This bit about pushing for funding for alternative fuels from Dubya is quite interesting--in this case, I hope he's more successful than he was in pushing for alternative Social Security.
Of course, with him you've got to wonder what's the ulterior motive, i.e., where's the big-money interest behind it? In any case, though, I'd rather he speak on this one than any other topic I can think of, and it should prove somewhat educational for his fans--the only ones who listen to him anymore.
In the interests of full disclosure, I should offer my own direct experience. We have a 2003 Prius--I believe they've made a lot of improvements, particularly in the electrical systems, since then--it gets about 40 mpg in town and 50-60 mpg on the highway. This is a lot less than the EPA posted mileage, but those methods are seriously flawed. It's also hard to compare with other cars that don't give the readout so continuously or accurately. Finally, we're at 7,000 ft. here, and that could affect the engine's performance. Beats me--I'm no engineer.
Anyway, we bought it despite the math; we wanted to support the emergent technology and decided it had gotten past the bleeding edge stage. We still like it. My feeling is that the gasoline/electric hybrid combination may not be the answer, but the technology seems to combine multiple energy sources very successfully, and that approach should hold long-term promise.
The thing that gets me, and that proves to me that Dubya's educational program is needed, is that--despite the gas price inflation we've seen lately--the hybrid is still being sold more effectively as a high-powered vehicle (and the electric motor does get you off the line first vs. most cars when the light turns green) than as a fuel-efficient one. Hard to believe, but true.
Sunday, February 26, 2006
They're a Reach or Two
Two recent stories for which the Bushites have taken excessive pasting are the Dick Cheney shooting and the U.A.E. port brouhaha.
I don’t like to defend the Bushites for anything; in fact, I won’t defend them here, either: It is oh-so-typical of Cheney that his first reaction is to cover up the whole thing, and of course the port business is just typical Bushite arrogance and incompetence.
Neither is worthy of the attention given, though; it almost makes me suspect Rove is trying a homeopathic approach—give little driblets of fake problems to the press in order to try and distract from the serious screw-ups. Like Iraq, domestic spying, torture, not finding Bin Laden, nuclear proliferation, deficit expansion, the continued presence in the Bush Administration of people involved in the outing of covert CIA agents, the Medicare prescription drug scam, to give a few examples of real issues these phony ones are forcing off the front pages.
On the port thing, it’s clear that the U.A.E. is not the issue, or even the fact that “Muslims” will be watching the ports. Since we can’t put any government effort behind port security, it’s going to be some company that’s going to do it, and companies everywhere are much the same. This is the new big, useless government approach in which the Bushites specialize. All we need to do is put some effort behind the security investigations of the personnel the company will employ.
I don’t like to defend the Bushites for anything; in fact, I won’t defend them here, either: It is oh-so-typical of Cheney that his first reaction is to cover up the whole thing, and of course the port business is just typical Bushite arrogance and incompetence.
Neither is worthy of the attention given, though; it almost makes me suspect Rove is trying a homeopathic approach—give little driblets of fake problems to the press in order to try and distract from the serious screw-ups. Like Iraq, domestic spying, torture, not finding Bin Laden, nuclear proliferation, deficit expansion, the continued presence in the Bush Administration of people involved in the outing of covert CIA agents, the Medicare prescription drug scam, to give a few examples of real issues these phony ones are forcing off the front pages.
On the port thing, it’s clear that the U.A.E. is not the issue, or even the fact that “Muslims” will be watching the ports. Since we can’t put any government effort behind port security, it’s going to be some company that’s going to do it, and companies everywhere are much the same. This is the new big, useless government approach in which the Bushites specialize. All we need to do is put some effort behind the security investigations of the personnel the company will employ.
Iraq: It's too Late Now, Darling
Let’s hope that it’s not civil war this time. Let’s hope that we recognize that we can’t do much good on the streets of Iraq at this point (if we ever did). Let’s hope that we don’t get the bright idea that we can separate the fighting parties—I think we’ve all seen what happens to do-gooders who get between determined brawlers.
