Ok, by request, here's these two stories, although I'm sure most of you have heard the hooker story, and maybe my naming of it is throwing people off.
The pink shirt story, because there is less to it, is what I'll start with. This was indeed after I had attended Melissa's wedding in Jacksonville, to which I wore my stripey grey suit and my salmon shirt. It was new then, I guess, since Jane convinced me to buy it since the bridesmaids were wearing a similar color. Anyway, after the wedding I had to stop in Lake City for something. For those of you who don't know, Lake City is a pretty backwards, podunk place. Anyway, while I was at a gas station filling up a (I want to say truckfull, but I'm pretty sure it was a car) carfull of rednecks/locals pulled up next to me and started shouting stuff like "Hey, faggot! Look at that faggot in the pink shirt! Better be careful, faggot!" It was pretty terrifying. But it's also not so surprising to have that happen in Lake City.
When I was visiting Houston last year to check out apartments (actually, I guess it was two years ago. Wow, the time passes) I stayed in this pretty run down Super 8. It was near Hobby (I don't know if any Houston people read this blog, but Hobby is a pretty scary area). When I got up to my room and was about to go in, I hear this woman calling me from the parking lot. She says "Hey, can I use your phone?" Looking at her from a distance, I thought she looked like a fairly regular woman. So I godown to help her out (dropping off my wallet in my room, just in case). As soon as I get six feet from her I realize that this is not a regular woman. It is clearly a prostitute. You know, weathered face, missing some teeth, fifty year old woman dressing like a twenty year old, etc. But she's honest.
"I'm not going to lie to you," she says. "I'm a call girl. I work for an escort service. And I've seen some crazy shit. But something really bad just happened to me and I need to call my boss. Can I come up to your room and use your phone?"
"Uhh, no, but you can use my cell phone right here," I say. It was pretty obvious she was just trying to be coy about turning a trick or shivving me and stealing my money.
"It's just a quick call. Can't I come up to your room and do it?"
"No. Use my cell."
"What's the matter. You don't trust me?" She says. No, prostitute I just met, of course I don't trust you!
"No, I don't trust you. But you can use my phone here." I figure since she weighs about forty pounds and I could probably outrun her, there isn't much harm in letting her use my cell. I mean, apart from getting mouth herpes or ear herpes or something.
"Fine."
So she uses my phone and yells at the operator at her service to send a car, which apparently isn't going to happen. Then she starts in on trying to turn the trick again.
"Can I just come up to your room and use the bathroom real quick?" She asks.
"No. There's a bathroom in the front office," I say.
"Can I have ten bucks?"
"No, I'm broke. I'm just here looking at schools."
"Oh, really? I was a student a long time ago. What are you studying?"
"Poetry."
"Oh, Ok. Well, thanks for letting me use your phone. I better get going."
Then she leaves. And that was my introduction to the city of Houston! I also slept in my clothes in that creepy hotel. Although the people in charge were nice. A tip: You can't tell how a hotel will look in reality by its webpage. Also, they don't tell you if scary hookers are going to murder you on the webpage usually either.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Monday, February 26, 2007
Road Trip
On Wednesday I will be leaving to drive from Houston to Atlanta (Hotlanta, or the ATL as kids may call it these days) with a few friends of mine. We're going for some big lame writing conference, ostensibly, but really to hang out and get away from Houston. Well, that's why I'm going anyway.
Of course, some people may ask "Glenn, this is the 21st century. You should be taking a plane." To that I would say "That's not actually a question." And then I would say I'm terrified of flying, which everybody knows already. But I love driving, and I love extended, long driving trips. There's a great feeling to be in a car in the middle of nowhere, and imagining what living a life in the towns you drive through would be like. Back before gas was a eight dollars a tablespoon I used to just drive to random towns near wherever I lived, just as a way to relax.
In order to make this more than just about road trips, maybe this week's topic is anecdotes of road trips you've been on, vacations you've been on, or perhaps you can write about the attitude we Americans have about having to be able to drive anywhere. (Sorry, but no matter what topic I pick here, somebody will hate it).
Anyway, I'm in a rush, so I'll just list a few of my personal road trip highlights of the past.
1 - In 2003, my friend Dimitri and I decided to road trip from Orlando to Illinois. No big deal, except we decided to start driving at 10 pm for some reason. It was fine until about 5 or so, when we got past Atlanta. I started getting really tired and drifting off, so we decided to pull off at this crazy, nowhere gas station. At this gas station, hovering around the lights, were about twenty gigantic moths (if you put your open hands next to each other that's probably the size of their wingspan), with really intricately shaped wings of bright colors. I couldn't believe they were real. Added to our exhaustion, it was really surreal. I looked them up, and I think they were luna moths.
2 - In 2004 I was going to Illinois again, this time with my friend Dauro. We stopped at a rest area in Alabama and its bathroom had the most hilarious graffiti I have ever seen. It went pretty much exactly like this, with each line being a different person's handwriting:
-I hate raceists
-you dumb asshole, you spelled racist wrong
-Actually, racism in America has been proven to exist on all sides, and to largely be influenced by the economic class of the person demonstrating racist tendencies.
-EAT SHIT
3 - Well, this story is also from Dimitri and my trip in 2003. We were driving back from Chicago at night to stop at my parents' place, and I look up in my rear view mirror to see a huge bright cross barreling down on us. It turns out this trucker had rigged a lightset on his grill in the shape of a cross. It was pretty terrifying.
I'll leave it at three stories for now. Everybody knows my Houston hooker story, so I won't tell that again. Also, I have a lot of work to be doing right now. So, road trip stories, vacay stories, hooray!
Of course, some people may ask "Glenn, this is the 21st century. You should be taking a plane." To that I would say "That's not actually a question." And then I would say I'm terrified of flying, which everybody knows already. But I love driving, and I love extended, long driving trips. There's a great feeling to be in a car in the middle of nowhere, and imagining what living a life in the towns you drive through would be like. Back before gas was a eight dollars a tablespoon I used to just drive to random towns near wherever I lived, just as a way to relax.
In order to make this more than just about road trips, maybe this week's topic is anecdotes of road trips you've been on, vacations you've been on, or perhaps you can write about the attitude we Americans have about having to be able to drive anywhere. (Sorry, but no matter what topic I pick here, somebody will hate it).
Anyway, I'm in a rush, so I'll just list a few of my personal road trip highlights of the past.
1 - In 2003, my friend Dimitri and I decided to road trip from Orlando to Illinois. No big deal, except we decided to start driving at 10 pm for some reason. It was fine until about 5 or so, when we got past Atlanta. I started getting really tired and drifting off, so we decided to pull off at this crazy, nowhere gas station. At this gas station, hovering around the lights, were about twenty gigantic moths (if you put your open hands next to each other that's probably the size of their wingspan), with really intricately shaped wings of bright colors. I couldn't believe they were real. Added to our exhaustion, it was really surreal. I looked them up, and I think they were luna moths.
2 - In 2004 I was going to Illinois again, this time with my friend Dauro. We stopped at a rest area in Alabama and its bathroom had the most hilarious graffiti I have ever seen. It went pretty much exactly like this, with each line being a different person's handwriting:
-I hate raceists
-you dumb asshole, you spelled racist wrong
-Actually, racism in America has been proven to exist on all sides, and to largely be influenced by the economic class of the person demonstrating racist tendencies.
-EAT SHIT
3 - Well, this story is also from Dimitri and my trip in 2003. We were driving back from Chicago at night to stop at my parents' place, and I look up in my rear view mirror to see a huge bright cross barreling down on us. It turns out this trucker had rigged a lightset on his grill in the shape of a cross. It was pretty terrifying.
I'll leave it at three stories for now. Everybody knows my Houston hooker story, so I won't tell that again. Also, I have a lot of work to be doing right now. So, road trip stories, vacay stories, hooray!
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Reality has a liberal bias
Here is a link to a site that I think everyone should check out; it is slightly similar to the topic we discussed a few weeks ago, but more importantly, it tells you something about a portion of so-called conservatives:
Conservapedia.
"A conservative encyclopedia you can trust." This is the conservatives version of Wikipedia. It seems that these people think that Wikipedia has a "liberal bias." (Remember, reality has a liberal bias.) Read the article on evolution- they actually manage to turn their evolution article into a swipe at Bill Clinton!!!!
I think that this site, while also extremely amusing (and completely maddening), shows you something about the mindset of conservatives (or at least a certain portion of them): they do not wish to exist in reality. They would rather make their own reality. And anyone who does not agree with their constructed and false reality, you're evil and bad and existing under a "liberal bias." It's a total authoritarian mindset- they honestly can't exist in actual reality. They are so fragile and insecure that they can't handle anything that threatens their twisted, delusional and revisionist reality. While I'm fine with relegating these people to their own reality, it's scary to think that these people have more or less been running our country for the past six years, if not longer, and attempt to push their version of reality upon everyone else. I suppose the thing that gives me the most hope is the fact that their reality is increasingly crashing down on them- their war is unpopular, their president is extremely unpopular, they lost big in the last election, their 2008 presidential field sucks (while the Dem field is energizing people), etc. And as their world keeps closing in on them, their message and ideology and tactics and "messages" get increasingly more bizarre, shrill and incoherent, and they seemingly have to retreat into their own made-up fantasy reality, one free of so-called "liberal bias" (of which Wikipedia obviously has none- but Wikipedia will obviously not allow these idiots to post their own false information and propaganda).
Conservapedia.
"A conservative encyclopedia you can trust." This is the conservatives version of Wikipedia. It seems that these people think that Wikipedia has a "liberal bias." (Remember, reality has a liberal bias.) Read the article on evolution- they actually manage to turn their evolution article into a swipe at Bill Clinton!!!!
I think that this site, while also extremely amusing (and completely maddening), shows you something about the mindset of conservatives (or at least a certain portion of them): they do not wish to exist in reality. They would rather make their own reality. And anyone who does not agree with their constructed and false reality, you're evil and bad and existing under a "liberal bias." It's a total authoritarian mindset- they honestly can't exist in actual reality. They are so fragile and insecure that they can't handle anything that threatens their twisted, delusional and revisionist reality. While I'm fine with relegating these people to their own reality, it's scary to think that these people have more or less been running our country for the past six years, if not longer, and attempt to push their version of reality upon everyone else. I suppose the thing that gives me the most hope is the fact that their reality is increasingly crashing down on them- their war is unpopular, their president is extremely unpopular, they lost big in the last election, their 2008 presidential field sucks (while the Dem field is energizing people), etc. And as their world keeps closing in on them, their message and ideology and tactics and "messages" get increasingly more bizarre, shrill and incoherent, and they seemingly have to retreat into their own made-up fantasy reality, one free of so-called "liberal bias" (of which Wikipedia obviously has none- but Wikipedia will obviously not allow these idiots to post their own false information and propaganda).
Friday, February 23, 2007
Now, is that in Korean Years or International Years?
Let me preface this post by saying that I currently live and work in Daegu, South Korea.
I was born in September of 1978, and my current age is 30. Obviously, if you do the math you’ll find a bit of a discrepancy; you’ll find that I’m actually 28½. Or at least that’s what you’ll find if you’re not here in Korea.
Here in Korea, the moment you pop out of your mom’s belly, you’re considered to be one year old. Then every Seollal (lunar new year) your age is increased by one. So according to Korean age reckoning, I was one year old as of September 25, 1978, and by Lunar New Year 1979 I was two.
Seollal was last Sunday, so as of last Sunday I turned 30. If I were a Korean, no doubt my friends and family would be quite worried about the fact that I am now thirty years old and yet I am still single. (As it is, every Korean I meet asks me three things: Where are you from? How old are you? and Are you single? Here in Korea, asking someone if he or she is single is just as common and innocuous as asking someone back in the States So where do you work?) Getting married is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT here, to the point that family members will look down upon older, unmarried relatives, especially women. If a Korean woman is still single at 30, this is generally considered a Big Problem. This makes it rather unfortunate that Korean women only have 28 years before hitting the big three-oh.
Now, as I am the oldest blogger here at the Supergroup, I’ve taken the liberty of posting twice. So scroll down and read my second post!
I was born in September of 1978, and my current age is 30. Obviously, if you do the math you’ll find a bit of a discrepancy; you’ll find that I’m actually 28½. Or at least that’s what you’ll find if you’re not here in Korea.
Here in Korea, the moment you pop out of your mom’s belly, you’re considered to be one year old. Then every Seollal (lunar new year) your age is increased by one. So according to Korean age reckoning, I was one year old as of September 25, 1978, and by Lunar New Year 1979 I was two.
Seollal was last Sunday, so as of last Sunday I turned 30. If I were a Korean, no doubt my friends and family would be quite worried about the fact that I am now thirty years old and yet I am still single. (As it is, every Korean I meet asks me three things: Where are you from? How old are you? and Are you single? Here in Korea, asking someone if he or she is single is just as common and innocuous as asking someone back in the States So where do you work?) Getting married is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT here, to the point that family members will look down upon older, unmarried relatives, especially women. If a Korean woman is still single at 30, this is generally considered a Big Problem. This makes it rather unfortunate that Korean women only have 28 years before hitting the big three-oh.
Now, as I am the oldest blogger here at the Supergroup, I’ve taken the liberty of posting twice. So scroll down and read my second post!
How TV reminds me that I'm getting older
One of the Korean TV channels had a day-long Prison Break marathon the other day, and I watched a good chunk of it. I spent a good portion of my Prison Break watching time trying to figure out where I’d seen the actress who plays lawyer Veronica Donovan before. Finally, I gave in to curiosity and googled the show.
Turns out the actress is Robin Tunney, who played Sarah Bailey, the main character in The Craft. Remember that movie? It came out during my senior year of high school. Back in high school I was part of an extremely tight-knit, very cliquish group of friends called the Round Floor. (Yes, we had a name.) When The Craft came out, a girl who had known the Round Floor for a long time told me that the movie reminded her of us. (The girl was Karen K, for anyone who might be wondering.) At the time I totally didn’t see the connection, but looking back, we were a pentagram shy of a coven. (WD40 anyone?) Somehow, seeing “Sarah Bailey” all grown up was really rather disconcerting.
Turns out the actress is Robin Tunney, who played Sarah Bailey, the main character in The Craft. Remember that movie? It came out during my senior year of high school. Back in high school I was part of an extremely tight-knit, very cliquish group of friends called the Round Floor. (Yes, we had a name.) When The Craft came out, a girl who had known the Round Floor for a long time told me that the movie reminded her of us. (The girl was Karen K, for anyone who might be wondering.) At the time I totally didn’t see the connection, but looking back, we were a pentagram shy of a coven. (WD40 anyone?) Somehow, seeing “Sarah Bailey” all grown up was really rather disconcerting.
Left: Sarah Bailey; Right: Veronica Donovan
And just in case you needed a reminder of The Craft...
Similarly, I’ve been a fan of crime dramas for years and years. Recently, I found myself wondering why all the actors and actresses cast to play the prosecuting attorneys were so young… then it occurred to me that they’re all probably roughly my age! Hell, I have friends from college and one ex-boyfriend who are now lawyers, so it’s certainly feasible.
Lastly, I recently discovered the BBC’s newest Robin Hood series. It’s incredibly cheesy, but the star, Jonas Armstrong, is simply gorgeous. I ran him through wikipedia and discovered that I am three years older than him! Something about being older than Robin Hood is seriously unnerving. It’s not going to stop me from ogling him though.
Lastly, I recently discovered the BBC’s newest Robin Hood series. It’s incredibly cheesy, but the star, Jonas Armstrong, is simply gorgeous. I ran him through wikipedia and discovered that I am three years older than him! Something about being older than Robin Hood is seriously unnerving. It’s not going to stop me from ogling him though.
Yummy.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
I could crush your skull - like a nut - but I'm not going to - because I need you.
I'm really not sure what to say about this week's topic. I'm not exactly sure what it is I'm supposed to write about. Do I feel old? Not really; sometimes I do, maybe when I'm talking to people younger than me, like my younger brother, who's ten years younger than I (when I realize he will be 17 this year, that *does* make me feel slightly "old"), but most of the time, actually, I feel very young. I am the youngest person where I work.
