Archive for National Affairs
Help For New Mexico Businesses
by U.S. Senator Tom Udall
This week, the Senate reconvened in Washington after the summer work period in our districts, and the first order of business was tackling a long-stalled small business jobs bill.
Believe it or not, all summer this commonsense bill was repeatedly blocked by a filibuster. Thankfully, after months of obstruction, we succeeded in overcoming the filibuster and passing this measure to help New Mexico’s small businesses create jobs and regain access to private capital.
Throughout the financial crisis, small business owners have continually told me, “I can’t get access to credit. And because I can’t get access to credit, I can’t grow.”
Let’s All Use Our Indoor Voices, Shall We?
by John Weckerle
By chance, we happened to tune in on The Daily Show With Jon Stewart last night, and managed to catch it on an unusual night. Mr. Stewart’s guest was former President Bill Clinton, discussing issues ranging from his daughter’s recent wedding to The Clinton Initiative to – you guessed it, the economy. We were interested enough to go to the web site and watch both the broadcast and complete versions, and we highly recommend that those interested in the current state of the economy tune in and listen to Mr. Clinton’s discussion with Mr. Stewart on the issue.
Of additional information was an announcement on Mr. Stewart’s part: that he is organizing the Rally to Restore Sanity on October 30, 2010 in Washington, D.C. The slogan: Take It Down A Notch For America. We’ve been touting this for a while, and we’re with Mr. Stewart on this issue. Mr. Stewart came out hard for this concept years ago on the CNN show Crossfire, telling the hosts that what they were doing was bad for America, and damaging our ability to have a serious debate on serious issues – the result of which was the almost immediate cancellation of Crossfire by CNN. Now Mr. Stewart is back with the same message.
We do not know why it is that it takes a comedian to do what others cannot in restoring civility to political discussion, especially as topical a comedian as Mr. Stewart. It worked last time for a little while, though, and we hope it works again.
It remains to be seen whether the Rally to Restore Sanity (aka the Million Moderate March) will bring about much needed quiet discussion, or whether the counter-demonstration planned by Stephen Colbert – The March to Keep Fear Alive – for the same day will prevail. One thing is for certain – your editor wishes he had plane fare to get there, because it looks as if things will be interesting – and hopefully, not too loud.
NM-Central “Outs” Anonymous Tea Party Spokesman?
by John Weckerle
Rats. We had what could have been a great article in mind for this morning on the identity of the mysterious East Mountain Tea Party (EMTP) spokesperson “teapartynm.” Based on writing styles and one particular hint from the web site, we were all ready to provide an exhaustive (and, now that we think of it, probably boring to most people) account of why we thought a particular person was the man behind the “nom de plume,” as it were. Or, as it turns out, as it is. Unfortunately, as it turns out, the Damage Control Subcommittee of the EMTP’s Public Relations Committee (okay, we’re being just a bit facetious there) appears to have gotten ahead of us and made a policy change requiring “teapartynm” to put his name on his articles – and after our most recent article on the subject, we might add.
Hunt For East Mountain Tea Party Spokesperson Continues
by John Weckerle
In recent weeks, we’ve taken issue (here and here) with the anonymity of an official spokesperson for the East Mountain Tea Party (EMTP) who posts articles on the EMTP site and has posted comments here, including some that we consider to be anti-Muslim and equating Islam with al Qaeda. We initially almost-but-not-quite concluded that the person, who goes by the moniker “teapartynm” on the EMTP site and “East Mountain Tea Party” here, was one Emily Cooper. However, Gadabout-blogalot.com editor and EMTP supporter Chuck Ring asserted that Ms. Cooper was not the domain contact any longer, and was in fact no longer participating in Tea Party activities. Mr. Ring declined to clarify: “I don’t see that knowing the name will add anything to the issue at this juncture.” We disagree; as we stated in the original article, we consider equating Islam with al Qaeda to be bigotry, and while we think that while outright, Terry Jones-style bigotry is ugly, we believe that anonymous bigotry is worse, if somewhat less effective.
Now, it is a rule that domain contact information must be kept current, and with that in mind, we filed a complaint with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). This is the organization that administers domains at the highest level, and makes the rules for using them. Registrars (for example, Network Solutions or GoDaddy) then process requests for domain names. Now, the way this process works is that, upon reciept of the complaint, ICANN sends a request for validation or update to the the registrar – in this case, GoDaddy – which then sends a notification to the administrative contact e-mail, and the recipient logs on and confirms the contact information. Yesterday, we got a response that told us:
New York – A View From The Top
by John Weckerle
Today, we give you two photographs taken from the top of the World Trade Center by your editor on a somewhat smoggy day in the early 1980s.