It’s time to stop the spin, and start talking seriousl, and in a bipartisan way, about a timetable to get out. If the objective facts on the ground and the ability of the Iraqi government forces to maintain order are our criteria for withdrawal, then we certainly aren’t getting any closer, and the 100 Americans a month we’re losing could increase very rapidly if things deteriorate further and we come out of our fortresses and try to do something about it.
It’s too late baby, now, it’s too late
Though we really did try to make it
Something inside has died and I can’t hide
And I just can’t fake it—Carole King
It’s time to stop the spin, and start talking seriousl, and in a bipartisan way, about a timetable to get out. If the objective facts on the ground and the ability of the Iraqi government forces to maintain order are our criteria for withdrawal, then we certainly aren’t getting any closer, and the 100 Americans a month we’re losing could increase very rapidly if things deteriorate further and we come out of our fortresses and try to do something about it.
It’s too late baby, now, it’s too late
Though we really did try to make it
Something inside has died and I can’t hide
And I just can’t fake it—Carole King
Olympic Rant
I can’t help it; I love to watch the Olympic competitions. That goes for the Winter games almost as much as the Summer ones. I wish I could say the same about our television production of the games, or about the organization of the games themselves.
My biggest beef with the games’ organization and their telecast is with the nationalistic slant of both. I abhor the obsession with “hardware”—the medal count by country is the worst example, but it goes on and on from there. Why is it a big deal if Bode Miller does not win a medal, or the U.S. only wins two medals in Alpine skiing? Bob Costas seems to blame Miller, or the U.S. ski team, if they don’t live up to the hype which he and his network had the principal role in creating. Lindsey Jacobellis becomes a national pariah because she tried a snowboarding trick and fell from gold to silver in her race. How do you think she feels about it? How do we shut him up?
I could not stomach the way that the network gave so much prominence to the feud between the U.S. speed skaters Chad Hedrick and Shani Davis. OK, they’re rivals and don’t really want to play together; maybe that’s what they had to do as part of their psychological motivation process. Who cares? It’s an individual sport, and basically one-on-one vs. the clock. Davis was clearly portrayed as The Bad Guy because he didn’t want to be in the relay and didn’t smile enough for the camera or wax poetic on the significance of being the “first African-American to win gold in the Winter games”: When he could have said, “gee, I guess it proves that cold weather doesn’t freeze our brains, after all!”
Think of how many events you saw (if you were watching American TV) when all you really saw were the Americans’ runs and that of the eventual winner. To give one silly example, the men’s 1500m speed skate event: the hype for days had been about the four American gold-medal winners facing off in the event. Then, the night of the telecast of the event, they showed in the preview the names of the four Americans, plus an Italian: I could tell at that moment who won the gold!
Too much money, too much cost—those are the excuses for all the nonsense. Without the huge network contract, and the national Olympic committees, we couldn’t have the pricey venues, the opening and closing spectaculars, etc.
I say, we can do without all that. Have the individual sport federations issue the invitations, as many as they can afford. The athletes should compete without flags and national anthems. The events should be broadcast live, then repeated in prime time if necessary. Close down the national organizing committees, and their stupid votes for future sites of the games. The venues should be Athens—every time—for summer, and some place that’s high enough and close enough to the poles that they can keep the winter games there every time, even 50 years from now when the polar icecaps are seasonal. And, please, get rid of that ridiculous short-track speed skating. That’s no sport: it’s a cross between roller derby and roulette.
There will still be plenty of glory for those who win, and for those who are heroic but don’t win. In the athletes’ home country, yes, but also everywhere else. That’s the Olympic way.
