Now that Holy Joe Leiberman is (sadly) going back to the Senate, its time to start a campaign to give Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) his seniority back....
When Lautenburg went back to the senate after retiring, he lost all of his seniority. If he had maintained his seniority status, he would be ahead of Holy Joe and take over Holy Joe's committee seniority. If Joementum is going back to the senate after pissing all over his party, then I think it only fair to give Lautenberg his seniority.
Yes, Holy Joe can be part of the Democratic caucus, but a message has to be sent. Joementum can keep his seniority, but Frank Lautenburg should get his back too.
And the upside is that it will really piss Joementum off.
Tuesday, November 7, 2006
Sunday, November 5, 2006
Election Countdown
I know that I have not used this blog in sometime. In fact, I have not blogged at all in over a year. I shut down the original Late Night Pundit blog which was hosted on its own server due to my lack of time to keep up with it.
Anyway, I hope to get back into blogging over the next several weeks but until then, here's my predictions for the 2006 mid-term elections. Take this with a grain of salt...
House: Dems pick up 37 seats to take control of the House of Representatives. This is probably a pretty mainstream pick. Most pundits seem to think somewhere between a 25 to 40 seat pick-up for the Democrats.
Senate: Democrats 51, Republicans 49. This prediction bucks the other pundits. Most seem to think that the Senate remains in Republican control - by either 1 seat or a tie with the VP vote keeping the Senate in Republican hands.
Anyway we'll see how well I did on Tuesday. Don't forget to vote!
---EDIT: Updated April 26, 2007
----> I should have posted this update after the election: I was pretty darn close. Underestimated the Dem pickup in the house, but correctly got the senate right (and very few people saw that one beforehand). Anyway...updating the blog and thought I'd gloat a bit. lol.
Anyway, I hope to get back into blogging over the next several weeks but until then, here's my predictions for the 2006 mid-term elections. Take this with a grain of salt...
House: Dems pick up 37 seats to take control of the House of Representatives. This is probably a pretty mainstream pick. Most pundits seem to think somewhere between a 25 to 40 seat pick-up for the Democrats.
Senate: Democrats 51, Republicans 49. This prediction bucks the other pundits. Most seem to think that the Senate remains in Republican control - by either 1 seat or a tie with the VP vote keeping the Senate in Republican hands.
Anyway we'll see how well I did on Tuesday. Don't forget to vote!
---EDIT: Updated April 26, 2007
----> I should have posted this update after the election: I was pretty darn close. Underestimated the Dem pickup in the house, but correctly got the senate right (and very few people saw that one beforehand). Anyway...updating the blog and thought I'd gloat a bit. lol.
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Required Reading: Conservatives without Conscience
For those of you who read slashdot, this post is in the spirit of the occasional book reviews they post. And now to the point... John Dean's new book, Conservatives Without Conscience, is absolute required reading (I am in no way affiliated with this book. I just thought it was that good).
Not only is the book well written, but it comprehensively and (I would say) conclusively answers the question - why are the republicans so mean spirited? Dean's short answer is the republican party is run by autocratic ego maniacs who couldn't give a lick about you, me or even their own lemming supporters.
The question that bothers Dean is one that has bothered me - namely - how could the supporters of the radical right not see how they are being played for fools? Dean's answer: their personal make-up will just not allow them to. They are classic lemmings and share many of the same characteristics of the Germans and Italians during the late 1930's and early 1940's
I don't want to summarize the book too much (after all this is not a 9th grade book report) but Dean approaches the topic masterfully. After describing how, in the late 80's the right wing attack machine went after he and his wife, he began to question why the conservative movement had become so mean spirited and the atmosphere in DC had become so toxic. Dean examines the question using social science, political science and historical analysis and quickly comes to the conclusion that the personalities of right wing leaders are simply classic authoritarians (indeed, he puts some of them - notably Chaney and Delay in a super-authoritarian category). His conclusion is downright scary as he paints a picture of the possibility of a fascist America that could develop over the next few election cycles.
What is even more fascinating is the questions that Dean's book raises. He concludes that 30% of the electorate are, and will always be, authoritarian-followers. If true, how does that bode for the moderate democrat's argument that we have to start appealing to those voters? How can you address a democratic message for people who will simply not listen, no matter what you say?
The second large question raised by Dean is probably the most terrifying. What happens if another terrorist attack occurs while Bush is still in office? Would the backlash result in more authoritarian policies and could that lead to a fascist America?
Finally, Dean lays out how the radical right wing authoritarians have destroyed the Congress by implementing procedures designed to institute the iron fist of the majority. What happens if (and hopefully when) the Democrats take control? Do they go back to the "old" rules of congress based on civility and protection of the minority (personally I say hell no. Let the repugs rot under their own rules for a few years).
