Daily Progressive - Information and Inspiration

Army's 'Debt Of Service' Leaves Vets Perplexed: Unbelievably, Soldiers Must Pay For Damaged Equipment.

The gist:

Former Army Specialist Rodriguez started getting bills for $700 for lost or damaged government property this summer. Although he was discharged some four years ago, bills recently arrived demanding payment, but giving no details on what or why -- nor do they offer a way to dispute the charges.

"For doing my job you're going to bill me?" Rodriguez said.

And he's not alone. A 2006 government report found more than 1,000 soldiers being billed a total of $1.5 million. And while fighting overseas put their lives on the line, this battle on paper could cost them their future by ruining their credit. Rodriguez will be reported to credit agencies next month.

I can't believe that anyone in this country thinks that's okay, regardless of political orientation.

So the AFA is doing an online poll on illegal immigration and trying to be all serious about it, stating that they'll send the results "to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, and President George Bush." Their solution to illegal immigration? "The first step in dealing with the illegal immigration problem is to seal the borders and keep additional illegal immigrants out."

Of course, it'd be a shame if their poll turned out not to be one-sided... 0:)

It's almost like I care or something. Weird.

Anyhoo, new post!

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/…
"Bloggers at the Gates: What Was Good for EBay Should Be Good for Politics"
Analysis of the promise and perils of the "netroots".

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/…
"The Fallback"
In-depth profile of former Virginia Governor Warner and his prospects for the Democratic presidential nomination. Warning: when I say in-depth, I mean in-depth. This sucker's long.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/…
"Party Like it's 1994"
Analysis of the upcoming midterm elections and the Dems chances at pulling off a 1994-style revolution. Bit on the pessimistic/cynical side (oh, those New Yorkers), but still some damn fine readin'.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/…
"Gale Norton Resigns"
Scathing review of Norton's shameful legacy as Secretary of the Interior.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/13/…
"To Save a Crippled City"
The Republican Congress appears to consider fully rebuilding Louisiana optional. Not sure that I really buy that Bush actually cares.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/13/…
"Tax Madness"
Republicans are considering attempting to justify a massive giveaway for the rich with... a massive giveaway for the rich. Gosh, I wonder where their priorities are?

And, an Action Item (TMTMTM):
Katherine Harris (you know - the Republican Secretary of State in Florida who stole the election for Bush?) has announced she's planning to pump $10 million of her own money into a Senate campaign. I guess as a Republican she was really hurting for cash. Anyway, progressive Sen. Barbara Boxer (of my very own California) is soliciting donations to try and beat her back. You can contribute here. This is a crucial swing election, and if we want to take back the Congress in November, we can't let this go unanswered.

No, your eyes do not deceive you. I am in fact updating this thing. Don't get your hopes all up though - I don't know whether this is going to be semi-regular again or not.

First, the news:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/09/…
"The Death of the Intelligence Panel" (Op-Ed)
The New York Times examines the partisan breakdown of the intelligence oversight system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/10/…
"U.S. Contractor Found Guilty of $3 Million Fraud in Iraq"
What's this? Gross war profiteering in Iraq, enabled, if not encouraged, by lax Bush Administration oversight - with more still to come?! Shocking!

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/…
"Push to Tighten Lobbying Rules Loses Strength"
With political pressure off, Congressional Republicans decide that corruption is actually okay after all. Somewhere, there must be somebody who is surprised by this, but I can't imagine who.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/10/…
"$25,000 to Lobby Group Is Tied to Access to Bush"
Yet another Bush-Abramoff link.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/…
"Employers Sharply Criticize Shift in Unionizing Method to Cards From Elections"
Basically, corporations are saying "Hey, no fair! Don't the unions know that they're supposed to lose?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/…
"About That Rebellion ..." (Op-Ed)
The New York Times masterfully exposes Congressional Republicans' "rebellion" as the election-year sham it is.

Finally, an Action Item (TM). The DCCC has been running a contest to design a billboard ad to run against Rep. Pombo, Environmental Enemy #1. Vote for the winner here.