My biggest beef with the games’ organization and their telecast is with the nationalistic slant of both. I abhor the obsession with “hardware”—the medal count by country is the worst example, but it goes on and on from there. Why is it a big deal if Bode Miller does not win a medal, or the U.S. only wins two medals in Alpine skiing? Bob Costas seems to blame Miller, or the U.S. ski team, if they don’t live up to the hype which he and his network had the principal role in creating. Lindsey Jacobellis becomes a national pariah because she tried a snowboarding trick and fell from gold to silver in her race. How do you think she feels about it? How do we shut him up?
I could not stomach the way that the network gave so much prominence to the feud between the U.S. speed skaters Chad Hedrick and Shani Davis. OK, they’re rivals and don’t really want to play together; maybe that’s what they had to do as part of their psychological motivation process. Who cares? It’s an individual sport, and basically one-on-one vs. the clock. Davis was clearly portrayed as The Bad Guy because he didn’t want to be in the relay and didn’t smile enough for the camera or wax poetic on the significance of being the “first African-American to win gold in the Winter games”: When he could have said, “gee, I guess it proves that cold weather doesn’t freeze our brains, after all!”
Think of how many events you saw (if you were watching American TV) when all you really saw were the Americans’ runs and that of the eventual winner. To give one silly example, the men’s 1500m speed skate event: the hype for days had been about the four American gold-medal winners facing off in the event. Then, the night of the telecast of the event, they showed in the preview the names of the four Americans, plus an Italian: I could tell at that moment who won the gold!
Too much money, too much cost—those are the excuses for all the nonsense. Without the huge network contract, and the national Olympic committees, we couldn’t have the pricey venues, the opening and closing spectaculars, etc.
I say, we can do without all that. Have the individual sport federations issue the invitations, as many as they can afford. The athletes should compete without flags and national anthems. The events should be broadcast live, then repeated in prime time if necessary. Close down the national organizing committees, and their stupid votes for future sites of the games. The venues should be Athens—every time—for summer, and some place that’s high enough and close enough to the poles that they can keep the winter games there every time, even 50 years from now when the polar icecaps are seasonal. And, please, get rid of that ridiculous short-track speed skating. That’s no sport: it’s a cross between roller derby and roulette.
There will still be plenty of glory for those who win, and for those who are heroic but don’t win. In the athletes’ home country, yes, but also everywhere else. That’s the Olympic way.
Sunday, February 12, 2006
The First Fifteenth-Monthly Review
For the title, I was inspired by the First Third Bank, or whatever that inane name may be that I saw down in Florida. What, there were so many that wanted to be the Third Bank, there was some special honor in coming up with that third-rate name first?
We will aim to make this a monthly review of key developments of the month still recently past (though it is “so two weeks ago”). In doing so, we will aim once more at this blog's original mission of breadth between local and other levels, though just as one must admit the primacy of politics in human affairs (thank you, Aristotle, at least for that insight), one has to accept the focus on the US federal as the objective center of that interest, at least for a American citizen.
Hamas
I have been much troubled by the broad victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections. Among other things, I’ve been upset that I didn’t call it beforehand, publicly: it was there for the taking. The signs were clear, the most indicative being the rebellion over the Fatah official list by an upstart group. That kind of behavior tells you, this is a political organization that’s heading for a severe beating on election day. Also, when the guy who heads your list is serving a life sentence in a foreign prison; that could make it difficult to respond to a dynamic and unstable political environment.
All who accept basic principles of democracy must first acknowledge that the result is a legitimate, free choice, albeit conditioned by a variety of difficult local circumstances. Not only that, but a mature choice: there is every reason to think the Palestinian electorate chose the organization which has the greatest capability to address their aspirations. The issue of Palestinians' supporting Hamas at this juncture is entirely one of foreign affairs--including the group's support for the nasty practice of suicide bombing against Israeli civilians.