I can't really look at pop culture and decide whether or not that makes me young or old- I have almost always derided most things that are "popular." Anymore, things that are popular have a shelf life of a few days, so trying to keep up with what's hip, for someone with a job and a life, would be impossible. I do get nostaligic sometimes- once a year I will listen to 80s music for a couple of days and get nostalgic for being young and riding in my mom's car, listening to shitty mix stations on the radio. But that only lasts a couple of days. Personally, I hate nostalgia. It's like a disease.
The only thing that makes me feel "old" in a strange way is when I look at people I know and what they are doing. The main thing is that I am still in college, and won't be graduating until I am 28. That makes me feel, not necessarily old, but kinda crappy. I got started late; I hated LCCC, but had to get a full-time job so commuting out of town was not happening, and more flexible classes like hybrid courses or distance learning weren't as widely known or available, so I didn't go to school. Then I screwed around for a few years. I always knew I'd go back, but I waited a little longer than I wanted to. My hometown also sucked the life out of me. My big "growing-up" moment came when I finally decided to stop screwing around, and that meant moving away from my hometown. Then I started going back to school. Plus it took me that long to figure out exactly what I wanted to do, which I'm glad I did- had I just gone to school for whatever, I would likely be very unhappy now. I managed to figure out what I wanted to do, and now I am hugely passionate about it and very happy with it. But it took a while. Which I think is not abnormal. But it does make me feel "old" in relation to some of my friends who got their degrees already. Though I did manage to get lucky and get a job where I got promoted to making a decent living while I am in school. I don't know if it makes me feel "old" just as much as regretful that it took me so long to get my shit together.
I also feel strange when I think about the people I know who are my age and younger who got married. Usually, I feel like I am still way too young to do that- but sometiems, and this is probably due to where I grew up (rural, conservative, old-fashoined), sometimes it does make me feel old, since I haven't made some sort of huge life committment like getting married (that being the primary one), or buying a house, etc. But when I consider that almost every single one of my friends who got married got a divorce, and the few that didn't have had a hard time in their marriage and have thought about divorcing or getting separated, and all those horror stories, I feel vindicated. People these days are not getting married so quickly. I read an article a few years ago that talked about how "adolescence" is lasting well into the mid and late twenties (and it would probably tell you something about me to know that I saved that Time magazine issue and still have it). People aren't jumping right into a career right after high school, and people aren't sticking with one career or employer for their entire lives. Maybe it's natural, since people live a little longer. Who knows. But I don't feel old. Yet.
But I can say that I like myself now *infinitely* more than I did, say, six years ago. Six years ago I wouldn't even tuck in my shirt, not for anything. I think I didn't even tuck in my shirt for a job interview once. I refused to "dress up." I hated it. Now, I literally have about 75 ties. I realized a couple of weeks ago that 95% of my clothes are "dress" clothes; I had to go out and buy a new pair of jeans and some t-shirts. At work, when I started, my position didn't require a shirt and tie, but I wore them anyways because I really wanted to (and I got promoted to management- the old bromide "dress for success" must mean something). That's one way that I can see how much I've changed. Besides other personal things, such as my confidence level, my shyness, etc., which have also changed.
As far as using pop culture as a guage to see if one is old or young, that's not helpful for me. I've always liked things that are beneath the radar. If anything, the desire to seek out strange, obscure and eclectic music (and movies, though I don't get to watch a lot of movies) has only gotten stronger- I think this has a direct link to the other, more boring parts of my life. I mean, I almost exclusively read political and policy books (for fun!) and I watch an extensive amount of C-Span and news shows and read dozens of political blogs every day. So my musical and movie tatste have increasingly become more and more eclectic and strange.
It's all relative, I guess. I'm the youngest at work, yet often I act the most mature. Everyone has a different definintion of what is young and old. One thing, I will say, that does make me very acutely aware of my advancing age (though does not necessarily make me feel "old") is that I haven't "done" a lot of things that I'd like to do. I'm not "disappointed" with my life, but I haven't got to do a lot. For one thing, I never leave Florida. I haven't left the state of Florida in probably ten years. In my defense, Florida is not an easy state to get out of. From where I live, it would take me close to 9 or 10 hours to leave Florida, and then it's Georgia, which doesn't excite me. And I just haven't had the money/resources to fly places. I just haven't been able to do a whole lot. Of course, that doesn't bother me too much- I plan to vacation somewhere this year, and plan to move out of Florida altogether next year. Other things that I have never done, and am probably now a little past the point where I should start to try them, are things like drugs or something. But seriously, I probably haven't done as much as I'd like to have done by this age, but that doesn't make me feel too horrible. I'm stretching here.
I'm not sure if this is what I was supposed to write about. It's a tough one. I'm very introspective, but I don't spend any time thinking about old and young. There are times when I feel very young, as I can be extremely silly, and I work with people older than me. And there are times when I feel like I am getting older, like when I'm around people younger than myself. There have been moments where I have suddenly felt like I'm too old for my age, as all I do is go to work and then read about politics and public policy- so then I'll feel a need to do something to offset that, or feel the need to reevaluate what I'm doing or something. But those are fleeting moments. It has been a bit of a fight within myself at times to do what I feel is right, and not something based on different perceptions of old and young; where I grew up, it's very old fashioned- people ask "when are you getting married" etc. But, I moved to an urban area, and that sort of attitude is not very prevalent- most people here have told me not to get married until I am older, and most of my co-workers, while older than me, are single. So whatever, I do what I'm gonna do.
I can't really look at pop culture and decide whether or not that makes me young or old- I have almost always derided most things that are "popular." Anymore, things that are popular have a shelf life of a few days, so trying to keep up with what's hip, for someone with a job and a life, would be impossible. I do get nostaligic sometimes- once a year I will listen to 80s music for a couple of days and get nostalgic for being young and riding in my mom's car, listening to shitty mix stations on the radio. But that only lasts a couple of days. Personally, I hate nostalgia. It's like a disease.
The only thing that makes me feel "old" in a strange way is when I look at people I know and what they are doing. The main thing is that I am still in college, and won't be graduating until I am 28. That makes me feel, not necessarily old, but kinda crappy. I got started late; I hated LCCC, but had to get a full-time job so commuting out of town was not happening, and more flexible classes like hybrid courses or distance learning weren't as widely known or available, so I didn't go to school. Then I screwed around for a few years. I always knew I'd go back, but I waited a little longer than I wanted to. My hometown also sucked the life out of me. My big "growing-up" moment came when I finally decided to stop screwing around, and that meant moving away from my hometown. Then I started going back to school. Plus it took me that long to figure out exactly what I wanted to do, which I'm glad I did- had I just gone to school for whatever, I would likely be very unhappy now. I managed to figure out what I wanted to do, and now I am hugely passionate about it and very happy with it. But it took a while. Which I think is not abnormal. But it does make me feel "old" in relation to some of my friends who got their degrees already. Though I did manage to get lucky and get a job where I got promoted to making a decent living while I am in school. I don't know if it makes me feel "old" just as much as regretful that it took me so long to get my shit together.
I also feel strange when I think about the people I know who are my age and younger who got married. Usually, I feel like I am still way too young to do that- but sometiems, and this is probably due to where I grew up (rural, conservative, old-fashoined), sometimes it does make me feel old, since I haven't made some sort of huge life committment like getting married (that being the primary one), or buying a house, etc. But when I consider that almost every single one of my friends who got married got a divorce, and the few that didn't have had a hard time in their marriage and have thought about divorcing or getting separated, and all those horror stories, I feel vindicated. People these days are not getting married so quickly. I read an article a few years ago that talked about how "adolescence" is lasting well into the mid and late twenties (and it would probably tell you something about me to know that I saved that Time magazine issue and still have it). People aren't jumping right into a career right after high school, and people aren't sticking with one career or employer for their entire lives. Maybe it's natural, since people live a little longer. Who knows. But I don't feel old. Yet.
But I can say that I like myself now *infinitely* more than I did, say, six years ago. Six years ago I wouldn't even tuck in my shirt, not for anything. I think I didn't even tuck in my shirt for a job interview once. I refused to "dress up." I hated it. Now, I literally have about 75 ties. I realized a couple of weeks ago that 95% of my clothes are "dress" clothes; I had to go out and buy a new pair of jeans and some t-shirts. At work, when I started, my position didn't require a shirt and tie, but I wore them anyways because I really wanted to (and I got promoted to management- the old bromide "dress for success" must mean something). That's one way that I can see how much I've changed. Besides other personal things, such as my confidence level, my shyness, etc., which have also changed.
As far as using pop culture as a guage to see if one is old or young, that's not helpful for me. I've always liked things that are beneath the radar. If anything, the desire to seek out strange, obscure and eclectic music (and movies, though I don't get to watch a lot of movies) has only gotten stronger- I think this has a direct link to the other, more boring parts of my life. I mean, I almost exclusively read political and policy books (for fun!) and I watch an extensive amount of C-Span and news shows and read dozens of political blogs every day. So my musical and movie tatste have increasingly become more and more eclectic and strange.
It's all relative, I guess. I'm the youngest at work, yet often I act the most mature. Everyone has a different definintion of what is young and old. One thing, I will say, that does make me very acutely aware of my advancing age (though does not necessarily make me feel "old") is that I haven't "done" a lot of things that I'd like to do. I'm not "disappointed" with my life, but I haven't got to do a lot. For one thing, I never leave Florida. I haven't left the state of Florida in probably ten years. In my defense, Florida is not an easy state to get out of. From where I live, it would take me close to 9 or 10 hours to leave Florida, and then it's Georgia, which doesn't excite me. And I just haven't had the money/resources to fly places. I just haven't been able to do a whole lot. Of course, that doesn't bother me too much- I plan to vacation somewhere this year, and plan to move out of Florida altogether next year. Other things that I have never done, and am probably now a little past the point where I should start to try them, are things like drugs or something. But seriously, I probably haven't done as much as I'd like to have done by this age, but that doesn't make me feel too horrible. I'm stretching here.
I'm not sure if this is what I was supposed to write about. It's a tough one. I'm very introspective, but I don't spend any time thinking about old and young. There are times when I feel very young, as I can be extremely silly, and I work with people older than me. And there are times when I feel like I am getting older, like when I'm around people younger than myself. There have been moments where I have suddenly felt like I'm too old for my age, as all I do is go to work and then read about politics and public policy- so then I'll feel a need to do something to offset that, or feel the need to reevaluate what I'm doing or something. But those are fleeting moments. It has been a bit of a fight within myself at times to do what I feel is right, and not something based on different perceptions of old and young; where I grew up, it's very old fashioned- people ask "when are you getting married" etc. But, I moved to an urban area, and that sort of attitude is not very prevalent- most people here have told me not to get married until I am older, and most of my co-workers, while older than me, are single. So whatever, I do what I'm gonna do.
Working blues
When I started my last job, about 6 months after graduation, the interns were older than me. This caused some problems with one or two who 1.) kept calling me "Ms. Smither" and 2.) ignored me when I gave them tasks. Pompous jerks. At my current job, happily, I'm right at the median age.
Age is a strange thing these days. I have some friends right out of school in their early 20s (and some of their friends are still 18 or 19), and others in their early to mid 30s. Being 25, it's not too weird to hang out with any one in that range (although my behavior changes a bit), but I understand it when the 32-year-old says she feels awkward drinking with the 21-year-old.
What gets to me a little more is what I call the "Office Space Phenomenon." for example, this morning I rode the bus into work with a co-worker and we discussed the pros and cons of our neighborhood dry cleaners. Agag! Am I so boring?! To be fair, we later talked about bands we were going to download from iTunes after seeing them live. But you get the point. My usual lunch conversation revolves around network TV shows that aired the night before, and my neighbors are having their second annual Oscar party this weekend.
So, for me at least, the real measure of my age feels more acute as I notice my immersion in pop culture. It reflects for me that adult, work-a-day, water cooler socialization. I'm not too old to rebel, but I am old enough to see that "rebellion" is just as conformist as watching the latest Alan Sorkin show.
Man, I'm sleepy. Where's that intern with my next cup of coffee?
Age is a strange thing these days. I have some friends right out of school in their early 20s (and some of their friends are still 18 or 19), and others in their early to mid 30s. Being 25, it's not too weird to hang out with any one in that range (although my behavior changes a bit), but I understand it when the 32-year-old says she feels awkward drinking with the 21-year-old.
What gets to me a little more is what I call the "Office Space Phenomenon." for example, this morning I rode the bus into work with a co-worker and we discussed the pros and cons of our neighborhood dry cleaners. Agag! Am I so boring?! To be fair, we later talked about bands we were going to download from iTunes after seeing them live. But you get the point. My usual lunch conversation revolves around network TV shows that aired the night before, and my neighbors are having their second annual Oscar party this weekend.
So, for me at least, the real measure of my age feels more acute as I notice my immersion in pop culture. It reflects for me that adult, work-a-day, water cooler socialization. I'm not too old to rebel, but I am old enough to see that "rebellion" is just as conformist as watching the latest Alan Sorkin show.
Man, I'm sleepy. Where's that intern with my next cup of coffee?
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Late Mid Twenties
Well, being 26, I am in my late mid-twenties. In May, when I turn 27, I will be in my early late-twenties. This is something I've developed in order to make things sound a little more palatable as I get older.
Certainly in my life there have been things that have made me feel old. Like seeing Full House on Nick at Nite, having my younger brother and younger sister get married before me, or seeing Halloween 4 on American Movie Classics. Well, just kidding about that one. Everybody knows AMC is the worst channel in history. I mean, come on. They show fucking American Pie on that channel.
But probably what consistently reminds me of my age is teaching my college freshman. I mean, it wasn't so long ago that I myself was a college freshman, skipping lots of math classes and staying up until 4 every night with my roommate for absolutely no good reason other than we could. (We were pretty big losers, so we didn't have a lot of friends). This semester, though, I'm teaching Maus, Watchmen, and Dark Knight Returns, all written in the mid to late 80s. I find that I'm constantly having to explain the general political climate of the time, and how that might affect their reading of these works, because most of them were alive for only two years of the 80s, tops. I mean, we talk about the Reagan administration a little bit, and to be fair I wasn't actually in America for that, but I pretty much have to educate them from scratch. Their general knowledge of Reagan is that he single handedly broke the Berlin wall with his fists and destroyed the Soviet Bloc with one wink. Just kidding of course. They have no idea what the Berlin wall or Soviet Bloc are.
But do I feel old? I mean, I'm older than these kids, certainly. And I don't really ever get carded anymore, unless I go to a bar where college students go. And I have a couple of grey hairs. And I'm not really in shape. (Though some may argue that I wasn't ever in shape to begin with, and some may be right). And I'm in a stuffy graduate program. And I have two cats. And I pretty much always use metamusil and viagra. And I complain that things were better before all these whippersnappers were running around. And I go to Shoneys at 4:30 for dinner every Sunday. And I have to buy pre-chewed food. And my grandkids never call, the goddamned little ingrates. And I have a healthy collection of 78s, that don't quite hold up to the quality of phonographic cylinders. And I drive in a very annoying manner to young folk.
But on the other hand, my ideal day is probably spent reading comic books and playing video games. Also, my apartment is decorated in action figures and movie posters. So maybe I'm old in some ways, and young in the important ways.
PS - I don't need viagra, just to clarify. That was a joke. I was being facetious. I am one hundred percent fine in the special area. No viagra for me, thanks. Honest.
Certainly in my life there have been things that have made me feel old. Like seeing Full House on Nick at Nite, having my younger brother and younger sister get married before me, or seeing Halloween 4 on American Movie Classics. Well, just kidding about that one. Everybody knows AMC is the worst channel in history. I mean, come on. They show fucking American Pie on that channel.
But probably what consistently reminds me of my age is teaching my college freshman. I mean, it wasn't so long ago that I myself was a college freshman, skipping lots of math classes and staying up until 4 every night with my roommate for absolutely no good reason other than we could. (We were pretty big losers, so we didn't have a lot of friends). This semester, though, I'm teaching Maus, Watchmen, and Dark Knight Returns, all written in the mid to late 80s. I find that I'm constantly having to explain the general political climate of the time, and how that might affect their reading of these works, because most of them were alive for only two years of the 80s, tops. I mean, we talk about the Reagan administration a little bit, and to be fair I wasn't actually in America for that, but I pretty much have to educate them from scratch. Their general knowledge of Reagan is that he single handedly broke the Berlin wall with his fists and destroyed the Soviet Bloc with one wink. Just kidding of course. They have no idea what the Berlin wall or Soviet Bloc are.