“Credit” Where It Is Due?
by John Weckerle
Editor’s note/update: Gadabout-blogalot.com editor Chuck Ring has challenged us on our forensics in this article, stating that “you have used resources to mis-identify people who have nothing to do with the email address you are dogging.” We beg to differ, and offer the registration information as support:
East Mountain Tea Party Domain Registration Info from GoDaddy whois; phone number redacted for privacy.
A few days ago, we published an article on the proposed Islamic community center in downtown Manhattan that was a response to an article on the East Mountain Tea Party web site, and had an exchange with someone calling themselves “East Mountain Tea Party.” This person’s comment was also posted on the East Mountain Tea Party site under the name “teapartynm.” We challenged the person to identify himself or herself, and thus far, there has been no such identification. Neither is that person identified on the East Mountain Tea Party site; rather, the pseudonym “teapartynm” is used.
We fully support people’s right to state their opinions. However, it’s important to realize that, while the Constitution may guarantee the right to do so, it doesn’t necessarily guarantee the right to do so anonymously, and given the rather controversial views expressed, we decided to do a little digging and see what we could find out. Actually, we found out quite a bit, but we will for now stick to just trying to identify the person who posted the original article on the East Mountain Tea Party site and commented on ours.
No Mosque At Ground Zero – For Starters, Because Nobody’s Proposing One
Update 1/4/11: Additional discussion of the potential basis for the East Mountain Tea Party’s apparent bias against Islam can be found in our article East Mountain Tea Party Officials and Islam.
by John Weckerle
We had initially thought not to address the construction of a Muslim community center in downtown Manhattan (the Park51 Project, or Cordova House, commonly but mistakenly called the “Ground Zero Mosque), but since the East Mountain Tea Party has apparently decided to make this an election issue, we’ve decided to add some thoughts to the debate.
We’d like to begin, though, with a caution regarding a particular set of practices of discussion that seem to have become popular in certain quarters. The first is the device by which those who disagree with a particular position attempt to turn the argument back on the originator as some sort of personal critique. In spoken conversation, we often refer to this as the “I know you are, but what am I?” method, and have little use for it. The second is to just outright attack the person originating the position or those who agree with it in general. We’re not big on that one, either. We invite our readers to post whatever comments they like, but be aware that we will probably ignore these two literary devices where responding to comments is concerned.
We also have something to say to the nebulous “teapartynm” who posted the article: We don’t think you should have to put your money where your mouth is, but you should certainly put your name there if you truly believe in what you’re saying. To twist a line from the movie “Beetlejuice:” “Never trust the unidentified.”
»» No Mosque At Ground Zero – For Starters, Because Nobody’s Proposing One
The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly
by John Weckerle
It is perhaps an ultimate expression of Murphy’s Law that we were putting the finishing touches on a long article on people playing the racism card when the Shirley Sherrod story broke. That article will have to wait for now, as the current issue seems more pressing, and perhaps drives home a point we were trying to make in that article far better than we could have hoped.
Ms. Sherrod was subjected to national humiliation and loss of her job after administration officials viewed a video on biggovernment.com, published by Andrew Breitbart. That video purportedly showed that Ms. Sherrod, an African American speaking at a National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) event, not only was a racist, but actually discriminated against white people in the course of performing her work for the United States Department of Agriculture. It turns out that the video was heavily edited and that the original speech was essentially the opposite of what was being portrayed. No surprise, there; it was, after all, Andrew Breitbart, and we’ve debunked him here before on the issue of phony claims associated with Senator Robert Byrd (here and here). In an interview with CNN, Mr. Breitbart angrily defended his actions stating that they were in response to the NAACP’s accusations that the “Tea Party” was tolerant of racism at its rallies.
As with the Byrd situation, conservative bloggers nationwide, including our friends at Gadabout-Blogalot.com, immediately and in some cases gleefully relayed the story, with embedded video “proof” that the NAACP was racist because one of its members made racist comments at one of their events. (The irony is hard to miss; the NAACP is racist because somebody made a “racist” speech at one of their functions, but it is outrageous to suggest that the “Tea Party” is racist because a number of their rallies have included people waving signs with racist overtones and some highly-visible organizers have made bigoted comments.) This has become a common tactic over the last several years – somebody makes an accusation of one inappropriate behavior or other, and the response is to accuse that party of the same behavior. Seldom does the response deal with the substance of the original accusation. It is, to most of us, rather transparent and more than a little childish – the phrase “I know you are, but what am I?” comes to mind – but there is a certain percentage of the population that seems to buy into this approach. I, myself, have been publicly denounced as a racist for criticizing Mr. Breitbart’s position that African American congressmen walking through a white crowd was race-baiting. I wouldn’t be surprised if I’m accused of it again in response to this article. Regardless, we’ve taken issue with Mr. Breitbart’s distorted reporting in the past, and we hope that this incident will be a wake-up call to those who have been happily consuming and passing on the dreck that comes out of his mouth, or keyboard, as the case may be. But that is not what this article is about. »» The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly
Au Revoir, Helen Thomas
by John Weckerle
By now, most of the furor over Helen Thomas’s recent comments on the State of Israel has died down. We’ve reviewed the video and also the transcript of the conversation – which, as is often the case, contains more than the video. The transcript is as follows:
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: Any advice for these young people over here for starting out in the press corps?