Hamas, for its part, is trying to be both a responsible player on the regional stage and true to its fundamentalist principles—in other words, trying to bridge an enormous chasm. Yasir’s death has taken the veil off the rot of the Fatah’s administration of the Palestinan “state”, such as Israel allows it to be. It now seems that Hamas may be a little reluctant to take operate the pseudopod "organs" of the pseudo-state headed by the Palestinian Authority, and would prefer to use its own channels to provide social services, its core strength area.
Readers here will note that, like yours truly, Hamas rejects the “two states” principle, so I think their ultimate recognition of the simple fact that Israel is an earthly reality that they can not imagine away (the minimum for US negotiation with them) will retain rejection of permanent separation as the ultimate goal. With that disavowal of Levantine Apartheid, I will have to agree! Further, I don’t think that stance is or should be a show-stopper for the US in its evaluation of Hamas’ status as a terrorist organization. That will depend whether the Hamas leaders can find reasons to extend the truce on suicide bombings and make it stick.
The situation is propitious for Hamas to wheel and deal, because their main alternative sponsor, other than the West, is Iran. This in itself will make the Bushites more cautious than they would normally in putting Hamas beyond the pale.
In the longer run, though, I don’t see the Hamas leaders being willing to drop their concept that the ultimate Palestinian state would be an Islamic one, thus leaving room for Jews and Christians to live among them with inferior status. Your basic non-starter for Israel, strategically, and it will essentially take Hamas out of any negotiations on "the roadmap", though not out of discussions on security, on Sharon's Wall, etc.
Thus, I think their historical role will be as the foil, to the renewed challenge that will come from those who would make a Palestinian unitary state more of a secular and modern one. That could even be a rejuvenated Fatah.
NSA Domestic Electronic Eavesdropping
Naturally, I feel this is much more important than something like, Who’s a Bram? When you talk about the Tyranny of Bushite Misrule, this is Ground Zero. (The Tyranny of Bushite Misrule, or “TBMR”, something like the banner the ancient Roman legions used to carry with "SPQR": I have a vision of our legions marching under that standard, of having it inscribed in public places built during the Bushite Era—the new levees in New Orleans?)
OK, I will grant that the unencrypted cellular transmissions were Out There, waiting to be harvested electronically. So, it’s not like they’re searching your drawers, your thoughts, or your public library book rental. All right, it is like that last one, which is also Out There, and which we got courtesy of the original-and-still-unmodified PATRIOT Act, particularly like it in the part about potentially providing utterly useless information by the firehose streamful.
The point is, the Bushites disregarded the law, and did it intentionally. They expected that their cloud of legal obfuscation would protect them when the secret got out. That turns out to be the easy part to sweep aside. The real questions are those of whether their act, despite being contrary to statute and legislative intent, is criminal; and whether the objections of convenience they have raised to following the legally-specified procedures merit any change in the law. Particularly since the Bushites didn't feel obligated to observe them in the first place.
Now we have Scooter Liddy (sorry, Libby) saying that Cheney told him he was “authorized by superiors” to go out there and get nasty with opponents of the Iraq war. Ever forward with the TBMR!
The New Mexico State Senate...
Has passed a statute allowing medicinal marijuana to be provided to those patients who can get proper medical support for the contention that their condition is one addressable with marijuana, the weed to be supplied by state-approved gardeners.
The White House sent a representative to tell them that they were getting it all wrong, that there is no medicinal need for the hooch, that the Supreme Court has backed the Feds’ right to crash the local party if it gets too wild. The legislators were not impressed, and they told him so-uh-uh-oh.
A lot of political hay has been laid up on the argument that medicinal marijuana is a Trojan horse, or a stalking horse, or some other kind of drug-bearing equine quadruped. The fact that acknowledged drug users might want their fellow humans to have the sweet relief of intoxication to ease their illness-driven pangs of discomfort does not seem to me to be an adequate argument to deny the sick their surcease. Still, the proponents have to lay down a firm line that this bill will not help “the dopers”.