But do I feel old? I mean, I'm older than these kids, certainly. And I don't really ever get carded anymore, unless I go to a bar where college students go. And I have a couple of grey hairs. And I'm not really in shape. (Though some may argue that I wasn't ever in shape to begin with, and some may be right). And I'm in a stuffy graduate program. And I have two cats. And I pretty much always use metamusil and viagra. And I complain that things were better before all these whippersnappers were running around. And I go to Shoneys at 4:30 for dinner every Sunday. And I have to buy pre-chewed food. And my grandkids never call, the goddamned little ingrates. And I have a healthy collection of 78s, that don't quite hold up to the quality of phonographic cylinders. And I drive in a very annoying manner to young folk.
But on the other hand, my ideal day is probably spent reading comic books and playing video games. Also, my apartment is decorated in action figures and movie posters. So maybe I'm old in some ways, and young in the important ways.
PS - I don't need viagra, just to clarify. That was a joke. I was being facetious. I am one hundred percent fine in the special area. No viagra for me, thanks. Honest.
Monday, February 19, 2007
"I'm 37, I'm not old"
Well I was trying to think of something really bizarre to write about, and one of the kids from my church suggested bedsheets. Definitely weird, but after skiing all weekend, I don't think I could muster enough creativity to write my own post about bedsheets, so consider yourselves safe for now.
I've actually been thinking a lot about age lately - maybe this is from being around people at least 7-8 yrs younger than I this weekend. I was thinking about how much age is perceived differently, not only as you get older, but in society in general. For example, turning 30 used to be a big deal. There are all sorts of scenes in sitcoms and movies where people are agonizing over being the big 3-0. I don't know about the rest of you, but who cares? 30 isn't old, and yet these people act as if it's the end of the world (of course it's funnier that way). Maybe when I get closer to 30 I'll feel differently, but I don't think so - I've never thought of that age as old, except maybe when I was 5.
However, maybe I was just mature about aging when I was younger. I actually had 2 kids at the library basically tell me I was old the other day. These two guys (about 13-14) were hitting on some girls, and in general giving me grief. One of them said "I bet you had a lot of guys chasing after you when you were young" (a poor attempt to suck up). I said "What do you mean 'when I was young'?" His friend hit him and said, "She's still young". The first one goes "What are you, 21?". "No, a little older than that.", "24?", "No a little older.", "29?!". OK - big jump there from 24 to 29, but the fact that his first guess was 21 is a little disheartening. I mean, I guess it's a compliment if I look 4 yrs younger than I am, but it's disheartening because he was implying that 21 was old.
I used to think 50 was pretty old too, but now that my parents and friends' parents are hitting that age, it's not that way anymore. I mean, it still sounds old - but when I look at the people I know who are that age, it doesn't match the image that was conjured in my mind when I was younger.
Part of this is probably my perception of age changing as I get older, but I think society as a whole is changing. People are getting married and having kids later. If this were 20 yrs ago, all of us on this blog would probably be married and maybe have kids, but as it is none of us are. Maybe it's because life spans keep getting longer. I mean, back when people only lived to be about 40, they were married with kids at 13. Maybe we're getting smarter - we're waiting to get married and have kids once were more responsible and financially stable. Or maybe we're just more selfish - waiting to live out our single lives as long as we can before settling.
Of course there are still plenty of people who get married and have kids right out of high school. One of which is my new coworker, with whom I went to school. She was telling me about her husband and kids, and she asked if I had any. I replied no, but I know I had a look of utter shock and horror at the question. (That's something I really should work on) I tried to cover, but it just didn't work. I can't imagine having any children right now, much less having any when I was 18. (I could have a 7 yr old right now!)
As much as I hate people 10 yrs younger than me thinking I'm old, I guess I do the same to them - that is think that they're really young - just kids. It's funny hanging out with my Sr. High youth @ church - we like a lot of the same movies and music and they're really cool. However a song will play - like the Undone Sweater song by Weezer, and I'll stop and think "Wow - they were like 6 when this song came out - weird."
So I guess this week's topic is age - how you perceive it, how society perceives it, how you think people a certain age should act - that type of stuff.
Oh and props to Laurie for giving us a shoutout via bulletin on myspace.
I've actually been thinking a lot about age lately - maybe this is from being around people at least 7-8 yrs younger than I this weekend. I was thinking about how much age is perceived differently, not only as you get older, but in society in general. For example, turning 30 used to be a big deal. There are all sorts of scenes in sitcoms and movies where people are agonizing over being the big 3-0. I don't know about the rest of you, but who cares? 30 isn't old, and yet these people act as if it's the end of the world (of course it's funnier that way). Maybe when I get closer to 30 I'll feel differently, but I don't think so - I've never thought of that age as old, except maybe when I was 5.
However, maybe I was just mature about aging when I was younger. I actually had 2 kids at the library basically tell me I was old the other day. These two guys (about 13-14) were hitting on some girls, and in general giving me grief. One of them said "I bet you had a lot of guys chasing after you when you were young" (a poor attempt to suck up). I said "What do you mean 'when I was young'?" His friend hit him and said, "She's still young". The first one goes "What are you, 21?". "No, a little older than that.", "24?", "No a little older.", "29?!". OK - big jump there from 24 to 29, but the fact that his first guess was 21 is a little disheartening. I mean, I guess it's a compliment if I look 4 yrs younger than I am, but it's disheartening because he was implying that 21 was old.
I used to think 50 was pretty old too, but now that my parents and friends' parents are hitting that age, it's not that way anymore. I mean, it still sounds old - but when I look at the people I know who are that age, it doesn't match the image that was conjured in my mind when I was younger.
Part of this is probably my perception of age changing as I get older, but I think society as a whole is changing. People are getting married and having kids later. If this were 20 yrs ago, all of us on this blog would probably be married and maybe have kids, but as it is none of us are. Maybe it's because life spans keep getting longer. I mean, back when people only lived to be about 40, they were married with kids at 13. Maybe we're getting smarter - we're waiting to get married and have kids once were more responsible and financially stable. Or maybe we're just more selfish - waiting to live out our single lives as long as we can before settling.
Of course there are still plenty of people who get married and have kids right out of high school. One of which is my new coworker, with whom I went to school. She was telling me about her husband and kids, and she asked if I had any. I replied no, but I know I had a look of utter shock and horror at the question. (That's something I really should work on) I tried to cover, but it just didn't work. I can't imagine having any children right now, much less having any when I was 18. (I could have a 7 yr old right now!)
As much as I hate people 10 yrs younger than me thinking I'm old, I guess I do the same to them - that is think that they're really young - just kids. It's funny hanging out with my Sr. High youth @ church - we like a lot of the same movies and music and they're really cool. However a song will play - like the Undone Sweater song by Weezer, and I'll stop and think "Wow - they were like 6 when this song came out - weird."
So I guess this week's topic is age - how you perceive it, how society perceives it, how you think people a certain age should act - that type of stuff.
Oh and props to Laurie for giving us a shoutout via bulletin on myspace.
Lastly...
...another follow-up to my post, since the Iraq War came up. I was against the war when it started. I remember the "countdown" that Bush had for Saddam Hussein. I remember that night watching TV at work when the "countdown" ran out, and I remember watching when the bombs started dropping. At the time, I lived in a rural area, and most people were very much behind this war. I remember being home from work and watching, live on TV, the tanks riding into Baghdad. I was against it, and I remember hearing Howard Dean at the time speaking out against it, and saying what he thought would happen; and it happened just as he said. I remember before the war started, seeing how many Democrats voted for it. I remember some of the rationalizing about it: that in the moment, in the political climate that existed, and with the BS intelligence that Bush and Co. were pushing (and remember, Congress doesn't have access to their own intelligence like the White House does, of course), it, in hindsight, does make a slight bit of sense that many Dems might vote for the war. But even then, I didn't understand it. Now, personally, I am not a big follower of foreign policy; I try to stay up on Iraq and the Middle East, but mostly, I'm more interested in domestic policy. But, Iraq is the biggest policy fuckup, both foreign or domestic, that has happened surely in my lifetime, if not in competition for all-time fuckup. Not only has is completely screwed up the US with regards to other countries and our standing on the world stage, it's screwed up our domestic policy, both by massive and unnecessary spending and by directing our attention away from things that need to be addressed here at home. So I do think that the war is a strike against our Dem candidates, those that voted for it. But I do think that Edwards is on the right track: he's denounced the war, he's said it was a mistake and he was wrong to vote for it. I'm loathe to "promote" someone who made such a massive mistake, but one does have to somewhat take the politics of the time into account. Obama, of course, was not in the Senate, but did come out strong against the war at the time. Clinton voted for it and won't even talk about her vote; she also furthers the Right Wing rhetoric that the Republic Party pushes, likely in an attempt to triangulate her position with more conservative folks (it won't work).
Here is a good blog post that speaks to exactly how I feel about the war. I think that we need to get out of there. Yes, we should take some "responsibility" for what we've done. But we've lost more Americans to the Iraq War fuckup than we did in 9/11, which was and still is used as justification for being there. There are PLENTY of plans out there that Dems have put forth to get us out of Iraq. It's already a civil war, and it's going to get worse with or without us standing in the way and getting killed. I know people over there. I'm tired of seeing people come home in caskets, or come home wounded or mentally fucked-up and not getting the help they deserve. To hear the GOP talk about supporting the troops, and talking about how even debating an exit from Iraq is damaging to the troops, and then not trying to raise taxes even a cent, or even repealing some of Bush's fat tax cuts for the richest among us, to help pay for the war, and get life-saving armor over there to the troops- it's disgusting, and it makes me, honestly, wish I could get locked into a room with some of these fucking assholes. The new Bush budget cuts more veterans benefits, and cuts completely any new research and development into traumatic brain injuries, which is something that is common among Iraq War casualties. The troops don't have the armor and protection they need- the army couldn't even get helmet liners to the troops that could save lives and the troops brains; a private citizen started a campaign to get these to the troops, and ended up finally shaming the army into providing them after regular people sent large sums of their own personal money to get these liners over to the troops. How dare these yellow, scum-sucking, posturing two-faced bottom feeing fuckers even BEGIN to talk about supporting the troops? This war needs to end. There are plans to remove us from Iraq; re-deployment to other areas to continue to help train and protect the borders. A "soft-partition" of Iraq into three different areas (which is, de facto, what is already happening anyway- remember, Iraq was never actually a country, it was cobbled together from different more tribal areas and held together by a dictator). Biden has one of the best plans; unfortunately, he's not the best talker, and our high and mighty news media thinks that someone misspeaking is more fucking important than actually having a good plan and getting something done. This whole situation is fucked, and continuing down the same path, because "we must take responsibility," or because we are too proud to "lose," or whatever; it's morally repugnant and wrong. These soldiers deserve better, and so do the future generations which are undoubtedly going to live in the aftermath of these blunders.
Here is a good blog post that speaks to exactly how I feel about the war. I think that we need to get out of there. Yes, we should take some "responsibility" for what we've done. But we've lost more Americans to the Iraq War fuckup than we did in 9/11, which was and still is used as justification for being there. There are PLENTY of plans out there that Dems have put forth to get us out of Iraq. It's already a civil war, and it's going to get worse with or without us standing in the way and getting killed. I know people over there. I'm tired of seeing people come home in caskets, or come home wounded or mentally fucked-up and not getting the help they deserve. To hear the GOP talk about supporting the troops, and talking about how even debating an exit from Iraq is damaging to the troops, and then not trying to raise taxes even a cent, or even repealing some of Bush's fat tax cuts for the richest among us, to help pay for the war, and get life-saving armor over there to the troops- it's disgusting, and it makes me, honestly, wish I could get locked into a room with some of these fucking assholes. The new Bush budget cuts more veterans benefits, and cuts completely any new research and development into traumatic brain injuries, which is something that is common among Iraq War casualties. The troops don't have the armor and protection they need- the army couldn't even get helmet liners to the troops that could save lives and the troops brains; a private citizen started a campaign to get these to the troops, and ended up finally shaming the army into providing them after regular people sent large sums of their own personal money to get these liners over to the troops. How dare these yellow, scum-sucking, posturing two-faced bottom feeing fuckers even BEGIN to talk about supporting the troops? This war needs to end. There are plans to remove us from Iraq; re-deployment to other areas to continue to help train and protect the borders. A "soft-partition" of Iraq into three different areas (which is, de facto, what is already happening anyway- remember, Iraq was never actually a country, it was cobbled together from different more tribal areas and held together by a dictator). Biden has one of the best plans; unfortunately, he's not the best talker, and our high and mighty news media thinks that someone misspeaking is more fucking important than actually having a good plan and getting something done. This whole situation is fucked, and continuing down the same path, because "we must take responsibility," or because we are too proud to "lose," or whatever; it's morally repugnant and wrong. These soldiers deserve better, and so do the future generations which are undoubtedly going to live in the aftermath of these blunders.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
No way, eh! Radiation has made me an enemy of civilization!
Well, I had a good long post ready on Friday, and then Blogger crapped out on me; not expecting Blogger to do that, I didn't copy my text, and I lost the post. I haven't been in the mood to re-post it; needless to say, it's basically more of the same stuff that I have written previously and in the comments to everyone else's posts. On the subject of Obama, I think he certainly can win. This question of "electability" is one that seems strange to me: "can he/she win" seems to be something the media comes up with; they asked the same thing about Bill Clinton. Any of the three top tier candidates in the Democratic field could most certainly win. Even Hillary Clinton.
As for me personally, Obama is my favorite candidate right now (of those that are running). I'd count the top tier candidates as Obama, Edwards and Clinton, and I prefer them in that order. I'm not the biggest fan of Clinton; I'd maybe even prefer a couple of the second tiered candidates to her (Richardson, Dodd, possibly Vilsack). I feel that way about Hillary for a few reasons. First, she represents a part of the Democratic party that I think should be purged: the more "Republican-lite, DLC wing." I remember, I think in 2003 or 2004, when Howard Dean said he represented "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party"; that's what he meant. There are two parts of the party, and as much as I like Bill Clinton, and as much as I do actually like Hillary Clinton, I don't think she would be the best President. The second thing is her calculating and triangulating: it seriously troubles me. She seems to take no strong, principled stands on things, until, of course, her stand has been fully tested and when her handlers think it is politically sound to say. I've been much more impressed with Obama's ideas, which seem to be actually saying something, and with his quick and effective replies to attacks. (There's an anecdote about seeing Hillary speak in one of these comments threads that details her sort of hollow rhetoric; contrast that with Obama's speeches, which are truly inspiring and linger long after they are over). Hillary's stance on the war is particularly troubling; she is obviously against it now, and she speaks out against it, but she also adopts some of the Right's bullshit rhetoric (such as equating 9/11 with Iraq), and she will just not say that she was wrong to vote for the war. This seems to clearly be to not completely alienate those who might still be for the war. This is a huge mistake; those people are not likely to vote for Hillary in the first place; and as she tries unsuccessfully to pander to them, she is turning off those who would actually vote for her, as they move to one of the other two candidates. The Iraq War, which is one of the biggest policy blunders probably in history, was a mistake; for some reason, in DC, we seem to allow people to fail upwards; do we really want to PROMOTE someone who was so wrong? Edwards, of course, squeaks by because he has consistently said he was wrong and it was a mistake; Obama was not in the US Senate at the time, but has the virtue of having come out strongly against the war from his podium as a state senator. (I can somewhat excuse Democrats who voted for the war; it was somewhat close to 9/11, the country wanted something to be done and had fallen for the president's bullshit intelligence and was seeming to somewhat rally around Bush, etc.- it was a political decision, and very few seemed to see what a blunder this would be; Howard Dean was someone who seemed to see exactly what was going to happen, as did Obama.) So I am not for Hillary; but, if she is the nominee, I will vote for her with no problem.
One way or another, I think Obama will be on the ticket. Edwards has made it clear he isn't running for Vice President and didn't care for it the first time; he could change his mind. But I think, if Obama doesn't get the presidential nod, he'll be on the ticket as VP, and then in four or eight years, he will be the prohibitive favorite. I would, personally, love to see Gore come in, and have a Gore/Obama ticket. Out of those already in the game, I'd be into an Edwards/Obama ticket, or possibly an Obama/Clinton ticket as a second choice. I will also predict something now: barring a catastrophic mistake on the part of the congressional Democrats, if a Democrat wins the White House in 2008, I predict Democratic leadership for quite a while- I might even say a generation (again, barring any real big fuckups). The GOP ran Washington and this country into the ground for the past 12 years, and the country is trending Democratic; with the Dem field this exciting (and the GOP field decidedly not exciting), if a Dem wins, I predict a Democratic era for a while.