HELEN THOMAS: Go for it. You’ll never be unhappy. You’ll always keep people informed. And you’ll always keep learning. The greatest thing of the profession is never stop learning.
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: Today they’re covering the Jewish Heritage Month. Any—
HELEN THOMAS: Are they going to meet the President?
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: Yeah, and any comments on Israel? We’re asking everybody today. Any comments on Israel?
HELEN THOMAS: Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine.
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: Ooh, any better comments than that?
UNIDENTIFIED: Helen is blunt.
HELEN THOMAS: Remember, these people are occupied, and it’s their land. It’s not Germany, and it’s not Poland.
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: So where should they go? What should they do?
HELEN THOMAS: They could go home.
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: Where is their home?
HELEN THOMAS: Poland, Germany—
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: So the Jews—you’re saying Jews should go back to Poland and Germany?
HELEN THOMAS: —and America and everywhere else. Why push people out of there who have lived there for centuries? See?
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: Now, are you familiar with the history of that region and what took place?
HELEN THOMAS: Very much. I’m of Arab background.
RABBI DAVID NESENOFF: I see.
Leaving aside for now the appropriateness (or lack thereof) of Ms. Thomas’s comments, there are one or two ancillary issues we wish to examine.
Baying For Blood
by John Weckerle
Returning from vacation, we were gratified to see that the Mountain View Telegraph shares our sentiments on political advertisements. In an editorial titled “Save The Venom For After Summer,” the link to which has inexplicably and disappointingly disappeared from the Telegraph’s web site, editor Rory McClannahan bemoans the tone – and the early appearance – of vitriolic campaign ads associated with this Fall’s general elections. We couldn’t agree more – we made some comments on the primary election ads ourselves – but we are not stopping with Ms. Denish and Ms. Martinez.
There are a growing number of people – your editor included – who are simply sick to death of the tone that the local, state, and national debates on critical issues have taken. The falsehoods, name calling, inflammatory language, hyperbole, and invective have reached a near-historic pitch, and I for one am tired of hearing it. Commentators are “Marxist-Socialist” for simply suggesting that the “Tea Party movement” might become a third major political party (Bob Steiner, letter to The Independent, 5/26/10). Tea Party Express chairman Mark Williams decries Muslims as worshipers of a “monkey god” and “animals of Allah,” and refers to President Barak Obama as “an Indonesian Muslim turned welfare thug and a racist in chief.” Biggovernment.com bloviator Andrew Breitbart propagates a lie about Robert Byrd getting an earmark for a nonexistent company – a lie enthusiastically picked up and passed along by bloggers across the country (see our stories here and here). Demonstrations are held in which signs are proudly carried comparing Mr. Obama to Adolph Hitler and decrying anyone holding a different opinion as either Socialist, Marxist, or Nazi (none of which terms seem to be particularly well understood by those using them). A demonstrator at a Washington rally became so incensed over the pending passage of a health care bill that his saliva ended up on a Congressman’s face. (Note: After watching the video a couple of dozen times, we really don’t think he deliberately spit at the Congressman. However, the obvious alternative explanation – that he was foaming at the mouth over the issue – is only slightly less ugly, and perhaps just as absurd.)
And lest the folks on the other side of the debate get too complacent, here: we have not forgotten MoveOn.org’s contemptible “General Betray-Us” ad in the New York Times, or comparisons of Mr. Obama’s predecessor with the aforementioned ruler of the Third Reich.
To those flinging around the invective: We see little to be proud of in this behavior. Perhaps we should remember that the people we are attacking are our fellow Americans, our fellow citizens. Few, if any, on either side of the “fence” (whichever side that may be) are seeking to destroy America, or our “American values,” or our “American way of life.” They simply hold different opinions and have different ideas on how the country should be run and what direction we should take with respect to certain issues. A more polite and considerate discussion may not bring agreement on all issues, but it might bring at least compromise on some. We are calling on all parties to stop the shouting, and engage in more constructive dialogue.