If we consider Their side for a moment, "hypothetically" (as the pathetic legal BAG-man, Bram Alberto Gonzalez, said to Sen. Feingold), even stoners can figure out that there is a dog out there that needs to bark. Anything that can normalize the 1920's- era, Demon Weed/Reefer Madness concept that is underlying current law is a step in the right direction.
Update: the bill was tabled by a House Committee, to the delight of the state constabulary.
Bobby Duran, No Mas
In Taos, it appears to be a watershed election with political control truly at stake.
The key race is that for mayor. Though the mayor’s position has limited actual governing leverage beyond the ceremonial—basically as a Dick Cheney-type presiding-officer vote when the four-person council splits evenly—the identity of the person chosen to be the symbol of the town will here be very significant.
Bobby Duran, the mayor by appointment, represents the old regime, and his statements in the debate are full of defensive awareness of his association. If he were more astute as a politician, he would have a better alibi, as he has not been "in charge" (as the City Manager's office allows the elected mayor to claim) for so long. The problem is, he’s been around the whole time, so at least he’s complicit in the more egregious realities the town faces (excessive budget surplus with severe deficits in security, safety, transportation, and education).
Gene Sanchez is definitely the Clean Gene (in homage to the late Sen. McCarthy) candidate of the mayoral race; he narrowly won a council seat two years ago as an upstart and has stubbornly resisted co-optation. Which makes him “not a team player”. The amazing thing is that he has all the credentials of a typical local consensus-driven candidate: born and raised Taoseno of Hispanic descent, father a former mayor, long-time businessman, etc. His issue positions, from which he never strays, are responsible but not exciting. It's his willingness to declaim the reality of the local deal gone down with the city manager, the bureaucratic elite, and the local constabulary which makes him stimulating to those of us on the fringes, and unnerving to those at the center of local “power”.
The two city council seats up for election will provide a decisive local political force, if they are aligned with the winner of the mayoral race. There are seven candidates, and there are several possibilities, but it would seem to me that the seats will go to Darren Cordova and Rudy Abeyta. Cordova is a mover and shaker in the Hispanic majority community, and for those like me, he recently opened up Air America on AM radio. Abeyta seems a bit of a crypto-Republican (though not a Bushite), but he’s also the most articulate and direct of the candidates, almost beat Sanchez for the council seat two years ago, and has successfully moderated his positions.
The wild card is the upstart candidacy of a Czech-American realtor/developer, Pavel Lukes, who has campaigned aggressively and outspokenly. His presence in the race brings the local 600-pound gorilla into the campaign when it might not otherwise have done, that of real estate development and its implications for longer-term town planning. Though he supports Gene Sanchez implicitly, the polarization between the (still) majority against aggressive development and the modernizers which Lukes’ candidacy drives may hurt Sanchez in the election. This is the only real problem I have with Pavel: I agree with most of his positions, which he expresses more clearly than most.
Bottom line prediction is that Cordova and Abeyta will find it easy to line up with Gene Sanchez after he pulls off a narrow victory, which will lead to some dramatic changes in the local government. On the other hand, if Duran gets the OK for one more round, little will change no matter who wins the council posts.
Valle Vidal
There's a beautiful area near here by that name, part of the Carson National Forest, that has been the subject of an intense battle of words and evocative nature photography, pitting environmentalists against Bushites and their associated Brams. The area is an untouched natural mountain paradise, but the drilling fraternity has decided it might well contain large quantities of natural gas. So, like ANWR, the question is to drill or not to drill.
Also like ANWR, the feeling is that, once violated by the drillers, the pristine nature of the place will be gone forever. So, the effort of the environmentalists is not just to block immediate development, but to put it forever beyond the reach of the oilmen. Senator Bingaman, Gov. Richardson, and local Congressman Tom Udall have all endorsed that objective, though there is still some debate about the best tactics to achieve it. Sen. Domenici, who reliably votes as a Bram though always with some appropriate moralistic posturing, and moderate Republican Congresswoman Heather Wilson (facing a tough re-election challenge in her Albuquerque district this year) have both taken more nuanced positions. They love the spot, don't insist in tearing it up right away, but want to keep their options open.