Speaking of the GOP field, it's very interesting; the Democratic field is extremely exciting and is seriously getting people pumped up, while the GOP field is problematic to Republicans and conservatives. The situation seems to be that an extremely socially conservative candidate couldn't win the general election, but a more moderate Republican can't get through the GOP primary. Their top tiered candidates are not seeming to move people- I have read many blogs and articles that seem to have conservatives not very happy with their choices, and I've seen this on television as well. Who've they got? Mccain, who the conservative base does not seem to trust- no matter how much he runs to the HARD right, and no matter how much he completely lies and flip-flops through this campaign season. Giuliani, who absolutely doesn't have the experience to be president; he is really a candidate who is even out there because of one day- and as soon as this thing gets rolling, we're going to see all of the real dirt on him, and the incompetence of much of his mayorship that got brushed under the rug when 9/11 happened. Besides that, I also think that his positions on things will scare away much of the GOP base. And then we have Romney, who is a Mormon; I'm sorry, but that's going to kill him in this race. I'm not saying that's right, but I don't think a Mormon will get through the GOP primary. And then the other candidates, such as Duncan Hunter, or Mike Huckabee, are just not well known enough that even if they do have more conservative credentials that might get them through the GOP primary, I don't see them breaking the wave that is Obama, or any of the other nationally well-known Dem candidates. So it's really unfortunate for the Republic party, and really fortunate for those who would like to see the Dems take back the WH and solidify their hold on Congress in '08 (the GOP has many more Senate seats up for grabs in 08 than the Dems do, so it seems likely that the Dems will strengthen their razor-thin hold on the Senate).
And lastly, for someone who said they thought they could see themselves voting Mccain, here's a couple of links that you (and everyone) should take a look at. Yes, it's from a left-wing website, but the content speaks for itself. Mccain is a liar and, in my opinion, a dangerous candidate. This image of him from the 2000 primaries as a "maverick" and a moderate is increasingly false. His Iraq War bullshit is also troubling.
That's pretty much what I said the first time in the post that Blogger ate; except the first time it was probably not as riddled with mistakes and was less stream-of-consciousness, but hey, it's late.
As for me personally, Obama is my favorite candidate right now (of those that are running). I'd count the top tier candidates as Obama, Edwards and Clinton, and I prefer them in that order. I'm not the biggest fan of Clinton; I'd maybe even prefer a couple of the second tiered candidates to her (Richardson, Dodd, possibly Vilsack). I feel that way about Hillary for a few reasons. First, she represents a part of the Democratic party that I think should be purged: the more "Republican-lite, DLC wing." I remember, I think in 2003 or 2004, when Howard Dean said he represented "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party"; that's what he meant. There are two parts of the party, and as much as I like Bill Clinton, and as much as I do actually like Hillary Clinton, I don't think she would be the best President. The second thing is her calculating and triangulating: it seriously troubles me. She seems to take no strong, principled stands on things, until, of course, her stand has been fully tested and when her handlers think it is politically sound to say. I've been much more impressed with Obama's ideas, which seem to be actually saying something, and with his quick and effective replies to attacks. (There's an anecdote about seeing Hillary speak in one of these comments threads that details her sort of hollow rhetoric; contrast that with Obama's speeches, which are truly inspiring and linger long after they are over). Hillary's stance on the war is particularly troubling; she is obviously against it now, and she speaks out against it, but she also adopts some of the Right's bullshit rhetoric (such as equating 9/11 with Iraq), and she will just not say that she was wrong to vote for the war. This seems to clearly be to not completely alienate those who might still be for the war. This is a huge mistake; those people are not likely to vote for Hillary in the first place; and as she tries unsuccessfully to pander to them, she is turning off those who would actually vote for her, as they move to one of the other two candidates. The Iraq War, which is one of the biggest policy blunders probably in history, was a mistake; for some reason, in DC, we seem to allow people to fail upwards; do we really want to PROMOTE someone who was so wrong? Edwards, of course, squeaks by because he has consistently said he was wrong and it was a mistake; Obama was not in the US Senate at the time, but has the virtue of having come out strongly against the war from his podium as a state senator. (I can somewhat excuse Democrats who voted for the war; it was somewhat close to 9/11, the country wanted something to be done and had fallen for the president's bullshit intelligence and was seeming to somewhat rally around Bush, etc.- it was a political decision, and very few seemed to see what a blunder this would be; Howard Dean was someone who seemed to see exactly what was going to happen, as did Obama.) So I am not for Hillary; but, if she is the nominee, I will vote for her with no problem.
One way or another, I think Obama will be on the ticket. Edwards has made it clear he isn't running for Vice President and didn't care for it the first time; he could change his mind. But I think, if Obama doesn't get the presidential nod, he'll be on the ticket as VP, and then in four or eight years, he will be the prohibitive favorite. I would, personally, love to see Gore come in, and have a Gore/Obama ticket. Out of those already in the game, I'd be into an Edwards/Obama ticket, or possibly an Obama/Clinton ticket as a second choice. I will also predict something now: barring a catastrophic mistake on the part of the congressional Democrats, if a Democrat wins the White House in 2008, I predict Democratic leadership for quite a while- I might even say a generation (again, barring any real big fuckups). The GOP ran Washington and this country into the ground for the past 12 years, and the country is trending Democratic; with the Dem field this exciting (and the GOP field decidedly not exciting), if a Dem wins, I predict a Democratic era for a while.
Speaking of the GOP field, it's very interesting; the Democratic field is extremely exciting and is seriously getting people pumped up, while the GOP field is problematic to Republicans and conservatives. The situation seems to be that an extremely socially conservative candidate couldn't win the general election, but a more moderate Republican can't get through the GOP primary. Their top tiered candidates are not seeming to move people- I have read many blogs and articles that seem to have conservatives not very happy with their choices, and I've seen this on television as well. Who've they got? Mccain, who the conservative base does not seem to trust- no matter how much he runs to the HARD right, and no matter how much he completely lies and flip-flops through this campaign season. Giuliani, who absolutely doesn't have the experience to be president; he is really a candidate who is even out there because of one day- and as soon as this thing gets rolling, we're going to see all of the real dirt on him, and the incompetence of much of his mayorship that got brushed under the rug when 9/11 happened. Besides that, I also think that his positions on things will scare away much of the GOP base. And then we have Romney, who is a Mormon; I'm sorry, but that's going to kill him in this race. I'm not saying that's right, but I don't think a Mormon will get through the GOP primary. And then the other candidates, such as Duncan Hunter, or Mike Huckabee, are just not well known enough that even if they do have more conservative credentials that might get them through the GOP primary, I don't see them breaking the wave that is Obama, or any of the other nationally well-known Dem candidates. So it's really unfortunate for the Republic party, and really fortunate for those who would like to see the Dems take back the WH and solidify their hold on Congress in '08 (the GOP has many more Senate seats up for grabs in 08 than the Dems do, so it seems likely that the Dems will strengthen their razor-thin hold on the Senate).
And lastly, for someone who said they thought they could see themselves voting Mccain, here's a couple of links that you (and everyone) should take a look at. Yes, it's from a left-wing website, but the content speaks for itself. Mccain is a liar and, in my opinion, a dangerous candidate. This image of him from the 2000 primaries as a "maverick" and a moderate is increasingly false. His Iraq War bullshit is also troubling.
That's pretty much what I said the first time in the post that Blogger ate; except the first time it was probably not as riddled with mistakes and was less stream-of-consciousness, but hey, it's late.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
My.President.Com
the lefty side of Washington has recently become one big Obama love-in. As my neighbor put it last week, "it's all Barack, all the time here." In fact, I haven't heard a negative thing about him in weeks, which is saying a lot in a city like this.
That said, I confess I haven't been too eager to follow all the hype and the plethora of other contestants. For one thing, I've been AWFULLY pre-occupied with the Anna Nicole Smith stories (this alone could make for a very long blog series from me), and for another, the full election is still a full 21 months off. I can't make a decision right now, knowing I'll have nearly 2 years to gather more information and to change my mind. Even the DC primary is a full year away.
One of my best friends recently signed up on My.BarackObama.com to support his campaign, so I decided to check out the site. I highly recommend this, as it made it abundantly clear that Obama is running the better campaign. The Web site is packed full of information and easy to use, and it even has a password-protected MySpace-style personalize-able section to encourage participation from people who normally wouldn't bother. He offers tons of professional information about himself-- past speeches, press releases, bills, etc.-- and a (obviously highly flattering) bio. I read his recent Springfield speech, since I had neglected to actually listen to the whole thing when he gave it, and, I have to admit, I got a little misty-eyed! I think he's certainly the first politician who knows how to talk to our generation-- who knows what we really want, why we've become cynical, what we want to believe is possible, and how to reassure us that despite whatever we've seen so far it really IS possible. He comes across as intelligent and straight-forward. His Web site also included a list of important issues, what he thought was wrong with them, and how he would fix them. Right there! In print! "here's how I would fix the county and the world" Hillary couldn't even answer a question in a recent interview about whether she thought Obama had enough experience for office. She couldn't even offer her own opinion, and for that, she lost major points in my book. To quote a recent headline in reference to Obama, "somebody stop him before he gets more experience!"
I think Obama's big problem will not be that he's black (or not black enough) or inexperienced, but that he is doing such a great job at courting the young, newly influential idealists that make up so much of our generation. Unfortunately, most of us don't vote. This makes me want to rail and kick and scream, but it is the truth. For many of us, our first presidential election was Bush-Gore 2000, where it became abundantly clear that our single votes didn't matter so much. On the other hand, maybe the lesson was that they DID matter and all those people who would have voted Democratic if they had ever bothered to register were actually the ones who made the vote too close to call in a timely manner and therefore dependant on a panel of judges. Or maybe it was all Katherine Harris's fault, who does well in fulfilling her role as the perfect Snidely-Whiplash-or-Cruella-DeVil-style villain.
My conclusion, then, is two-fold. First, Hillary, you have to get off your duff and start running a creative and innovative campaign. We've been fooled enough times now to not fall for the same bullshit anymore. Stop "playing it safe" and actually put some real opinions out there so you don't force us to vote for a person rather than for issues (because you'll loose). and Second, my friends, my generation, you must register to vote, and you must exercise that right whenever you can. I was always big on voting in Florida, and, since I've moved and had to forfeit most of my representation and voting rights, it's become even more important to me. Look... it takes just a few minutes, and you can do it here: http://www.declareyourself.org/index.php (just try to get past the graphics obviously meant to encourage “young, hip, urban voters”). Thank you and god speed.
That said, I confess I haven't been too eager to follow all the hype and the plethora of other contestants. For one thing, I've been AWFULLY pre-occupied with the Anna Nicole Smith stories (this alone could make for a very long blog series from me), and for another, the full election is still a full 21 months off. I can't make a decision right now, knowing I'll have nearly 2 years to gather more information and to change my mind. Even the DC primary is a full year away.
One of my best friends recently signed up on My.BarackObama.com to support his campaign, so I decided to check out the site. I highly recommend this, as it made it abundantly clear that Obama is running the better campaign. The Web site is packed full of information and easy to use, and it even has a password-protected MySpace-style personalize-able section to encourage participation from people who normally wouldn't bother. He offers tons of professional information about himself-- past speeches, press releases, bills, etc.-- and a (obviously highly flattering) bio. I read his recent Springfield speech, since I had neglected to actually listen to the whole thing when he gave it, and, I have to admit, I got a little misty-eyed! I think he's certainly the first politician who knows how to talk to our generation-- who knows what we really want, why we've become cynical, what we want to believe is possible, and how to reassure us that despite whatever we've seen so far it really IS possible. He comes across as intelligent and straight-forward. His Web site also included a list of important issues, what he thought was wrong with them, and how he would fix them. Right there! In print! "here's how I would fix the county and the world" Hillary couldn't even answer a question in a recent interview about whether she thought Obama had enough experience for office. She couldn't even offer her own opinion, and for that, she lost major points in my book. To quote a recent headline in reference to Obama, "somebody stop him before he gets more experience!"
I think Obama's big problem will not be that he's black (or not black enough) or inexperienced, but that he is doing such a great job at courting the young, newly influential idealists that make up so much of our generation. Unfortunately, most of us don't vote. This makes me want to rail and kick and scream, but it is the truth. For many of us, our first presidential election was Bush-Gore 2000, where it became abundantly clear that our single votes didn't matter so much. On the other hand, maybe the lesson was that they DID matter and all those people who would have voted Democratic if they had ever bothered to register were actually the ones who made the vote too close to call in a timely manner and therefore dependant on a panel of judges. Or maybe it was all Katherine Harris's fault, who does well in fulfilling her role as the perfect Snidely-Whiplash-or-Cruella-DeVil-style villain.
My conclusion, then, is two-fold. First, Hillary, you have to get off your duff and start running a creative and innovative campaign. We've been fooled enough times now to not fall for the same bullshit anymore. Stop "playing it safe" and actually put some real opinions out there so you don't force us to vote for a person rather than for issues (because you'll loose). and Second, my friends, my generation, you must register to vote, and you must exercise that right whenever you can. I was always big on voting in Florida, and, since I've moved and had to forfeit most of my representation and voting rights, it's become even more important to me. Look... it takes just a few minutes, and you can do it here: http://www.declareyourself.org/index.php (just try to get past the graphics obviously meant to encourage “young, hip, urban voters”). Thank you and god speed.
The children are our future, I'm told
Well, as you all may know, I can't vote. Therefore, I don't watch or care about politics. Just kidding. I care. I'm a pretty left-wing person. Probably more left wing than most of my cobloggers here, even. (Sorry, Nick, but it's true). So I would definitely vote for whatever Democrat they put up against the republicans. Probably I would want that to be Barack Obama, because every time he speaks he sounds so intelligent and eloquent, unlike our president who sounds like a garbage truck crunching up a half ton of dirty diapers. Also, I agree with what he says that sounds so intelligent, too.
Anyway, this wasn't a make out with Barack topic, it was a race/sex matter in election topic. Which is strange, because I actually posed this question to my college freshmen students a couple of weeks ago as our daily debate topic. So here's some of what they said. (PS - I believe the issues are way more important than the race or sex of the candidate, for what that's worth. Which is approximately zero (0) votes)
- It would be nice if Obama were nominated, since "colored people" (student's term) have been through so much over the years, and it would be like an apology.
- Nobody will vote for Obama or Clinton because only old people vote, and they are racist and sexist. (I basically think this one might be true. Maybe I'm cynical.)
- Obama wouldn't make a good president because he would just want to help black people. Or conversely, he would make a good president because he would be able to help black people.
- Clinton would make a bad president because women are more emotional, and in a time of war she might not be able to send troops to their deaths because she would feel bad for them.
- Clinton would make a bad president because women get PMS and if she's really angry she might invade some country.
- Clinton would make a bad president because the rest of the world would view America as weak if there were a woman in charge (I had to point out that many world powers have had female leaders. Including Canada, by the way)
- Obama would make a good president because it would show the world that a black man would make a good leader (Again, I had to point out that numerous countries have black leaders, and in fact the secretary general of the United Nations is black)
- Clinton won't be elected because people will worry that she'll have a scandal to get back at her husband
Anyway, those are the highlights of the discussion. Had I known we'd have such a similar topic in here so soon, I would have taken notes.
Anyway, this wasn't a make out with Barack topic, it was a race/sex matter in election topic. Which is strange, because I actually posed this question to my college freshmen students a couple of weeks ago as our daily debate topic. So here's some of what they said. (PS - I believe the issues are way more important than the race or sex of the candidate, for what that's worth. Which is approximately zero (0) votes)
- It would be nice if Obama were nominated, since "colored people" (student's term) have been through so much over the years, and it would be like an apology.
- Nobody will vote for Obama or Clinton because only old people vote, and they are racist and sexist. (I basically think this one might be true. Maybe I'm cynical.)
- Obama wouldn't make a good president because he would just want to help black people. Or conversely, he would make a good president because he would be able to help black people.
