The problem with politicians

Colin Beavan (No Impact Man) sums it up like this at his blog:

[T]he politics of Washington are defunct. The Democratic politicians want to beat the Republicans. The Republican ones want to beat the Democratic ones. They are, like the rest of us, scared for their jobs! But the American people? We just want to get along with each other and solve problems. We want happy lives and to be kind to our neighbors. We want leaders who care about us more than their own careers.
Americans are often under the illusion that we have meaningful choices when we vote in national elections, but that is dangerously simplistic. Big money and commercial media pre-designate the candidates who qualify as "serious candidates" long before the citizens vote. Those candidates who prevail are those that have given sufficient winks and nods to big money such that they continue to get well-funded. To compound things, big money likes the status quo. Hence, Barack Obama's continuing lovefest with Wall Street (Disclosure: I voted for Obama but I'm sorely disappointed--yet I still think he is far preferable to McCain-Palin). There are no easy solutions to this problem. The start of a solution, in my opinion, is to give smart, "non-connected" and non-monied people a real chance to get elected. There are several "clean money" campaign reform proposals floating about (for details on one of these, see this post by Lawrence Lessig). The purpose of clean-money elections is the radical idea promoted by the Founding Fathers: that We the People would self-govern. The topic Colin Beavan raises today is the most important political topic out there, in my opinion. Without an honest, open and self-critical deliberative process, we don't actually have a democracy. With the current system of private-money elections (especially in the wake of Citizens United), we don't have an honest, open and self-critical deliberate process. What we have instead, is what Beavan has described: a big expensive game where politicians do anything and say anything to maintain their power and perks.

Continue ReadingThe problem with politicians

The fearmongering strategy

At Newsweek, Daniel Klaidman describes fearmongering as a political strategy:

Americans are historically a tough lot. But the policies and rhetoric of the Bush-Cheney years, which set the tone for the current GOP attacks, are infantilizing: be very afraid, we're told, and let the government take care of you. The tough-guy bluster has led to a permanent state of anxiety—and a slew of counterproductive policies, from harsh visa restrictions to waterboarding. Our politicians rail about apocalyptic threats while TSA officers pat down toddlers at the airport. The irony is that many potentially lethal terror attacks—from United Flight 93 to Richard Reid to the underwear bomber—have been foiled by regular citizens.
Echoes of this.

Continue ReadingThe fearmongering strategy

Investigating people on the internet

A friend recently recommended two sites that aggregate information on people whose names you enter at the sites. If you need to investigate someone's background using only the Internet, these are two good places to start. I tried a few searches at Peekyou and Snitchname, and I am rather impressed at the information that can be gathered by these free sites . . .

Continue ReadingInvestigating people on the internet

The history of the filibuster

Lawyer Thomas Geoghegan, interviewed by Amy Goodman of DemocracyNow, gives an excellent review of the history of the filibuster. What's the best way to get rid of the filibuster (which is no where to be seen in the Constitution)? According to Geoghegan, we should back to the old-fashioned filibuster (a la Jimmy Stewart) until it is mocked out of existence.

Continue ReadingThe history of the filibuster