Now comes news of a clever deal worked out between the gas drillers, El Paso Corp., the Vermejo Ranch owned by Ted Turner, and the federal Bureau of Land Management. Turner's ranch already has gas drilling, which supposedly has been done in a novel, exemplary manner to minimize the visual disruption of the gas drilling.
The plan now is to put new sites at the border of Turner's ranch and the National Forest land. That way, they can get at the gas believed under Valle Vidal without drilling in the National Forest itself. Because it is believed that gas will thus be taken from under the federal lands, royalties from these sites will be paid to the state and federal governments.
Some environmentalists have protested, cheated of what they saw as a sure political victory. I can't say that they have anything to bitch about, presuming that the solution is legal. Though I believe that leaving it in the ground is almost always wise for all concerned (the value can only increase), this seems to be a way to put the issue to rest more definitively (if it is combined with permanent protection for the National Forest land). The drillers will either get their gas, or they will satisfy themselves that there is none. The National Forest land should end up being preserved, and the sites themselves should be held to the same standard of being inobtrusive that prevails elsewhere on Vermejo.
We will aim to make this a monthly review of key developments of the month still recently past (though it is “so two weeks ago”). In doing so, we will aim once more at this blog's original mission of breadth between local and other levels, though just as one must admit the primacy of politics in human affairs (thank you, Aristotle, at least for that insight), one has to accept the focus on the US federal as the objective center of that interest, at least for a American citizen.
Hamas
I have been much troubled by the broad victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections. Among other things, I’ve been upset that I didn’t call it beforehand, publicly: it was there for the taking. The signs were clear, the most indicative being the rebellion over the Fatah official list by an upstart group. That kind of behavior tells you, this is a political organization that’s heading for a severe beating on election day. Also, when the guy who heads your list is serving a life sentence in a foreign prison; that could make it difficult to respond to a dynamic and unstable political environment.
All who accept basic principles of democracy must first acknowledge that the result is a legitimate, free choice, albeit conditioned by a variety of difficult local circumstances. Not only that, but a mature choice: there is every reason to think the Palestinian electorate chose the organization which has the greatest capability to address their aspirations. The issue of Palestinians' supporting Hamas at this juncture is entirely one of foreign affairs--including the group's support for the nasty practice of suicide bombing against Israeli civilians.
Hamas, for its part, is trying to be both a responsible player on the regional stage and true to its fundamentalist principles—in other words, trying to bridge an enormous chasm. Yasir’s death has taken the veil off the rot of the Fatah’s administration of the Palestinan “state”, such as Israel allows it to be. It now seems that Hamas may be a little reluctant to take operate the pseudopod "organs" of the pseudo-state headed by the Palestinian Authority, and would prefer to use its own channels to provide social services, its core strength area.
Readers here will note that, like yours truly, Hamas rejects the “two states” principle, so I think their ultimate recognition of the simple fact that Israel is an earthly reality that they can not imagine away (the minimum for US negotiation with them) will retain rejection of permanent separation as the ultimate goal. With that disavowal of Levantine Apartheid, I will have to agree! Further, I don’t think that stance is or should be a show-stopper for the US in its evaluation of Hamas’ status as a terrorist organization. That will depend whether the Hamas leaders can find reasons to extend the truce on suicide bombings and make it stick.
The situation is propitious for Hamas to wheel and deal, because their main alternative sponsor, other than the West, is Iran. This in itself will make the Bushites more cautious than they would normally in putting Hamas beyond the pale.
In the longer run, though, I don’t see the Hamas leaders being willing to drop their concept that the ultimate Palestinian state would be an Islamic one, thus leaving room for Jews and Christians to live among them with inferior status. Your basic non-starter for Israel, strategically, and it will essentially take Hamas out of any negotiations on "the roadmap", though not out of discussions on security, on Sharon's Wall, etc.