- Clinton would make a bad president because women are more emotional, and in a time of war she might not be able to send troops to their deaths because she would feel bad for them.
- Clinton would make a bad president because women get PMS and if she's really angry she might invade some country.
- Clinton would make a bad president because the rest of the world would view America as weak if there were a woman in charge (I had to point out that many world powers have had female leaders. Including Canada, by the way)
- Obama would make a good president because it would show the world that a black man would make a good leader (Again, I had to point out that numerous countries have black leaders, and in fact the secretary general of the United Nations is black)
- Clinton won't be elected because people will worry that she'll have a scandal to get back at her husband
Anyway, those are the highlights of the discussion. Had I known we'd have such a similar topic in here so soon, I would have taken notes.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
For Glenn
I hate to break in on our topic of discussion this week (and break my long-standing tradition of my blog post titles), but I had to post a few things specifically with Glenn in mind to read (though everyone should read them): Read these three articles about your favorite show, 24. I thought you'd find them interesting.
I now return you to our regularly scheduled topic.
I now return you to our regularly scheduled topic.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Weighing The Options
I hate to admit it, but I haven't been keeping up with the candidates lately, and I had to do a bit of research before writing this (As it's Mon afternoon, and I have to post this on Tues, it hasn't given me much time). However, after watching a few videos and reading a few articles, I think I've cobbled enough info together to write a reasonable enough post.
Hope. That's the main tenet in Obama's speeches, and one that will help power his campaign. I hate to say it, but I think one of the main reasons the Democratic candidates have lost over the last couple of years is that they didn't inspire a passion in people. Both Gore and Kerry came across as robots, and though Dean came off looking like a lunatic in his famous little scream speech, at least there was a passion coming through. There have been early criticisms that it's just fluff, and with the exception of his proposed bill to bring troops home, he hasn't laid out plans for his other platforms such as health care. I don't think he HAS to lay out all his plans just yet. His idealism is inspiring, and using that should help him gain a lot of support (but I agree, he'll have to eventually).
As far as electability goes, there are some issues. The biggest one is race, and it's this topic that might be a little backwards than one would initially think. I was watching the Colbert Report this morning, and there was a woman on who was saying that Obama didn't have a lot of support from the black community because he isn't their definition of black. He isn't descended from slaves (West African slaves specifically), and thus didn't have the same upbringing and challenges that most in the black community have had. He has a white mother, and was apparently raised around her parents, thus having a predominantly white upbringing. This is great for attracting white votes - he has the skin color, but the upbringing (some would say personality) of a white person. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson had the opposite problem, they had black support, but alienated the white votes. Recent polls show that Obama only has 20% of the black vote, meanwhile Clinton is in the lead in black polls, getting at least 60% I think.
Speaking of Hillary, she has a bit of an edge, mainly just with name recognition. Through her 8 years as first lady, and now her time in the senate, there's not a person in the U.S. who hasn't heard of her. Of course that can also be her pitfall. There are people out there who think she's Satan incarnate, and I highly doubt that Obama or Edwards has generated that kind of hatred against them. She also has Bill though, and there are tons of people who would vote her in just to have him back in the White House in some form. Unfortunately, I think that she doesn't have as much of a chance because she's a woman. Black men got the right to vote before women did, and I don't see the election of president being much different.
I supported Edwards in the 2004 election. Mainly it was because my roommate Lindsey was working for his campaign, and needed the help, but I also thought he had the charisma to win. Sadly, he was a bit of a one-trick pony (son of a mill worker), but he did secure the nomination for vice president. I think it was a ploy to win the southern votes, but it backfired because (if memory serves me correctly) before the nomination Kerry was farther ahead in the polls than he was. It seems he's learned a lot since then, but some of the stigma from the last campaign may still be attached. It's the same thing Al Gore will have to face - they've already lost one election, why bet on them a second time? (Gore though has the advantage of technically having won his election, and if he runs again, the people might have enough momentum this time to make sure there's no doubt if he wins).
Another hot topic is experience. While I'm sure it's nice to have, is it always necessary? Right now we have a president who already has served one term AND has a father who served - plenty of experience right? Look how fucked over we are. While I think experience can be important in making decisions, that's what advisers are for. I haven't seen it yet, but I would have to laugh if Edwards ever criticizes Obama for using the "Washington outsider" play, as it was the one he used in the last election.
As far as Obama's Christianity, it can't hurt right? OK, well actually I suppose it could. It will be a key tool in attracting the conservative religious votes, but he can't overplay it and lose the people who aren't religious. Of course, if he ends up being the Democratic nominee, then that won't be as much of a worry, because I think the non-religious would vote for him regardless, just to get a Democrat in office.
As of right now, I'm still not throwing my support towards any particular candidate - I still need to find out more.
Hope. That's the main tenet in Obama's speeches, and one that will help power his campaign. I hate to say it, but I think one of the main reasons the Democratic candidates have lost over the last couple of years is that they didn't inspire a passion in people. Both Gore and Kerry came across as robots, and though Dean came off looking like a lunatic in his famous little scream speech, at least there was a passion coming through. There have been early criticisms that it's just fluff, and with the exception of his proposed bill to bring troops home, he hasn't laid out plans for his other platforms such as health care. I don't think he HAS to lay out all his plans just yet. His idealism is inspiring, and using that should help him gain a lot of support (but I agree, he'll have to eventually).
As far as electability goes, there are some issues. The biggest one is race, and it's this topic that might be a little backwards than one would initially think. I was watching the Colbert Report this morning, and there was a woman on who was saying that Obama didn't have a lot of support from the black community because he isn't their definition of black. He isn't descended from slaves (West African slaves specifically), and thus didn't have the same upbringing and challenges that most in the black community have had. He has a white mother, and was apparently raised around her parents, thus having a predominantly white upbringing. This is great for attracting white votes - he has the skin color, but the upbringing (some would say personality) of a white person. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson had the opposite problem, they had black support, but alienated the white votes. Recent polls show that Obama only has 20% of the black vote, meanwhile Clinton is in the lead in black polls, getting at least 60% I think.
Speaking of Hillary, she has a bit of an edge, mainly just with name recognition. Through her 8 years as first lady, and now her time in the senate, there's not a person in the U.S. who hasn't heard of her. Of course that can also be her pitfall. There are people out there who think she's Satan incarnate, and I highly doubt that Obama or Edwards has generated that kind of hatred against them. She also has Bill though, and there are tons of people who would vote her in just to have him back in the White House in some form. Unfortunately, I think that she doesn't have as much of a chance because she's a woman. Black men got the right to vote before women did, and I don't see the election of president being much different.
I supported Edwards in the 2004 election. Mainly it was because my roommate Lindsey was working for his campaign, and needed the help, but I also thought he had the charisma to win. Sadly, he was a bit of a one-trick pony (son of a mill worker), but he did secure the nomination for vice president. I think it was a ploy to win the southern votes, but it backfired because (if memory serves me correctly) before the nomination Kerry was farther ahead in the polls than he was. It seems he's learned a lot since then, but some of the stigma from the last campaign may still be attached. It's the same thing Al Gore will have to face - they've already lost one election, why bet on them a second time? (Gore though has the advantage of technically having won his election, and if he runs again, the people might have enough momentum this time to make sure there's no doubt if he wins).
Another hot topic is experience. While I'm sure it's nice to have, is it always necessary? Right now we have a president who already has served one term AND has a father who served - plenty of experience right? Look how fucked over we are. While I think experience can be important in making decisions, that's what advisers are for. I haven't seen it yet, but I would have to laugh if Edwards ever criticizes Obama for using the "Washington outsider" play, as it was the one he used in the last election.
As far as Obama's Christianity, it can't hurt right? OK, well actually I suppose it could. It will be a key tool in attracting the conservative religious votes, but he can't overplay it and lose the people who aren't religious. Of course, if he ends up being the Democratic nominee, then that won't be as much of a worry, because I think the non-religious would vote for him regardless, just to get a Democrat in office.
As of right now, I'm still not throwing my support towards any particular candidate - I still need to find out more.
I'm voting for Barack Obama, but can he win?
Even though it’s not yet 2008, politicians have begun to announce their respective candidacies for the presidency. It’s still quite early in the race; at this point we have no way of knowing who will join the race, who will bow out, what skeletons will emerge from which closets… and we certainly have no way of knowing just who the Democratic nominee will be. However, ever since the 2004 Democratic Convention, when I watched Barack Obama’s keynote speech (and found myself wishing that he – not Kerry – were the Democratic nominee), I’ve been hoping that he’d run in 2008. With Obama’s recent announcement that he is indeed throwing his hat into the ring for 2008, I’ve decided to support him.
Now, as much as I was blown away by his keynote speech at the convention (you can watch it here, or you can download it for free from i-tunes), I’m not going to back a candidate solely on the basis of his oratory skill. (If nothing else, Reagan was an exceptional speaker, and we all know that I never would have voted for the man. You know, had I not been all of two and six when he was running.) I did some research into the Democratic Big 3: Obama, Hillary and John Edwards. They all have very similar records/views when it comes to the issues I care about, specifically things like Roe v. Wade, contraception, stem cell research, etc. HOWEVER: Both Edwards and Hillary both gave into Bush’s obviously bullshit request to authorize the invasion of Iraq. That makes Obama the only candidate of the three who is untainted by the choice to send our troops into the desert. Granted, Obama wasn’t a Senator at the time, although he says that he wouldn’t have voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Of course, he has the benefit of making this statement after the fact, knowing what we know now. I was vehemently opposed to the invasion of Iraq back before this whole mess began, and I would like to think that there’s a politician or two out there who share my views. I would like to believe that Obama would be one of them.
Another thing I like about Obama is his Christianity and his willingness to court the Christian vote is an asset. Now, coming from me, this probably sounds mighty strange, as I am not religious whatsoever. However, as much as I would love it if the world would suddenly decide to share my point of view in this matter, I acknowledge that will never happen. Americans are a pretty religious bunch. Too long have the Republicans courted the religious vote, portraying the Democratic Party as a bunch of godless heathens, hell bent on destroying America. I think it’s about time the Democrats stopped shying away from religion; doing so simply allows Karl Rove, et al, to swoop in and snag Republican votes. (Somebody PLEASE remind the Religious Right that “turning the other cheek” is really not the same as bombing the shit out of one’s enemies.) However, even though Obama is a committed Christian, he also believes strongly in the separation of Church and State. Best of both worlds.
So those are some of the reasons why I’m supporting Barack Obama. But can he win? I don’t know. I hope so, but I just don’t know. I wonder if America is ready for a “black” candidate. (I put that in quotes because, as my father pointed out, if his mother is white and his father is black, isn’t he just as much a “white” candidate as a black one? But let’s face it, most people are going to take one look at this fellow’s skin color and label him “black.”) I myself am not so sure that America is ready for Obama, just as I’m not too sure that America is ready for Hillary either. Strategically, a vote for Edwards would be safer, but I very much prefer Obama over Edwards. I’ve talked about this electability issue with Nick before. His idea is that as long as the Democrats don’t waste too much time and money campaigning in the South, and instead focus on more “winnable” states, both Obama and Hillary stand a chance. I am not so sure either that the Democrats would essentially give up the South, or that the rest of America contains fewer bigots than the South.
This week’s discussion: What are your thoughts on Obama, Hillary and Edwards? Obama’s Christianity? The likelihood of a female or a person of color being elected President of the United States?
Now, as much as I was blown away by his keynote speech at the convention (you can watch it here, or you can download it for free from i-tunes), I’m not going to back a candidate solely on the basis of his oratory skill. (If nothing else, Reagan was an exceptional speaker, and we all know that I never would have voted for the man. You know, had I not been all of two and six when he was running.) I did some research into the Democratic Big 3: Obama, Hillary and John Edwards. They all have very similar records/views when it comes to the issues I care about, specifically things like Roe v. Wade, contraception, stem cell research, etc. HOWEVER: Both Edwards and Hillary both gave into Bush’s obviously bullshit request to authorize the invasion of Iraq. That makes Obama the only candidate of the three who is untainted by the choice to send our troops into the desert. Granted, Obama wasn’t a Senator at the time, although he says that he wouldn’t have voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq. Of course, he has the benefit of making this statement after the fact, knowing what we know now. I was vehemently opposed to the invasion of Iraq back before this whole mess began, and I would like to think that there’s a politician or two out there who share my views. I would like to believe that Obama would be one of them.
Another thing I like about Obama is his Christianity and his willingness to court the Christian vote is an asset. Now, coming from me, this probably sounds mighty strange, as I am not religious whatsoever. However, as much as I would love it if the world would suddenly decide to share my point of view in this matter, I acknowledge that will never happen. Americans are a pretty religious bunch. Too long have the Republicans courted the religious vote, portraying the Democratic Party as a bunch of godless heathens, hell bent on destroying America. I think it’s about time the Democrats stopped shying away from religion; doing so simply allows Karl Rove, et al, to swoop in and snag Republican votes. (Somebody PLEASE remind the Religious Right that “turning the other cheek” is really not the same as bombing the shit out of one’s enemies.) However, even though Obama is a committed Christian, he also believes strongly in the separation of Church and State. Best of both worlds.
So those are some of the reasons why I’m supporting Barack Obama. But can he win? I don’t know. I hope so, but I just don’t know. I wonder if America is ready for a “black” candidate. (I put that in quotes because, as my father pointed out, if his mother is white and his father is black, isn’t he just as much a “white” candidate as a black one? But let’s face it, most people are going to take one look at this fellow’s skin color and label him “black.”) I myself am not so sure that America is ready for Obama, just as I’m not too sure that America is ready for Hillary either. Strategically, a vote for Edwards would be safer, but I very much prefer Obama over Edwards. I’ve talked about this electability issue with Nick before. His idea is that as long as the Democrats don’t waste too much time and money campaigning in the South, and instead focus on more “winnable” states, both Obama and Hillary stand a chance. I am not so sure either that the Democrats would essentially give up the South, or that the rest of America contains fewer bigots than the South.
This week’s discussion: What are your thoughts on Obama, Hillary and Edwards? Obama’s Christianity? The likelihood of a female or a person of color being elected President of the United States?
Saturday, February 10, 2007
It could always be worse
I think that a good Constitution requires foresight and a bit of humility from its writers. It can't simply satisfy the poilitcal climate of the present, but it has to last and survive through societal changes for hundreds of years. Humility enters when the writers recognize that a Constitution that only allows for one group of rulers, no matter how currently democratically minded or self-righteous, will never last. Does the US Constitution provide answers to every question that arises today? Certainly not. But, it has served us pretty well, and we have been able to amend those parts that have become grossly outdated.
Obviously, not all Constitutions can claim this. I include the example below not as the worst example (I'm sure there are probably some pretty horrible ones in parts of Africa), but simply as the first I found. There are some ideas in here that I'm inclined to agree whole-heartedly with. But, as a Constitution, it seems to have some fundamental problems. All emphasis is mine.
Adopted by the Fifth All-Russian Congress of Soviets
[pulled from http://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/constitution/1918/index.htm]
July 10, 1918
The declaration of rights of the labouring and exploited people (approved by the Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets in January 1918), together with the Constitution of the Soviet Republic, approved by the fifth congress, constitutes a single fundamental law of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
This fundamental law becomes effective upon the publication of the same in its entirety in the 'Izvestia of the All-Russian General Executive Committee.' It must be published by all organs of the Soviet Government and must be posted in a prominet place in every soviet institution.
The fifth congress instructs the People's Commissariat of Education to introduce in all schools and educational instituitions of the Russian Republic the study and explanation of the basic principles of this Constitution.
Article One
CHAPTER ONE
1. Russia is declared to be a republic of the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', and Peasants' Deputies. All the central and local power belongs to these soviets.
2. The Russian Soviet Republic is organized on the basis of a free union of free nations, as a federation of soviet national republics.
CHAPTER TWO
3. Bearing in mind as its fundamental problem the abolition of the exploitation of men by men, the entire abolition of the division of the people into classes, the suppression of exploiters, the establishment of a socialist society, and the victory of socialism in all lands, the Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', and Peasants' Deputies further resolves:
(a) For the purpose of attaining the socialization of land, all private property in land is abolished, and the entire land is declared to be national property and is to be apportioned among agriculturists without compensation of the former owners, to the measure of each one's ability to till it.
(b) All forests, treasures of the earth, and waters of general public utility, all equipment whether animate or inanimate, model farms and agricultural enterprises, are declared to be national property.