A poster displayed at one of the Moveon vigils against
wire-tapping reads:
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

I am against the illegal wiretapping too, but that is the kind of statement that I find maddening. It simplifies things too much and leaves me thinking these people follow
a "liberty" principle blindly. Liberty and security are intertwined and are not so easily separable. For instance, I am free to ride my bike in my neighborhood because I live in a secure neighborhood--where I don't have too worry about being mugged. Why is my neighborhood secure? I'll name just a few factors: employed neighbors, the presence of a local police force, and security cameras. Alternatively, if I am “too secure”, then perhaps I am not free. If the local police become too imposing and start to arrest people of my
race, religion, or height, then I would certainly not be free to ride my bike!

The issue here is about the PROCESS of LEGAL wire-tapping….just as my example
is about the PROCESS of policing? And when the issue is summarized with the previous sort of statement it makes me think those people don't really understand the issue. I think a more appropriate phrase would be:
It is against the law to wiretap without a warrant! OR Wiretap responsibly, do it legally!

As you may know, the Democratic Party is promoting Bob Casey, Jr. as their choice to defeat Rick Santorum in the Pennsylvania Senate race this year. Unfortunately, Bob Casey's politics are the same as Santorum's. He's an anti-choice, anti-birth control, pro-war, anti-civil rights, anti-national health care, corporate lapdog who takes money from a lot of the same corporations and PACS as Santorum. We are mounting a grassroots campaign to take back our party in Pennsylvania. Progressives here are supporting Chuck Pennacchio, hoping that through hard work we can defeat Casey in the primary. Chuck Pennacchio is politically experienced and an expert in foreign relations, and has a lot of ideas and well-thought-out strategies on how to address the nation's domestic and international problems. A recent Zogby poll shows Pennacchio in the lead (ahead of both Santorum and Casey)if people are aware of how the candidates stand on the issues. Furthermore, Casey's lead over Santorum collapses to two points when people are aware of how he stands on the issues.

In Connecticut, a movement is underway to run Ned Lamont, a progressive, against Joe Lieberman in their August primary this year.

I am trying to spread the word to progressives about these two real Democrats, true to the people this party is supposed to stand for, who are standing up to the machine and the big money. They are running on a shoe-string budget, so the Internet is the best way to get the word out..

Check them out and help any way you can! Chuck Pennacchio's website is www.chuck2006.com and Ned Lamont's is www.nedlamont.com

I am assuming there are other moveon.org members in this community so I am posting this comment here. I really value the e-mails I get from moveon.org, but I am very frustrated with the Action Forum on their website. The Action Forum is supposed to be a place where members can suggest issues that moveon.org should focus on. Members can also rate other members suggested priorities. But there are close to 20,000 comments to be voted on (and on the order of 100 postings a day)--which makes the forum useless as a tool for setting the priorities for moveon.org. Is anyone else similarly frustrated? I am really amazed at how poorly the Action Forum is set up. You cannot even search the postings to find subjects you may want to vote on.

I think the forum should be reorganized into two sections. One section would present only the 20-30 comments that are representative of the comments received during a month (like letter to the editor pages in newspapers), and members could rate the importance of these each month. The purpose of this section would be to set the priorities for moveon.org. A second section would be similar to the current format, but would be expanded to include the option for other members to comment on the posting. This section would provide space for open discussion about all issues raised by members. Thoughts?

I e-mailed this suggestion to moveon.org (even posted it in the ActionForum). I hope this posting will inspire other members to e-mail their concern to moveon.org--
http://www.moveonpac.org/feedback/…

I just volunteered to host people overnight at my apartment while Cindy Shehan's trip makes its way to Washington DC - think you might want to do the same?

http://www.bringthemhomenowtour.org

(x-posted widely)

If you're interested, you can complain to the FCC about Pat Robertson's recent fatwa -- just write and explain the offense and when/where it took place, and it'll go into the official logs and whatnot. (Contact info here, with thanks.)

I tend to think that an FCC fine might be good for the ol' CBN -- they have pleeeenty of money, and it might be a better reminder that one must watch one's mouth when one is being aired on NATIONAL TELEVISION. Turn-about's fair play, and all that.

( letter you can stealCollapse )

What would happen if Right-Wing Christians took on the theory of gravity.
This is cross-posted to several other communities.