Thus, I think their historical role will be as the foil, to the renewed challenge that will come from those who would make a Palestinian unitary state more of a secular and modern one. That could even be a rejuvenated Fatah.
NSA Domestic Electronic Eavesdropping
Naturally, I feel this is much more important than something like, Who’s a Bram? When you talk about the Tyranny of Bushite Misrule, this is Ground Zero. (The Tyranny of Bushite Misrule, or “TBMR”, something like the banner the ancient Roman legions used to carry with "SPQR": I have a vision of our legions marching under that standard, of having it inscribed in public places built during the Bushite Era—the new levees in New Orleans?)
OK, I will grant that the unencrypted cellular transmissions were Out There, waiting to be harvested electronically. So, it’s not like they’re searching your drawers, your thoughts, or your public library book rental. All right, it is like that last one, which is also Out There, and which we got courtesy of the original-and-still-unmodified PATRIOT Act, particularly like it in the part about potentially providing utterly useless information by the firehose streamful.
The point is, the Bushites disregarded the law, and did it intentionally. They expected that their cloud of legal obfuscation would protect them when the secret got out. That turns out to be the easy part to sweep aside. The real questions are those of whether their act, despite being contrary to statute and legislative intent, is criminal; and whether the objections of convenience they have raised to following the legally-specified procedures merit any change in the law. Particularly since the Bushites didn't feel obligated to observe them in the first place.
Now we have Scooter Liddy (sorry, Libby) saying that Cheney told him he was “authorized by superiors” to go out there and get nasty with opponents of the Iraq war. Ever forward with the TBMR!
The New Mexico State Senate...
Has passed a statute allowing medicinal marijuana to be provided to those patients who can get proper medical support for the contention that their condition is one addressable with marijuana, the weed to be supplied by state-approved gardeners.
The White House sent a representative to tell them that they were getting it all wrong, that there is no medicinal need for the hooch, that the Supreme Court has backed the Feds’ right to crash the local party if it gets too wild. The legislators were not impressed, and they told him so-uh-uh-oh.
A lot of political hay has been laid up on the argument that medicinal marijuana is a Trojan horse, or a stalking horse, or some other kind of drug-bearing equine quadruped. The fact that acknowledged drug users might want their fellow humans to have the sweet relief of intoxication to ease their illness-driven pangs of discomfort does not seem to me to be an adequate argument to deny the sick their surcease. Still, the proponents have to lay down a firm line that this bill will not help “the dopers”.
If we consider Their side for a moment, "hypothetically" (as the pathetic legal BAG-man, Bram Alberto Gonzalez, said to Sen. Feingold), even stoners can figure out that there is a dog out there that needs to bark. Anything that can normalize the 1920's- era, Demon Weed/Reefer Madness concept that is underlying current law is a step in the right direction.
Update: the bill was tabled by a House Committee, to the delight of the state constabulary.
Bobby Duran, No Mas
In Taos, it appears to be a watershed election with political control truly at stake.
The key race is that for mayor. Though the mayor’s position has limited actual governing leverage beyond the ceremonial—basically as a Dick Cheney-type presiding-officer vote when the four-person council splits evenly—the identity of the person chosen to be the symbol of the town will here be very significant.
Bobby Duran, the mayor by appointment, represents the old regime, and his statements in the debate are full of defensive awareness of his association. If he were more astute as a politician, he would have a better alibi, as he has not been "in charge" (as the City Manager's office allows the elected mayor to claim) for so long. The problem is, he’s been around the whole time, so at least he’s complicit in the more egregious realities the town faces (excessive budget surplus with severe deficits in security, safety, transportation, and education).