(c) As a first step toward complete transfer of ownership to the Soviet Republic of all factories, mills, mines, railways, and other means of production and transportation, the soviet law for the control of workmen and the establishment of a Supreme Soviet of National Economy is hereby confirmed so as to insure the power of the workers over the exploiters.
(d) With reference to international banking and finance, the Third Congress of Soviets is discussing the soviet decree regarding the annulment of loans made by the Government of the Czar, by landowners and the bourgeoisie, and it trust that the Soviet Government will firmly follow this course until the final victory of the international workers' revolt against the oppression of capital.
(e) The transfer of all banks to the ownership of the Workers' and Peasants' Government, as one of the conditions of the liberation of the toiling masses from the yoke of capital, is confirmed.
(f) Universal obligation to work is introduced for the purpose of eliminating the parasitic strata of society and organizing the economic life of the country.
(g) For the purpose of securing the working class in the possession of complete power, and in order to eliminate all possibility of restoring the power of the exploiters, it is decreed that all workers be armed, and that a Socialist Red Army be organized and the propertied class disarmed.
CHAPTER THREE
4. Expressing its fixed resolve to liberate mankind from the grip of capital and imperialism, which flooded the earth with blood in its present most criminal of all wars, the Third Congress of Soviets fully agrees with the Soviet Government in its policy of abrogating secret treaties, of organizing on a wide scale the fraternization of the workers and peasants of the belligerent armies, and of making all efforts to conclude a general democratic peace without annexations or indemnities, upon the basis of the free determination of peoples.
5. It is also to this end that the Third Congress of Soviets insists upon putting an end to the barbarous policy of the bourgeois civilization which enables the exploiters of a few chosen nations to enslave hundreds of millions of the working population of Asia, of the colonies, and of small countries generally.
6. The Third Congress of Soviets hails the policy of the Council of People's Commissars in proclaiming the full independence of Finland, in withdrawing troops from Persia, and in proclaiming the right of Armenia to self-determination.
CHAPTER FOUR
7. The Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', and Peasants' Deputies believes that now, during the progress of the decisive battle between the proletariat and its exploiters, the exploiters should not hold a position in any branch of the Soviet Government. The power must belong entirely to the toiling masses and to their plenipotentiary representitives- the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', and Peasants' Deputies.
8. In its effort to create a league-- free and voluntary, and for that reason all the more complete and secure-- of the working classes of all the peoples of Russia, the Third Congress of Soviets merely establishes the fundamental principles of the Federation of Russian Soviet Republics, leaving to the workers and peasants of every people to decide the following question at their plenary sessions of their soviets, namely, whether or not they desire to participate, and on what basis, in the Federal government and other Federal soviet institutions.
Article Two
GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE RUSSIAN SOCIALIST FEDERATED SOVIET REPUBLIC
CHAPTER FIVE
9. The fundamental problem of the constitution of the Russian Socialist federated Soviet Republic involves, in view of the present transition period, the establishment of a dictatorship of the urban and rural proletariat and the poorest peasantry in the form of a powerful All-Russian soviet authority, for the purpose of abolishing the exploitation of men by men and introduction of socialism, in which their will be neither a division into classes nor a state of autocracy.
10. The Russian Republic is a free socialist society of all the working people of Russia. The entire power, within the boundaries of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, belongs to all the working people of Russia, united in urban and rural soviets.
11. The soviets of those regions which differentiate themselves by a special form of existence and national character may unite in autonomous regional unions, ruled by the local congress of the soviets and their executive organs.
These autonomous regional unions participate in the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic upon a Federal basis.
12. The supreme power of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic belongs to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, and, in periods between the convocation of the congress, to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
13. For the purpose of securing to the workers real freedom of conscience, the church is to be separated from the state and the school from the church, and the right of religious and anti-religous propaganda is accorded to every citizen.
14. For the purpose of securing freedom of expression to the toiling masses, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic abolishes all dependence of the Press upon capital, and turns over to the working people and the poorest peasantry all technical and material means for the publication of newspapers, pamphlets, books, etc., and guarantees their free circulation throughout the country.
15. For the purpose of enabling the workers to hold free meetings, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic offers to the working class and to the poorest peasantry furnished halls, and takes care of their heating and lighting appliances.
16. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, having crushed the economic and political power of the propertied classes, and having thus abolished all obstacles which interfered with the freedom of organization and action of the workers and peasants, offers assistance, material and other, to the workers and the poorest peasantry in their effort to unite and organize.
17. For the purpose of guaranteeing to the workers real access to knowledge, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic sets itself the task of furnishing full and general free education to the workers and the poorest peasantry.
18. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic considers work the duty of every citizen of the Republic, and proclaims as its motto: 'He shall not eat who does not work.'
19. For the purpose of defending the victory of the great peasants' and workers' revolution, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic recognizes the duty of all citizens of the Republic to come to the defense of their socialist fatherland, and it therefore introduces universal military training. The honor of defending the revolution with arms is accorded only to the workers, and the non-working elements are charged with the performance of other military duties.
20. In consequence of the solidarity of the workers of all nations, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic grants all political rights of Russian citizens to foreigners who live in the territory of the Russian Republic and are engaged in work and who belong to the working class. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic also recognizes the right of local soviets to grant citizenship to such foreigners without complicated formality.
21. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic offers shelter to all foreigners who seek refuge from political or religious persecution.
22. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, recognizing the equal rights of all citizens, irrespective of their racial or national connections, proclaims all privileges on this ground, as well as oppression of national minorities, to be contrary to the fundamental laws of the Republic.
23. Being guided by the interests of the working class as a whole, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic deprives all individuals and groups of rights which could be utilized by them to the detriment of the socialist revolution.
Article Three
ORGANIZATION OF THE SOVIET POWER
A. Organization of Central Power
CHAPTER SIX
THE ALL-RUSSIAN CONGRESS OF SOVIETS OF WORKERS', PEASANTS', COSSACKS', AND RED ARMY DEPUTIES
24. The All-Russian Congress of Soviets is the supreme power of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
25. The All-Russian Congress of Soviets is composed of representatives of urban soviets (one delegate for 25,000 voters), and of representatives of the provincial (gubernia) congresses of soviets (one delegate for 125,000 inhabitants).
Note 1: In case the provincial congress is not called before the All-Russian Congress is convoked, delegates for the latter are sent directly from the county (uyezd) congress.
Note 2: In case the regional (oblast) congress is convoked indirectly, previous to the convocation of the All-Russian Congress, delegates for the latter may be sent by the regional congress.
26. The All-Russian Congress is convoked by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee at least twice a year.
27. A special The All-Russian Congress is convoked by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee upon its own initiative, or upon the request of local soviets having not less than one-third of the entire population of the Republic.
28. The All-Russian Congress elects an All-Russian Central Executive Committee of not more than 200 members.
29. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee is entirely responsible to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets.
30. In the periods between the convocation of the congresses, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee is the supreme power of the Republic.
CHAPTER SEVEN
THE ALL-RUSSIAN CENTRAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
31. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee is the supreme legislative, executive and controlling organ of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
32. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee directs in a general way the activity of the Workers' and Peasants' Government and of all organs of the soviet authority in the country, and it coordinates and regulates the operation of the Soviet constitution and of the resolutions of the All-Russian congresses and of the central organs of the soviet power.
33. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee considers and enacts all measures and proposals introduced by the Soviet of People's Commissars or by the various departments, and it also issues its own decrees and regulations.
34. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee convokes the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, at which time the Executive Committee reports on its activity and on general questions.
35. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee forms a Council of People's Commissars for the purpose of general management of the affairs of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, and it also forms departments (People's Commissariats) for the purpose of conducting various branches.
36. The members of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee work in the various departments (People's Commissariats) or execute special orders of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
CHAPTER EIGHT
THE COUNCIL OF PEOPLE'S COMMISSARS
37. The Council of People's Commissars is entrusted with the general management of the affairs of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
38. For the accomplishment of this task the Council of People's Commissars issues decrees, resolutions, orders, and, in general, takes all steps necessary for the proper and rapid conduct of governmental affairs.
39. The Council of People's Commissars notifies immediately the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of all it's orders and resolutions.
40. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee has the right to revoke or suspend all orders and resolutions of the Council of People's Commissars.
41. All orders and resolutions of the Council of People's Commissars of great political significance are referred for consideration and final approval to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
Note: Measures requiring immediate execution may be enacted directly by the Council of People's Commisariats.
42. The members of the Council of People's Commissars stand at the head of the various People's Commissariats.
43. There are seventeen [sic] People's Commissars: (a) Foreign Affairs; (b) Army; (c) Navy; (d) Interior; (e) Justice; (f) Labor; (g) Social Welfare; (h) Education; (i) Post and Telegraph; (j) National Affairs; (k) Finances; (l) Ways of Communication; (m) Agriculture; (n) Commerce and Industry; (o) National Supplies; (p) State Control; (q) Supreme Soviet of National Economy; (r) Public Health.
44. Every commissar has a collegium (committee) of which he is the president, and the members of which are appointed by the Council of People's Commissars.
45. A People's Commissar has the individual right to decide on all questions under the jurisdiction of his commissariat, and he is to report on his decision to the collegium. If the collegium does not agree with the commissar on some decisions, the former may, without stopping the execution of the decision, complain of it to the executive members of the Council of People's Commissars or to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
Individual members of the collegium have this right also.
46. The Council of People's Commissars is entirely responsible to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
47. The People's Commissars and the collegia of the People's Commissariats are entirely responsible to the Council of People's Commissars and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
48. The title of People's Commissar belongs only to the members of the Council of People's Commissars, which is in charge of general affairs of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, and it cannot be used by any other representative of the Soviet power, either central of local.
CHAPTER NINE
AFFAIRS IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ALL-RUSSIAN CONGRESS AND THE ALL-RUSSIAN CENTRAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
49. The All-Russian Congress and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee deal with the questions of state, such as:
(a) Ratification and amendment of the Constitution of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(b) General direction of the entire interior and foreign policy of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(c) Establishing and changing boundaries, also ceding territory belonging to the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(d) Establishing boundaries for regional soviet unions belonging to the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, also settling disputes among them;
(e) Admission of new members to the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, and recognition of the secession of any parts of it;
(f) The general administrative division of the territory of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic and the approval of regional unions;
(g) Establishing and changing weights, measures, and money denominations in the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(h) Foreign relations, declaration of war, and ratification of peace treaties;
(i) Making loans, signing commercial treaties and financial agreements;
(j) Working out a basis and a general plan for the national economy and for its various branches in the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(k) Approval of the budget of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(l) Levying taxes and establishing the duties of citizens to the state;
(m) Establishing the bases for the organization of armed forces;
(n) State legislation, judicial organization and procedure, civil and criminal legislation, etc.;
(o) Appointment and dismissal of the individual People's Commissars or the entire council, also approval of the president of the Council of People's Commissars;
(p) Granting and cancelling Russian citizenship and fixing rights of foreigners;
(q) The right to declare individual and general amnesty.
50. Besides the above-mentioned questions, the All-Russian Congress and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee have charge of all other affairs which, according to their decision, require their attention.
51. The following questions are solely under the jurisdiction of the All-Russian Congress:
(a) Ratification and amendment of the fundamental principles of the Soviet Constitution;
(b) Ratification of peace treaties.
52. The decision of questions indicated in paragraphs (c) and (h) of Section 49 may be made by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee only in cases it is impossible to convoke the Congress.
B. Organization of Local Soviets
CHAPTER TEN
THE CONGRESSES OF THE SOVIETS
53. Congresses of Soviets are composed as follows:
(a) Regional: of representatives of the urban and county soviets, one representative for 25,000 inhabitants of the county, and one representative for 5,000 voters of the cities- but not more than 500 representatives for the entire region- or of representatives of the provincial congresses, chosen on the same basis, if such a congress meets before the regional congress.
(b) Provincial (gubernia): of representatives of urban and rural (volost) soviets, one representative for 10,000 inhabitants from the rural districts, and one representative for 2,000 voters in the city; altogether not more than 200 representatives for the entire province. In case the county congress meets before the provincial, election takes place on the same basis, but by the county congress instead of the rural.
(c) County: of representatives of rural soviets, one delegate for each 1,000 inhabitants, but not more than 300 delegates for the entire county.
(d) Rural (volost): of representatives of all village soviets in the volost, one delegate for ten members of the soviet.
Note 1: Representatives of urban soviets which have a population of not more than 10,000 persons participate in the county congress; village soviets of districts of less than 10,000 inhabitants unite for the purpose of electing delegates to the county congress.
Note 2: Rural soviets of less than ten members send one delegate to the rural (volost) congress.
54. Congresses of the soviets are convoked by the respective executive committees upon their own initiative, or upon request of local soviets comprising not less than one-third of the entire population of the given district. In any case they are convoked at least twice a year for regions, every three months for provinces and counties, and once a month for rural districts.
55. Every congress of soviets (regional, provincial, county, or rural) elects its executive organ- an executive committee the membership of which shall not exceed (a) for regions and provinces, twenty-five; (b) for a county, twenty; (c) for a rural district, ten. The executive committee is responsible to the congress which elected it.
56. In the boundaries of the respective territories the congress is the supreme power; during intervals between the convocations of the congress, the executive committee is the supreme power.
CHAPTER ELEVEN
THE SOVIET DEPUTIES
57. Soviets of Deputies are formed
(a) In cities, one deputy for each 1,000 inhabitants; the total to be not less than fifty and not more than 1,000 members.
(b) All other settlements (towns, villages, hamlets, etc.) of less than 10,000 inhabitants, one deputy for each 100 inhabitants; the total to be not less than three and not more than fifty deputies for each settlement.
Term of the deputy, three months.
Note: In small rural sections, whenever possible, all questions shall be decided at general meeting of voters.
58. The Soviet of Deputies elects an executive committee to deal with current affairs; not more than five members for rural districts, one for every fifty members of the soviets of cities, but not more than fifteen and not less than three in the aggregate (Petrograd and Moscow not more than forty). The executive committee is entirely responsible to the soviet which elected it.
59. The Soviet of Deputies is convoked by the executive committee upon its own initiative, or upon the request of not less than one-half of the membership of the soviet; in any case at least once a week in cities, and twice a week in rural sections.
60. Within its jurisdiction the soviet, and in cases mentioned in Section 57, NOTE, the meeting of the voters is the supreme power in the given district.
CHAPTER TWELVE
JURISDICTION OF THE LOCAL ORGANS OF THE SOVIETS
61. Regional, provincial, county, and rural organs of the soviet power and also the Soviets of Deputies have to perform the following duties:
(a) Carry out all orders of the respective higher organs of the soviet power;
(b) Take all steps for raising the cultural and economic standard of the given territory;
(c) Decide all questions of local importance within their respective territories;
(d) Coordinate all soviet activity in their respective territories.
62. The congresses of soviets and their executive committees have the right to control the activity of the local soviets (i.e., the regional congress controls all soviets of the respective region; the provincial, of the respective province, with the exception of the urban soviets, etc.); and the regional and provincial congresses and their executive committees have in addition the right to overrule the decisions of the soviets of their districts, giving notice in important cases to the central soviet authority.
63. For the purpose of performing their duties, the local soviets, rural and urban and the executive committees form sections respectively.
Article Four
THE RIGHT TO VOTE
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
64. The right to vote and to be elected to the soviets is enjoyed by the following citizens of both sexes, [Jen's note: American women's suffrage supporter posted fliers with drawings of miserable-looking women in burlap sack-dresses to point out that Soviet women could vote and Americans could not.] irrespective of religion, nationality, domicile, etc., of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, who shall have completed their eighteenth year by the day of election:
(a) All who have acquired the means of livelihood through labor that is productive and useful to society, and also persons engaged in housekeeping which enables the former to do productive work, i.e., laborers and employees of all classes who are employed in industry, trade, agriculture, etc., and peasants and Cossack agricultural laborers who employ no help for the purpose of making profits.
(b) Soldiers of the army and navy of the soviets.
(c) Citizens of the two preceding categories who have in any degree lost their capacity to work.
NOTE 1: Local soviets may, upon approval of the central power, lower the age standard mentioned herein.
NOTE 2: Non-citizens mentioned in Section 20 (Article Two, Chapter 5) have the right to vote.