Run don't walk to the nearest bookstore (or check out audible.com for the audiobook).
Not only is the book well written, but it comprehensively and (I would say) conclusively answers the question - why are the republicans so mean spirited? Dean's short answer is the republican party is run by autocratic ego maniacs who couldn't give a lick about you, me or even their own lemming supporters.
The question that bothers Dean is one that has bothered me - namely - how could the supporters of the radical right not see how they are being played for fools? Dean's answer: their personal make-up will just not allow them to. They are classic lemmings and share many of the same characteristics of the Germans and Italians during the late 1930's and early 1940's
I don't want to summarize the book too much (after all this is not a 9th grade book report) but Dean approaches the topic masterfully. After describing how, in the late 80's the right wing attack machine went after he and his wife, he began to question why the conservative movement had become so mean spirited and the atmosphere in DC had become so toxic. Dean examines the question using social science, political science and historical analysis and quickly comes to the conclusion that the personalities of right wing leaders are simply classic authoritarians (indeed, he puts some of them - notably Chaney and Delay in a super-authoritarian category). His conclusion is downright scary as he paints a picture of the possibility of a fascist America that could develop over the next few election cycles.
What is even more fascinating is the questions that Dean's book raises. He concludes that 30% of the electorate are, and will always be, authoritarian-followers. If true, how does that bode for the moderate democrat's argument that we have to start appealing to those voters? How can you address a democratic message for people who will simply not listen, no matter what you say?
The second large question raised by Dean is probably the most terrifying. What happens if another terrorist attack occurs while Bush is still in office? Would the backlash result in more authoritarian policies and could that lead to a fascist America?
Finally, Dean lays out how the radical right wing authoritarians have destroyed the Congress by implementing procedures designed to institute the iron fist of the majority. What happens if (and hopefully when) the Democrats take control? Do they go back to the "old" rules of congress based on civility and protection of the minority (personally I say hell no. Let the repugs rot under their own rules for a few years).
Run don't walk to the nearest bookstore (or check out audible.com for the audiobook).
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Welcome to Blogger
Hello and welcome. I have had this Blogger account for some time but have never used it. However, I have recently shut down the hosted version of Late Night Pundit, so here we go on blogger.
As the name suggests, I try and post when I have some free time which is usually late at night. I run the table on topics but generally try to stick to technology, with a focus on Apple technology and programming. I will also occasionally post topicd on politics, current events and, of course, the Red Sox.
I am an attorney so you may even find some discussion of legal issues. Be warned however, nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice nor do I assert that anything written here is intended as legal advice. If you have any legal questions please consult with your own attorney as I do not represent you.
With that disclaimer out of the way...off we go!
As the name suggests, I try and post when I have some free time which is usually late at night. I run the table on topics but generally try to stick to technology, with a focus on Apple technology and programming. I will also occasionally post topicd on politics, current events and, of course, the Red Sox.
I am an attorney so you may even find some discussion of legal issues. Be warned however, nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice nor do I assert that anything written here is intended as legal advice. If you have any legal questions please consult with your own attorney as I do not represent you.
With that disclaimer out of the way...off we go!
Thursday, February 16, 2006
A GitMo Who's Who...
Here is an interesting report on the GitMo detainees done by a professor and some students at Seton Hall Law School (my alma mater).
It is probably important to note that among the authors of the report are counsel for two GitMo detainees...
Its very short and worth a read.
Among the findings of the report:
1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies.
2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.
3. The Government has detained numerous persons based on mere affiliations with a large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of Homeland Security terrorist watch list. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such organizations varies considerably. Eight percent are detained because they are deemed "fighters for;" 30% considered "members of;" a large majority - 60% -- are detained merely because they are "associated with" a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners their nexus to any terrorist group is unidentified.
4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time in which the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies.
5. Finally, the population of persons deemed not to be enemy combatants are in fact accused of more serious allegations than a great many persons still deemed to be enemy combatants.
It is probably important to note that among the authors of the report are counsel for two GitMo detainees...
Its very short and worth a read.
Among the findings of the report:
1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies.
2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.
3. The Government has detained numerous persons based on mere affiliations with a large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of Homeland Security terrorist watch list. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such organizations varies considerably. Eight percent are detained because they are deemed "fighters for;" 30% considered "members of;" a large majority - 60% -- are detained merely because they are "associated with" a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners their nexus to any terrorist group is unidentified.
4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time in which the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies.
5. Finally, the population of persons deemed not to be enemy combatants are in fact accused of more serious allegations than a great many persons still deemed to be enemy combatants.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