Gene Sanchez is definitely the Clean Gene (in homage to the late Sen. McCarthy) candidate of the mayoral race; he narrowly won a council seat two years ago as an upstart and has stubbornly resisted co-optation. Which makes him “not a team player”. The amazing thing is that he has all the credentials of a typical local consensus-driven candidate: born and raised Taoseno of Hispanic descent, father a former mayor, long-time businessman, etc. His issue positions, from which he never strays, are responsible but not exciting. It's his willingness to declaim the reality of the local deal gone down with the city manager, the bureaucratic elite, and the local constabulary which makes him stimulating to those of us on the fringes, and unnerving to those at the center of local “power”.
The two city council seats up for election will provide a decisive local political force, if they are aligned with the winner of the mayoral race. There are seven candidates, and there are several possibilities, but it would seem to me that the seats will go to Darren Cordova and Rudy Abeyta. Cordova is a mover and shaker in the Hispanic majority community, and for those like me, he recently opened up Air America on AM radio. Abeyta seems a bit of a crypto-Republican (though not a Bushite), but he’s also the most articulate and direct of the candidates, almost beat Sanchez for the council seat two years ago, and has successfully moderated his positions.
The wild card is the upstart candidacy of a Czech-American realtor/developer, Pavel Lukes, who has campaigned aggressively and outspokenly. His presence in the race brings the local 600-pound gorilla into the campaign when it might not otherwise have done, that of real estate development and its implications for longer-term town planning. Though he supports Gene Sanchez implicitly, the polarization between the (still) majority against aggressive development and the modernizers which Lukes’ candidacy drives may hurt Sanchez in the election. This is the only real problem I have with Pavel: I agree with most of his positions, which he expresses more clearly than most.
Bottom line prediction is that Cordova and Abeyta will find it easy to line up with Gene Sanchez after he pulls off a narrow victory, which will lead to some dramatic changes in the local government. On the other hand, if Duran gets the OK for one more round, little will change no matter who wins the council posts.
Valle Vidal
There's a beautiful area near here by that name, part of the Carson National Forest, that has been the subject of an intense battle of words and evocative nature photography, pitting environmentalists against Bushites and their associated Brams. The area is an untouched natural mountain paradise, but the drilling fraternity has decided it might well contain large quantities of natural gas. So, like ANWR, the question is to drill or not to drill.
Also like ANWR, the feeling is that, once violated by the drillers, the pristine nature of the place will be gone forever. So, the effort of the environmentalists is not just to block immediate development, but to put it forever beyond the reach of the oilmen. Senator Bingaman, Gov. Richardson, and local Congressman Tom Udall have all endorsed that objective, though there is still some debate about the best tactics to achieve it. Sen. Domenici, who reliably votes as a Bram though always with some appropriate moralistic posturing, and moderate Republican Congresswoman Heather Wilson (facing a tough re-election challenge in her Albuquerque district this year) have both taken more nuanced positions. They love the spot, don't insist in tearing it up right away, but want to keep their options open.
Now comes news of a clever deal worked out between the gas drillers, El Paso Corp., the Vermejo Ranch owned by Ted Turner, and the federal Bureau of Land Management. Turner's ranch already has gas drilling, which supposedly has been done in a novel, exemplary manner to minimize the visual disruption of the gas drilling.
The plan now is to put new sites at the border of Turner's ranch and the National Forest land. That way, they can get at the gas believed under Valle Vidal without drilling in the National Forest itself. Because it is believed that gas will thus be taken from under the federal lands, royalties from these sites will be paid to the state and federal governments.
Some environmentalists have protested, cheated of what they saw as a sure political victory. I can't say that they have anything to bitch about, presuming that the solution is legal. Though I believe that leaving it in the ground is almost always wise for all concerned (the value can only increase), this seems to be a way to put the issue to rest more definitively (if it is combined with permanent protection for the National Forest land). The drillers will either get their gas, or they will satisfy themselves that there is none. The National Forest land should end up being preserved, and the sites themselves should be held to the same standard of being inobtrusive that prevails elsewhere on Vermejo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