65. The following persons enjoy neither the right to vote nor the right to be voted for, even though they belong to one of the categories enumerated above, namely:
(a) Persons who employ hired labor in order to obtain form it an increase in profits;
(b) Persons who have an income without doing any work, such as interest from capital, receipts from property, etc.;
(c) Private merchants, trade and commercial brokers;
(d) Monks and clergy of all denominations;
(e) Employees and agents of the former police, the gendarme corps, and the Okhrana (Czar's secret service), also members of the former reigning dynasty;
(f) Persons who have in legal form been declared demented or mentally deficient, and also persons under guardianship;
(g) Persons who have been deprived by a soviet of their rights of citizenship because of selfish or dishonorable offenses, for the period fixed by the sentence.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN
ELECTIONS
66. Elections are conducted according to custom on days fixed by the local soviets.
67. Election takes place in the presence of an election committee and the representation of the local soviet.
68. In case the representative of the soviet cannot for valid causes be present, the chairman of the election committee takes his place, and in case the latter is absent, the chairman of the election meeting replaces him.
69. Minutes of the proceedings and result of elections are to be compiled and signed by the members of the election committee and the representative of the soviet.
70. Detailed instructions regarding the election proceedings and the participation in them of professional and other workers' organizations are to be issued by the local soviets, according to the instructions of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
CHAPTER FIFTEEN
THE CHECKING AND CANCELLATION OF ELECTIONS AND RECALL OF THE DEPUTISM
71. The respective soviets receive all the records of the proceedings of the election.
72. The soviet appoints a commission to verify the election.
73. This commission reports the results to the soviet.
74. The soviet decides the question when there is doubt as to which candidate or another cannot be determined.
76. If an election was irregularly carried on in its entirety, it may be declared void by a higher soviet authority.
77. The highest authority in relation to questions of elections is the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
78. Voters who have sent a deputy to the soviet have the right to recall him, and to have a new election, according to general provisions.
Article Five
THE BUDGET
CHAPTER SIXTEEN
79. The financial policy of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic in the present transition period of dictatorship of the proletariat facilitates the fundamental purpose of expropriation of the bourgeoisie and the preparation of conditions necessary for the equality of all citizens of Russia in the production and distribution of wealth. To this end it sets forth as its task the supplying of the organs of the soviet power with all necessary funds for local and state needs of the Soviet Republic, without regard to private property rights.
80. The state expenditure and income of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic are combined in the state budget.
81. The All-Russian Congress of Soviets or the All-Russian Central Executive Committee determine what matters of income and taxation shall go to the state budget and what shall go to the local soviets; they also set the limits of taxes.
82. The soviets levy taxes only for the local needs. The state needs are covered by the funds of the state treasury.
83. No expenditures out of the state treasury not set forth in the budget of income and expense shall be made without a special order of the central power.
84. The local soviets shall receive credits from the proper People's Commissars out of the state treasury, for the purpose of making expenditures for general state needs.
85. All credits allotted to the soviets from the state treasury, and also credits approved for local needs, must be expended according to the estimates, and cannot be used for any other purposes without a special order of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Soviet of People's Commissars.
86. Local soviets draw up semi-annual and annual estimates of income and expenditure for local needs. The estimates of urban and rural soviets participating in county congresses, and also the estimates of the county organs of the soviet power, are to be approved by provincial and regional congresses or by their executive committees; the estimates of the urban, provincial, and regional organs of the soviets are to be approved by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars.
87. The soviets may ask for additional credits from the respective People's Commissariats for expenditures not set forth in the estimate, or where the allotted sum is insufficient.
88. In case of an insufficiency of local funds for local needs, the necessary subsidy may be obtained from the state treasury by applying to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee or the Council of People's Commissars.
Article Six
THE COAT OF ARMS AND FLAG OF THE RUSSIAN SOCIALIST FEDERATED SOVIET REPUBLIC
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN
89. The coat of arms of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic consists of a red background on which a golden scythe and a hammer are placed (crosswise, handles downward) in sun-rays and surrounded by a wreath, inscribed:
Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic
Workers of the World, Unite!
90. The commercial, naval, and army flag of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic consists of a red cloth, in the left corner of which (on top, near the pole) are in golden characters the letters R.S.F.S.R., or the inscription: Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
Chairman of the fifth All-Russian Congress of Soviets and of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee- J. Sverdlov.
Executive Officers, All-Russian Central Executive Committee-T.I. Teodorovitch, F.A. Rosin, A.P. Rosenholx, A.C. Mitrofanov, K.G. Maximov.
Secretary of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee- V.A. Avamessov.
Obviously, not all Constitutions can claim this. I include the example below not as the worst example (I'm sure there are probably some pretty horrible ones in parts of Africa), but simply as the first I found. There are some ideas in here that I'm inclined to agree whole-heartedly with. But, as a Constitution, it seems to have some fundamental problems. All emphasis is mine.
Adopted by the Fifth All-Russian Congress of Soviets
[pulled from http://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/government/constitution/1918/index.htm]
July 10, 1918
The declaration of rights of the labouring and exploited people (approved by the Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets in January 1918), together with the Constitution of the Soviet Republic, approved by the fifth congress, constitutes a single fundamental law of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
This fundamental law becomes effective upon the publication of the same in its entirety in the 'Izvestia of the All-Russian General Executive Committee.' It must be published by all organs of the Soviet Government and must be posted in a prominet place in every soviet institution.
The fifth congress instructs the People's Commissariat of Education to introduce in all schools and educational instituitions of the Russian Republic the study and explanation of the basic principles of this Constitution.
Article One
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS OF THE LABORING AND EXPLOITED PEOPLE
CHAPTER ONE
1. Russia is declared to be a republic of the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', and Peasants' Deputies. All the central and local power belongs to these soviets.
2. The Russian Soviet Republic is organized on the basis of a free union of free nations, as a federation of soviet national republics.
CHAPTER TWO
3. Bearing in mind as its fundamental problem the abolition of the exploitation of men by men, the entire abolition of the division of the people into classes, the suppression of exploiters, the establishment of a socialist society, and the victory of socialism in all lands, the Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', and Peasants' Deputies further resolves:
(a) For the purpose of attaining the socialization of land, all private property in land is abolished, and the entire land is declared to be national property and is to be apportioned among agriculturists without compensation of the former owners, to the measure of each one's ability to till it.
(b) All forests, treasures of the earth, and waters of general public utility, all equipment whether animate or inanimate, model farms and agricultural enterprises, are declared to be national property.
(c) As a first step toward complete transfer of ownership to the Soviet Republic of all factories, mills, mines, railways, and other means of production and transportation, the soviet law for the control of workmen and the establishment of a Supreme Soviet of National Economy is hereby confirmed so as to insure the power of the workers over the exploiters.
(d) With reference to international banking and finance, the Third Congress of Soviets is discussing the soviet decree regarding the annulment of loans made by the Government of the Czar, by landowners and the bourgeoisie, and it trust that the Soviet Government will firmly follow this course until the final victory of the international workers' revolt against the oppression of capital.
(e) The transfer of all banks to the ownership of the Workers' and Peasants' Government, as one of the conditions of the liberation of the toiling masses from the yoke of capital, is confirmed.
(f) Universal obligation to work is introduced for the purpose of eliminating the parasitic strata of society and organizing the economic life of the country.
(g) For the purpose of securing the working class in the possession of complete power, and in order to eliminate all possibility of restoring the power of the exploiters, it is decreed that all workers be armed, and that a Socialist Red Army be organized and the propertied class disarmed.
CHAPTER THREE
4. Expressing its fixed resolve to liberate mankind from the grip of capital and imperialism, which flooded the earth with blood in its present most criminal of all wars, the Third Congress of Soviets fully agrees with the Soviet Government in its policy of abrogating secret treaties, of organizing on a wide scale the fraternization of the workers and peasants of the belligerent armies, and of making all efforts to conclude a general democratic peace without annexations or indemnities, upon the basis of the free determination of peoples.
5. It is also to this end that the Third Congress of Soviets insists upon putting an end to the barbarous policy of the bourgeois civilization which enables the exploiters of a few chosen nations to enslave hundreds of millions of the working population of Asia, of the colonies, and of small countries generally.
6. The Third Congress of Soviets hails the policy of the Council of People's Commissars in proclaiming the full independence of Finland, in withdrawing troops from Persia, and in proclaiming the right of Armenia to self-determination.
CHAPTER FOUR
7. The Third All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', and Peasants' Deputies believes that now, during the progress of the decisive battle between the proletariat and its exploiters, the exploiters should not hold a position in any branch of the Soviet Government. The power must belong entirely to the toiling masses and to their plenipotentiary representitives- the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers', and Peasants' Deputies.
8. In its effort to create a league-- free and voluntary, and for that reason all the more complete and secure-- of the working classes of all the peoples of Russia, the Third Congress of Soviets merely establishes the fundamental principles of the Federation of Russian Soviet Republics, leaving to the workers and peasants of every people to decide the following question at their plenary sessions of their soviets, namely, whether or not they desire to participate, and on what basis, in the Federal government and other Federal soviet institutions.
Article Two
GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE RUSSIAN SOCIALIST FEDERATED SOVIET REPUBLIC
CHAPTER FIVE
9. The fundamental problem of the constitution of the Russian Socialist federated Soviet Republic involves, in view of the present transition period, the establishment of a dictatorship of the urban and rural proletariat and the poorest peasantry in the form of a powerful All-Russian soviet authority, for the purpose of abolishing the exploitation of men by men and introduction of socialism, in which their will be neither a division into classes nor a state of autocracy.
10. The Russian Republic is a free socialist society of all the working people of Russia. The entire power, within the boundaries of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, belongs to all the working people of Russia, united in urban and rural soviets.
11. The soviets of those regions which differentiate themselves by a special form of existence and national character may unite in autonomous regional unions, ruled by the local congress of the soviets and their executive organs.
These autonomous regional unions participate in the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic upon a Federal basis.
12. The supreme power of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic belongs to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, and, in periods between the convocation of the congress, to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
13. For the purpose of securing to the workers real freedom of conscience, the church is to be separated from the state and the school from the church, and the right of religious and anti-religous propaganda is accorded to every citizen.
14. For the purpose of securing freedom of expression to the toiling masses, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic abolishes all dependence of the Press upon capital, and turns over to the working people and the poorest peasantry all technical and material means for the publication of newspapers, pamphlets, books, etc., and guarantees their free circulation throughout the country.
15. For the purpose of enabling the workers to hold free meetings, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic offers to the working class and to the poorest peasantry furnished halls, and takes care of their heating and lighting appliances.
16. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, having crushed the economic and political power of the propertied classes, and having thus abolished all obstacles which interfered with the freedom of organization and action of the workers and peasants, offers assistance, material and other, to the workers and the poorest peasantry in their effort to unite and organize.
17. For the purpose of guaranteeing to the workers real access to knowledge, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic sets itself the task of furnishing full and general free education to the workers and the poorest peasantry.
18. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic considers work the duty of every citizen of the Republic, and proclaims as its motto: 'He shall not eat who does not work.'
19. For the purpose of defending the victory of the great peasants' and workers' revolution, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic recognizes the duty of all citizens of the Republic to come to the defense of their socialist fatherland, and it therefore introduces universal military training. The honor of defending the revolution with arms is accorded only to the workers, and the non-working elements are charged with the performance of other military duties.
20. In consequence of the solidarity of the workers of all nations, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic grants all political rights of Russian citizens to foreigners who live in the territory of the Russian Republic and are engaged in work and who belong to the working class. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic also recognizes the right of local soviets to grant citizenship to such foreigners without complicated formality.
21. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic offers shelter to all foreigners who seek refuge from political or religious persecution.
22. The Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, recognizing the equal rights of all citizens, irrespective of their racial or national connections, proclaims all privileges on this ground, as well as oppression of national minorities, to be contrary to the fundamental laws of the Republic.
23. Being guided by the interests of the working class as a whole, the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic deprives all individuals and groups of rights which could be utilized by them to the detriment of the socialist revolution.
Article Three
ORGANIZATION OF THE SOVIET POWER
A. Organization of Central Power
CHAPTER SIX
THE ALL-RUSSIAN CONGRESS OF SOVIETS OF WORKERS', PEASANTS', COSSACKS', AND RED ARMY DEPUTIES
24. The All-Russian Congress of Soviets is the supreme power of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
25. The All-Russian Congress of Soviets is composed of representatives of urban soviets (one delegate for 25,000 voters), and of representatives of the provincial (gubernia) congresses of soviets (one delegate for 125,000 inhabitants).
Note 1: In case the provincial congress is not called before the All-Russian Congress is convoked, delegates for the latter are sent directly from the county (uyezd) congress.
Note 2: In case the regional (oblast) congress is convoked indirectly, previous to the convocation of the All-Russian Congress, delegates for the latter may be sent by the regional congress.
26. The All-Russian Congress is convoked by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee at least twice a year.
27. A special The All-Russian Congress is convoked by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee upon its own initiative, or upon the request of local soviets having not less than one-third of the entire population of the Republic.
28. The All-Russian Congress elects an All-Russian Central Executive Committee of not more than 200 members.
29. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee is entirely responsible to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets.
30. In the periods between the convocation of the congresses, the All-Russian Central Executive Committee is the supreme power of the Republic.
CHAPTER SEVEN
THE ALL-RUSSIAN CENTRAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
31. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee is the supreme legislative, executive and controlling organ of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
32. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee directs in a general way the activity of the Workers' and Peasants' Government and of all organs of the soviet authority in the country, and it coordinates and regulates the operation of the Soviet constitution and of the resolutions of the All-Russian congresses and of the central organs of the soviet power.
33. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee considers and enacts all measures and proposals introduced by the Soviet of People's Commissars or by the various departments, and it also issues its own decrees and regulations.
34. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee convokes the All-Russian Congress of Soviets, at which time the Executive Committee reports on its activity and on general questions.
35. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee forms a Council of People's Commissars for the purpose of general management of the affairs of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, and it also forms departments (People's Commissariats) for the purpose of conducting various branches.
36. The members of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee work in the various departments (People's Commissariats) or execute special orders of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
CHAPTER EIGHT
THE COUNCIL OF PEOPLE'S COMMISSARS
37. The Council of People's Commissars is entrusted with the general management of the affairs of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
38. For the accomplishment of this task the Council of People's Commissars issues decrees, resolutions, orders, and, in general, takes all steps necessary for the proper and rapid conduct of governmental affairs.
39. The Council of People's Commissars notifies immediately the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of all it's orders and resolutions.
40. The All-Russian Central Executive Committee has the right to revoke or suspend all orders and resolutions of the Council of People's Commissars.
41. All orders and resolutions of the Council of People's Commissars of great political significance are referred for consideration and final approval to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
Note: Measures requiring immediate execution may be enacted directly by the Council of People's Commisariats.
42. The members of the Council of People's Commissars stand at the head of the various People's Commissariats.
43. There are seventeen [sic] People's Commissars: (a) Foreign Affairs; (b) Army; (c) Navy; (d) Interior; (e) Justice; (f) Labor; (g) Social Welfare; (h) Education; (i) Post and Telegraph; (j) National Affairs; (k) Finances; (l) Ways of Communication; (m) Agriculture; (n) Commerce and Industry; (o) National Supplies; (p) State Control; (q) Supreme Soviet of National Economy; (r) Public Health.
44. Every commissar has a collegium (committee) of which he is the president, and the members of which are appointed by the Council of People's Commissars.
45. A People's Commissar has the individual right to decide on all questions under the jurisdiction of his commissariat, and he is to report on his decision to the collegium. If the collegium does not agree with the commissar on some decisions, the former may, without stopping the execution of the decision, complain of it to the executive members of the Council of People's Commissars or to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
Individual members of the collegium have this right also.
46. The Council of People's Commissars is entirely responsible to the All-Russian Congress of Soviets and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
47. The People's Commissars and the collegia of the People's Commissariats are entirely responsible to the Council of People's Commissars and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
48. The title of People's Commissar belongs only to the members of the Council of People's Commissars, which is in charge of general affairs of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, and it cannot be used by any other representative of the Soviet power, either central of local.