Wherever You Go, There You Are
by John Weckerle
Over the past few days, several commentators have made some political hay over the fact that President Obama chose to observe Memorial Day at the Lincoln National Veterans Cemetery in Chicago, Illinois. At first, this seemed an odd choice, but a little research brought forth an interesting revelation: Mr. Obama is far from being unique in this regard.
According to an article at Snopes.com, former President Ronald Reagan was absent from Arlington on Memorial Day four times during his two terms, and two of those absences were for vacation/retreat purposes. Former President George W. Bush was absent once, celebrating Memorial Day at Normandy, France. Former President George H.W. Bush, the only combat veteran to hold the Presidency since 1980, never participated in Memorial Day ceremonies at Arlington; he was in Rome observing Memorial Day his first year in office, and spent the remaining three Memorial Days vacationing in Kennebunkport, Maine. The only President since 1980 to commemorate Memorial Day at Arlington every year while in office was former President Bill Clinton.
The National Veterans Cemetery at which Mr. Obama attempted to observe Memorial Day (the event was more or less rained out) is named for Abraham Lincoln, the President during whose term the National Veterans Cemeteries were established. For more information on the National Veterans Cemeteries, visit the National Cemeteries Association web site.
Is The Stimulus Package Working?
by John Weckerle
It was with some interest that we read this Wednesday’s article on at Gadabout-Blogalot.com regarding an announcement by Governor Bill Richardson that Federal recovery funds had created 3,000 jobs in New Mexico, 2271 of which were “public sector jobs” and 738 were “private sector.” Ignoring the “missing man” there, the complaint is that these public sector jobs will be a tax burden upon the citizens of New Mexico.
We haven’t seen the press release, and haven’t followed through on each and every job category to see what individual jobs have been “created,” so we don’t know what the nature of the “public sector jobs” may be. However, we should not that “public sector jobs” is a fairly vague expression. If we’re talking about important jobs that we used to be able to afford and will be able to afford again when the economy picks up and tax revenues increase, that’s different from putting people in make-work positions who will be either a burden or jettisoned after whatever recovery is going to occur comes through. »» Is The Stimulus Package Working?
The Wall, All In All…
by John Weckerle
One of our earlier articles, What’s A Chamber For? has unexpectedly mutated into a debate over the constitutional basis of the “wall between church and state.” Because so much time has passed between the publication of the article and the resumption of comments, and because it’s an interesting subject, we’re providing a brief mention here to make sure that all the original participants are aware that the discussion has continued.
Senator Visits Estancia Valley, Discusses Jobs, Health Care Reform
by John Weckerle
New Mexico Senator Jeff Bingaman and Local Elected Officials
Last Wednesday, New Mexico’s senior Senator, Jeff Bingaman, addressed the Estancia Valley Economic Development Association (EVEDA) and local officials from the Valley’s communities. Mr. Bingaman discussed two high-priority issues, job creation and health care reform.
On job creation, Senator Bingaman discussed two bills already passed: the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and the recently passed jobs bill, commonly known as the HIRE Act. According to Mr. Bingaman, the State of New Mexico recently estimated that it has been awarded $4.3 billion in ARRA funds. According to the map application at the Recovery.gov site, some of that, perhaps $3 million or more, has made it into the NM-Central.com coverage area. Mr. Bingaman highlighted the HIRE act as well, noting its provision for a payroll tax exemption for employers hiring new employees who have been out of work more than 60 days. The HIRE Act also purportedly increases the amount of equipment small businesses can write off in a single year (as opposed to depreciating it over multiple years) from $125,000 to $250,000. Mr. Bingaman expressed a hope of passing a new bill for clean energy projects. He also made mention of the new solar equipment manufacturing plant to be built in Rio Rancho, which may employ as many as 1,500 people by 2014. »» Senator Visits Estancia Valley, Discusses Jobs, Health Care Reform
John Weckerle: Racist? Race-Baiter? Racist-Baiter? False Accuser? Who Is This Guy?
by John Weckerle
It can be amazing how the same thing can mean different things to different people, and how easy it can be to get drawn into discussions of issues that one considers perhaps less than earth-shaking. Your editor has recently been in a discussion at Gadabout-Blogalot.com (thread here) regarding certain aspects of incidents in front of the Capitol Building leading up to the passage of the health care reform bill. The conversation begins with discussion of whether or not racial epithets are hurled, and sort of takes off from there. Unfortunately, there appears to be some disagreement as to the meaning of your editor’s writings, and Gadabout-Blogalot.com editor Chuck Ring has taken the position that it was my intent to “paint” him as a racist despite statements to the contrary. Mr. Ring declares himself the final authority on the meaning of my words in this regard – an assertion with which I might be expected to disagree. »» John Weckerle: Racist? Race-Baiter? Racist-Baiter? False Accuser? Who Is This Guy?