Blast from the Past

I vaguely remember setting up this blog; apparently I completely forgot about it. And when I did think of it, I could no longer remember what I had called it. Obviously, that has changed, so let's see if I can actually keep this one up to date.

Abortion Issues

South Dakota is voting on a bill whereby abortions would be illegal in the state, except in the case where the mother's life was in danger. Doctors found performing abortions in South Dakota would face felony charges. Supporters of the bill in the State Legislation believe the time is "right": they fully expect the case to go up before the Supreme Court and if that happens, for the Supreme Court to support the bill with the recent appointments of Justice Alito and Chief Justice Roberts. Too, they believe that Justice Stephens will soon retire, leaving yet a third opening to be appointed by President Bush. They are greatly encouraged by the decision by the Supreme Court to hear the case surrounding the partial-abortion ban passed by the US Congress in 2004 that was announced earlier today.

This is a very scary situation for the women of South Dakota. As I have always maintained, I do not understand why strangers should make decisions with regards to my body. They are not, afterall, the one who will have to carry the child to term. Too, I find the arguments for abortion to revolve around when life begins, and often falling into the religious zone. This is a big no-no for me: religion should stay out of politics, as much as possible. One person's moral views is not another's. If there existed compelling evidence for life at conception, I would be sympathetic. Sadly for the pro-Life faction, I do not find their evidence particularly believable.

Should South Dakota pass this bill and the governor sign it into law, this will become the big abortion showdown this country has seemed to be moving towards in recent years.

Disappointment in Senators

I used to respect Hillary Clinton. I liked what she was doing and does for my home state of New York. Her latest bill, which she is co-sponsoring with a Republican Senator, deeply disappoints me. The bill would, if passed, ban flag burning. She claims that her decision to propose the bill came after much discussion with veteran groups in NY who were deeply offended by the practice. Of course she does not provide statistics on how many flags are burned a year - in the US or in NY.

Why does this disappoint me? It strikes of pandering to the conservative right, solidifying the belief she plans to run for President in '08. Flag burning should not be an issue supported by Mrs. Clinton: banning it would violate the First Amendment. Burning a flag does not endanger anyone; it does not physically harm a person. Nor does it cause a person to fear for his or her life. It is, rather, an exercise of a person's free will to express displeasure by burning a material object that represents the US. I firmly believe banning the action of burning a flag violates the First Amendment. To find a politician I admired sponsoring a bill that would restrict our already greatly restricted freedoms saddens me. Furthermore, I do not see how flag burning is even an issue in today's society - people are not running around the streets burning flags on the corner.

For shame Mrs. Clinton. You just lost yourself a voter.

Darfur

I do not know what is worse: that after swearing we would never let genocide happen again, our governments are letting it, or the utter ignorance in the populace which seem not to realize that people are being murdered for being African in the Sudan. Few newspapers or media outlets report on the tragedy that is taking place right now in the Sudan. Nicholas Kristoff, an editorialist for the NY Times has done his best to alert his readers to the horrors, often bringing his readers face to face with someone who was raped, escaped or saw their family killed/tortured by the janjaweed. Today the NY Times had an editorial piece discussing the tragedy. The Economist has also reported on it, though they have been silent in recent months.

It is really quite tragic that genocide is happening now in the 21st century. After the Holocaust, the world declared "Never again", yet the track record we have had in stopping or preventing genocide have been laughable. It is time for world powers to stand by their declarations and do something before once again it is too late.

Thoughts on Veterans Day

It is amazing to me how little Veteran's Day means to most people - or maybe it is just the people I see in the street. In Europe, it is a national holiday. In America, unless you work for the government or a generous employer, it is merely one more day. On November 11, 1918, the Armistace ending World War I was signed, bringing closure to a war whose effects are far more reaching than many assume. The four years of heavy and hard and yes, even senseless fighting, changed Europe and drove foreign policy for years. The damage caused by the Great War would not be fully realized until decades later, if then. One can still go to the Somme, Verdenne or Ypres and see the damage caused by the incessant bombardments, the trench warfare that took so many lives.
Veteran's Day is a celebration - the end of a war, the first war that ushered in modern warfare to the European mind. (To be fair, the American Civil War displayed the terrible price modern armies could pay during war time.)It is also a day of remembrance and thanksgiving: to the soldiers who were, who died protecting something they believed in; the soldiers who are, who even now are fighting and dying for what they believe in; and the soldiers who will be.
War is a terrible thing. Yet to forget it or triviliaze the actions of the men and women who fight is worse.

No big surprise

That Mike Bloomberg was re-elected as NYC mayor was no big surprise. Not only do many New Yorkers like him (I am luke warm to him), but he also enters the history books as the person who spent the most money ever on a municipal election campaign. $75 million, much of it his own. It is frustrating, if only because he began his re-election campaign ahead of his opponent by many percentage points. There was no need, in my mind, to spend such an obscene amount of money to merely ensure that his lead remained as high as it did. Poor Freddy. I suspect that even if he had clear messages, he would have still lost - he didn't have nearly the same amount of money as Mike and certainly could never outspend him.

The spending of compaign money has become a bigger and bigger issue in recent elections. Perhaps because the world is such a multimedia state now, that it is far easier to reach your constituents than ever before. Mike Bloomberg was able to spend as much as he could because he funded his own campaign. It helps to be a billionaire I guess. He claims that because the money is his own, there is no worry that he must follow a party agenda - he is not obligated to since he didn't take Republican money. I find it scary, however, that a man such as he can literally out buy his competitor in all ways. Elected officials should be bound by the same laws that hamper corporations and individuals in contributions. While they may not owe the party any favors, they are also not held accountable or in check by anyone else. Sometimes we need some checks and balances.

Some politics

Reading the headlines in today's newspaper (well the NY Times) it seems as if the whole world is in a violent mood. Riots in Argentina in protest of Bush's visit and plans of economic globalization (hate to tell people but globalization is here to stay. Get used to it!); the continuing riots in France (they should really revise their immigration practices - that is, don't stuff immigrants into small communities and prevent them from bettering themselves.); a terrorist group threatening to kill the Morrocan diplomat and his driver they captured in Iraq last month; forged documents from Italy, CIA prisons in Eastern Europe, and of course, more violence in Israel and Iraq... yeah, this is a great week.

What is so frustrating about news nowadays is the constant drivel people are fed on the 24 hour stations and even in the newspapers. I watch CNN during my lunch hour (its either that or something inane on MTV) and half the time, I don't see how the news stories they go with are, well... news. Similar to the rant I had the other day about puggles, I really don't care about the latest trend; I'm far more concerned with how much we're screwing with the environment, international relations and the economy.

What also scares me is the lack of a coherent opposition party in the US. I just wish the Democrats or a third party would start to provide an actual alternative to the Republicans, rather than simply sit around and do nothing.