CHAPTER NINE
AFFAIRS IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE ALL-RUSSIAN CONGRESS AND THE ALL-RUSSIAN CENTRAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
49. The All-Russian Congress and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee deal with the questions of state, such as:
(a) Ratification and amendment of the Constitution of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(b) General direction of the entire interior and foreign policy of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(c) Establishing and changing boundaries, also ceding territory belonging to the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(d) Establishing boundaries for regional soviet unions belonging to the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, also settling disputes among them;
(e) Admission of new members to the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, and recognition of the secession of any parts of it;
(f) The general administrative division of the territory of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic and the approval of regional unions;
(g) Establishing and changing weights, measures, and money denominations in the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(h) Foreign relations, declaration of war, and ratification of peace treaties;
(i) Making loans, signing commercial treaties and financial agreements;
(j) Working out a basis and a general plan for the national economy and for its various branches in the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(k) Approval of the budget of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic;
(l) Levying taxes and establishing the duties of citizens to the state;
(m) Establishing the bases for the organization of armed forces;
(n) State legislation, judicial organization and procedure, civil and criminal legislation, etc.;
(o) Appointment and dismissal of the individual People's Commissars or the entire council, also approval of the president of the Council of People's Commissars;
(p) Granting and cancelling Russian citizenship and fixing rights of foreigners;
(q) The right to declare individual and general amnesty.
50. Besides the above-mentioned questions, the All-Russian Congress and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee have charge of all other affairs which, according to their decision, require their attention.
51. The following questions are solely under the jurisdiction of the All-Russian Congress:
(a) Ratification and amendment of the fundamental principles of the Soviet Constitution;
(b) Ratification of peace treaties.
52. The decision of questions indicated in paragraphs (c) and (h) of Section 49 may be made by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee only in cases it is impossible to convoke the Congress.
B. Organization of Local Soviets
CHAPTER TEN
THE CONGRESSES OF THE SOVIETS
53. Congresses of Soviets are composed as follows:
(a) Regional: of representatives of the urban and county soviets, one representative for 25,000 inhabitants of the county, and one representative for 5,000 voters of the cities- but not more than 500 representatives for the entire region- or of representatives of the provincial congresses, chosen on the same basis, if such a congress meets before the regional congress.
(b) Provincial (gubernia): of representatives of urban and rural (volost) soviets, one representative for 10,000 inhabitants from the rural districts, and one representative for 2,000 voters in the city; altogether not more than 200 representatives for the entire province. In case the county congress meets before the provincial, election takes place on the same basis, but by the county congress instead of the rural.
(c) County: of representatives of rural soviets, one delegate for each 1,000 inhabitants, but not more than 300 delegates for the entire county.
(d) Rural (volost): of representatives of all village soviets in the volost, one delegate for ten members of the soviet.
Note 1: Representatives of urban soviets which have a population of not more than 10,000 persons participate in the county congress; village soviets of districts of less than 10,000 inhabitants unite for the purpose of electing delegates to the county congress.
Note 2: Rural soviets of less than ten members send one delegate to the rural (volost) congress.
54. Congresses of the soviets are convoked by the respective executive committees upon their own initiative, or upon request of local soviets comprising not less than one-third of the entire population of the given district. In any case they are convoked at least twice a year for regions, every three months for provinces and counties, and once a month for rural districts.
55. Every congress of soviets (regional, provincial, county, or rural) elects its executive organ- an executive committee the membership of which shall not exceed (a) for regions and provinces, twenty-five; (b) for a county, twenty; (c) for a rural district, ten. The executive committee is responsible to the congress which elected it.
56. In the boundaries of the respective territories the congress is the supreme power; during intervals between the convocations of the congress, the executive committee is the supreme power.
CHAPTER ELEVEN
THE SOVIET DEPUTIES
57. Soviets of Deputies are formed
(a) In cities, one deputy for each 1,000 inhabitants; the total to be not less than fifty and not more than 1,000 members.
(b) All other settlements (towns, villages, hamlets, etc.) of less than 10,000 inhabitants, one deputy for each 100 inhabitants; the total to be not less than three and not more than fifty deputies for each settlement.
Term of the deputy, three months.
Note: In small rural sections, whenever possible, all questions shall be decided at general meeting of voters.
58. The Soviet of Deputies elects an executive committee to deal with current affairs; not more than five members for rural districts, one for every fifty members of the soviets of cities, but not more than fifteen and not less than three in the aggregate (Petrograd and Moscow not more than forty). The executive committee is entirely responsible to the soviet which elected it.
59. The Soviet of Deputies is convoked by the executive committee upon its own initiative, or upon the request of not less than one-half of the membership of the soviet; in any case at least once a week in cities, and twice a week in rural sections.
60. Within its jurisdiction the soviet, and in cases mentioned in Section 57, NOTE, the meeting of the voters is the supreme power in the given district.
CHAPTER TWELVE
JURISDICTION OF THE LOCAL ORGANS OF THE SOVIETS
61. Regional, provincial, county, and rural organs of the soviet power and also the Soviets of Deputies have to perform the following duties:
(a) Carry out all orders of the respective higher organs of the soviet power;
(b) Take all steps for raising the cultural and economic standard of the given territory;
(c) Decide all questions of local importance within their respective territories;
(d) Coordinate all soviet activity in their respective territories.
62. The congresses of soviets and their executive committees have the right to control the activity of the local soviets (i.e., the regional congress controls all soviets of the respective region; the provincial, of the respective province, with the exception of the urban soviets, etc.); and the regional and provincial congresses and their executive committees have in addition the right to overrule the decisions of the soviets of their districts, giving notice in important cases to the central soviet authority.
63. For the purpose of performing their duties, the local soviets, rural and urban and the executive committees form sections respectively.
Article Four
THE RIGHT TO VOTE
CHAPTER THIRTEEN
64. The right to vote and to be elected to the soviets is enjoyed by the following citizens of both sexes, [Jen's note: American women's suffrage supporter posted fliers with drawings of miserable-looking women in burlap sack-dresses to point out that Soviet women could vote and Americans could not.] irrespective of religion, nationality, domicile, etc., of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic, who shall have completed their eighteenth year by the day of election:
(a) All who have acquired the means of livelihood through labor that is productive and useful to society, and also persons engaged in housekeeping which enables the former to do productive work, i.e., laborers and employees of all classes who are employed in industry, trade, agriculture, etc., and peasants and Cossack agricultural laborers who employ no help for the purpose of making profits.
(b) Soldiers of the army and navy of the soviets.
(c) Citizens of the two preceding categories who have in any degree lost their capacity to work.
NOTE 1: Local soviets may, upon approval of the central power, lower the age standard mentioned herein.
NOTE 2: Non-citizens mentioned in Section 20 (Article Two, Chapter 5) have the right to vote.
65. The following persons enjoy neither the right to vote nor the right to be voted for, even though they belong to one of the categories enumerated above, namely:
(a) Persons who employ hired labor in order to obtain form it an increase in profits;
(b) Persons who have an income without doing any work, such as interest from capital, receipts from property, etc.;
(c) Private merchants, trade and commercial brokers;
(d) Monks and clergy of all denominations;
(e) Employees and agents of the former police, the gendarme corps, and the Okhrana (Czar's secret service), also members of the former reigning dynasty;
(f) Persons who have in legal form been declared demented or mentally deficient, and also persons under guardianship;
(g) Persons who have been deprived by a soviet of their rights of citizenship because of selfish or dishonorable offenses, for the period fixed by the sentence.
CHAPTER FOURTEEN
ELECTIONS
66. Elections are conducted according to custom on days fixed by the local soviets.
67. Election takes place in the presence of an election committee and the representation of the local soviet.
68. In case the representative of the soviet cannot for valid causes be present, the chairman of the election committee takes his place, and in case the latter is absent, the chairman of the election meeting replaces him.
69. Minutes of the proceedings and result of elections are to be compiled and signed by the members of the election committee and the representative of the soviet.
70. Detailed instructions regarding the election proceedings and the participation in them of professional and other workers' organizations are to be issued by the local soviets, according to the instructions of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
CHAPTER FIFTEEN
THE CHECKING AND CANCELLATION OF ELECTIONS AND RECALL OF THE DEPUTISM
71. The respective soviets receive all the records of the proceedings of the election.
72. The soviet appoints a commission to verify the election.
73. This commission reports the results to the soviet.
74. The soviet decides the question when there is doubt as to which candidate or another cannot be determined.
76. If an election was irregularly carried on in its entirety, it may be declared void by a higher soviet authority.
77. The highest authority in relation to questions of elections is the All-Russian Central Executive Committee.
78. Voters who have sent a deputy to the soviet have the right to recall him, and to have a new election, according to general provisions.
Article Five
THE BUDGET
CHAPTER SIXTEEN
79. The financial policy of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic in the present transition period of dictatorship of the proletariat facilitates the fundamental purpose of expropriation of the bourgeoisie and the preparation of conditions necessary for the equality of all citizens of Russia in the production and distribution of wealth. To this end it sets forth as its task the supplying of the organs of the soviet power with all necessary funds for local and state needs of the Soviet Republic, without regard to private property rights.
80. The state expenditure and income of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic are combined in the state budget.
81. The All-Russian Congress of Soviets or the All-Russian Central Executive Committee determine what matters of income and taxation shall go to the state budget and what shall go to the local soviets; they also set the limits of taxes.
82. The soviets levy taxes only for the local needs. The state needs are covered by the funds of the state treasury.
83. No expenditures out of the state treasury not set forth in the budget of income and expense shall be made without a special order of the central power.
84. The local soviets shall receive credits from the proper People's Commissars out of the state treasury, for the purpose of making expenditures for general state needs.
85. All credits allotted to the soviets from the state treasury, and also credits approved for local needs, must be expended according to the estimates, and cannot be used for any other purposes without a special order of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Soviet of People's Commissars.
86. Local soviets draw up semi-annual and annual estimates of income and expenditure for local needs. The estimates of urban and rural soviets participating in county congresses, and also the estimates of the county organs of the soviet power, are to be approved by provincial and regional congresses or by their executive committees; the estimates of the urban, provincial, and regional organs of the soviets are to be approved by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars.
87. The soviets may ask for additional credits from the respective People's Commissariats for expenditures not set forth in the estimate, or where the allotted sum is insufficient.
88. In case of an insufficiency of local funds for local needs, the necessary subsidy may be obtained from the state treasury by applying to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee or the Council of People's Commissars.
Article Six
THE COAT OF ARMS AND FLAG OF THE RUSSIAN SOCIALIST FEDERATED SOVIET REPUBLIC
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN
89. The coat of arms of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic consists of a red background on which a golden scythe and a hammer are placed (crosswise, handles downward) in sun-rays and surrounded by a wreath, inscribed:
Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic
Workers of the World, Unite!
90. The commercial, naval, and army flag of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic consists of a red cloth, in the left corner of which (on top, near the pole) are in golden characters the letters R.S.F.S.R., or the inscription: Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic.
Chairman of the fifth All-Russian Congress of Soviets and of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee- J. Sverdlov.
Executive Officers, All-Russian Central Executive Committee-T.I. Teodorovitch, F.A. Rosin, A.P. Rosenholx, A.C. Mitrofanov, K.G. Maximov.
Secretary of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee- V.A. Avamessov.
Friday, February 09, 2007
The head of Cartoon Network resigns!
The head of the Cartoon Network resigned Friday after a marketing stunt that caused a security scare in Boston. Blinking electronic devices had been planted around Boston to promote Aqua Teen Hunger Force, but when authorities got a series of 911 calls about the suspicious devices on Jan. 31, they called out the bomb squads and shut down bridges and highways for fear they could be explosives. A few hours later, Cartoon Network's corporate parent acknowledged it was part of a marketing move.
The announcement of Jim Samples resignation was made in an internal memo sent to Cartoon Network staff members. In the statement, Samples said he regrets what had happened. "It's my hope that my decision allows us to put this chapter behind us and get back to our mission of delivering unrivaled original animated entertainment for consumers of all ages," Samples said. He said he felt "compelled to step down, effective immediately, in recognition of the gravity of the situation that occurred under my watch." [article]
Why The Terrorists Have Already Won
I always feel like the end of the week is the worst time for me to post. I'm exhausted, and everybody has already said everything about the topics. Anyway, I decided to talk about the Aqua Teen Hunger Force thing, in a sense, because I like that show. Juice! (Anybody see that episode?) Also, I don't know anything about the constitution, and pretty much agree with Nick that while I would like to see it periodically amended, I would pretty much not want to see it amended in this political climate.
Anyway, I thought I'd try to compile the ten reasons I think the terrorists have already won, apart from the fact that a cartoon advertising campaign now plummets a city into trembling fear. I guess that's a pretty big reason.
10 - 99% of nation's bumper stickers now tied up in patriotism industry, sending Honor Student Beating Up industry into disrepair.
9 - Nation won't admit World Trade Center starring Nicholas Cage is a piece of crap, because they are worried they will be called anti-american and killed by a barage of french new wave dvds launched at their skulls.
8 - They're counting cards.
7 - Somebody might say something about the logistics of fighting a faceless, nationless enemy, but really I think it boils down to the existence of that MTV show "My Super Sweet Sixteen." I know I pretty much gave up on America the first time I saw that. Man, those dumb rich people! In every episode, I just want the camerman to walk on screen and punch those girls in the fucking eyeball. Regular people do not have the Black Eye Peas play at their birthday, except through the tape deck. While they eat cake by themselves and watch Star Trek. And maybe cry a little bit.
6 - Took tips from those who won the drug war. That is, meth heads. Therefore, all the terrorists are in redneck basements, the last place the government would ever think to look. After all, isn't the rebel flag more patriotic than the regular stars and bars? In a twisted sort of way?
5 - Crash won best picture last year. I can't prove it, but I'm sure the terrorists had something to do with that. Did I ever tell you guys I hate that fucking movie?
4 - *THIS REASON DELETED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY*
3 - Endless, endless television specials explaining why we're the greatest generation now that we've had a pearl harbor of our own.
2 - Magic. Let's pump another trillion dollars into fighting them!
1 - The name "Terrorists" is much cooler than "United States." What a boring name. "What shall we call our country? We're a bunch of states, and we're united. Hmmm." Maybe if we change our name to "Indestructibleland" or "Youdon'twanttofuckwiththisopia" then we'd start to get the upper hand. Just a thought. You know, New South Glennshaheenmark is free.
Well, those weren't as funny as I would have liked. It's late!
Anyway, I thought I'd try to compile the ten reasons I think the terrorists have already won, apart from the fact that a cartoon advertising campaign now plummets a city into trembling fear. I guess that's a pretty big reason.
10 - 99% of nation's bumper stickers now tied up in patriotism industry, sending Honor Student Beating Up industry into disrepair.
9 - Nation won't admit World Trade Center starring Nicholas Cage is a piece of crap, because they are worried they will be called anti-american and killed by a barage of french new wave dvds launched at their skulls.
8 - They're counting cards.
7 - Somebody might say something about the logistics of fighting a faceless, nationless enemy, but really I think it boils down to the existence of that MTV show "My Super Sweet Sixteen." I know I pretty much gave up on America the first time I saw that. Man, those dumb rich people! In every episode, I just want the camerman to walk on screen and punch those girls in the fucking eyeball. Regular people do not have the Black Eye Peas play at their birthday, except through the tape deck. While they eat cake by themselves and watch Star Trek. And maybe cry a little bit.
6 - Took tips from those who won the drug war. That is, meth heads. Therefore, all the terrorists are in redneck basements, the last place the government would ever think to look. After all, isn't the rebel flag more patriotic than the regular stars and bars? In a twisted sort of way?
5 - Crash won best picture last year. I can't prove it, but I'm sure the terrorists had something to do with that. Did I ever tell you guys I hate that fucking movie?
4 - *THIS REASON DELETED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY*
3 - Endless, endless television specials explaining why we're the greatest generation now that we've had a pearl harbor of our own.
2 - Magic. Let's pump another trillion dollars into fighting them!
1 - The name "Terrorists" is much cooler than "United States." What a boring name. "What shall we call our country? We're a bunch of states, and we're united. Hmmm." Maybe if we change our name to "Indestructibleland" or "Youdon'twanttofuckwiththisopia" then we'd start to get the upper hand. Just a thought. You know, New South Glennshaheenmark is free.
Well, those weren't as funny as I would have liked. It's late!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
