prior to or after a funeral, and protestors must maintain a distance of 300 feet from the memorial service.

This legislation is bad news for the psychotic media whores at the Westboro Baptist Church, who regularly stage protests at high-profile funerals, military or otherwise, to spread vitriolic and hateful messages about gays and lesbians, and anyone whom they perceive to be in support of the LGBT community.

Interestingly, not unlike those who have leapt to the defense of Chick-Fil-A President Dan Cathy, Westboro Baptist Church members claim their "freedom of speech" rights are being violated when limitations are placed on their ability to protest at funerals holding offensive placards and yelling cruel remarks. (To be clear though, unlike with Westboro, no one is attempting to legally restrict Chick-Fil-A's right to express its opinions.)

The U.S. Supreme Court actually sided with Westboro in a 2011 case, upholding their right to stage funeral protests, so it will be interesting to see if the new legislation passes judicial muster.

You can learn more than you wanted to know about the lunacy and malevolence of Westboro Baptist Church at their website godhatesfags.com.

Turn of Phrase - A Purposeful President and His Policy-Free Opponent

"Has there ever been a campaign with so few major plans on the table?

President Obama’s proposals are small and medium-size retreads, while Mitt Romney has run the closest thing to a policy-free race as any candidate in my lifetime."

- From conservative writer David Brooks, in a recent column in which he asserted that the 2012 presidential election has the potential to be the dullest ever.

I completely agree with Brooks' characterization of the election as monotonous and uninteresting, and in fact, made a similar observation in a post I wrote a couple of months ago (Will 2012 Be Our Most Boring Election Ever?). In that article, my estimation of a thoroughly lackluster campaign was dead on, although my assumption that the candidates would conduct themselves with "refreshing" civility has proven incorrect.

We were all taught in childhood that if we had nothing nice to say, then we should say nothing at all. If our two presidential candidates followed that adage, we'd have not only the most boring, but also the quietest election in U.S. history.

Fleeing Violence and Civil War in Syria

Syrian boy standing on mattresses at
the school where his family lives.
Photo: Jamal Saidi / Reuters

As the violence escalates between brutal dictator Bashar al-Assad and the armed rebel resistance, hundreds of thousands of Syrians are fleeing their country and crossing borders into Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, and other middle east nations.

It's hard to imagine the awful conditions and pervasive fear that must preclude such a mass evacuation.

What would lead people to pack up their entire families and flee their homes, with nothing ahead but the promise of poverty and hunger in hastily-erected tent cities in hostile neighboring countries?

Exodus is a heart-breaking hardship for those who flee their homelands, and a stressful and disruptive burden to the communities that must absorb them, particularly when resources may already be scarce.

This compelling Reuters photo slideshow reminds us of the real impact of civil war on a nation's people, not with graphic photos of war or violence, but with unique images of refugee life, some that capture sadness, and some that glimpse our fundamental human resilience and adaptability.

California Can’t Afford High-speed Rail

A few weeks ago, Governor Jerry Brown and the California state legislature accomplished something that has only happened three other times in the last twenty years - they passed the state’s annual budget before the fiscal year-end deadline.

The state’s elected leaders faced the daunting task of bridging a $16 billion budget gap, but the legislators ultimately showed courageous and determined leadership, navigating their way through a multitude of ugly dilemmas and gut-wrenching decisions to get the job done.

After such a show of sound governance, why then did they decide last week to do something as fiscally irresponsible as authorizing the allocation of $8 billion to build the first segment of track for the state’s proposed high-speed rail project?