"By the time the election rolls around, people are going to know where Democrats stand," Reid said.  Link

This is why I don't like politicians.  They need to spend months, even years, trying to figure out what they think.

Why not just SurveyMonkey every Democrat in the country?  Isn't that what they think?

Ok, so I've been vocal about siding with the MTA and the city... and so have the millions of the rest of us who are stranded, inconvenienced, etc...  but I'm going to take a step back for a second.

Let's suppose, for a moment, that the current deal the transit worker's union is getting is a bad deal, and bad precident for labor in this city in general.  Perhaps that's true.

Contrast that with this Op/Ed from USA Today:

 

"Pity the New Yorker who commutes from Queens to Manhattan to work in a hotel for $25,000 a year, with no health care or retirement benefits. She couldn't ride to work Tuesday because the city's transit workers went on strike.

 

The bus drivers who get her there make an average of $63,000. They are balking at a proposed 3% pay raise. What's more, they, along with other transit workers, are indignant at a proposal that they begin making a contribution (of 1% of wages) toward their health costs. And they beat back a plan to make future workers wait until age 62, rather than 55, to get full pensions.

 

If this sounds as if it's a militant union leveraging its ability to wreak havoc, it is. New York transit workers receive better pay and benefits than most of their riders do."

That sums up a lot of what I'm hearing from the public. 

But maybe we're not getting the whole story, and that's my point.

If there is another side to this, the transit workers, and whoever runs their PR, has done an awful job of getting the word out.  I went to their website, and they had a few stories about workers with cancer getting docked for sickleave, etc...  but these stories aren't getting out there.

When cops, fireman, and teachers have labor issues, there are a lot of people who naturally side with them, because we see cops getting killed, fireman going into fires, and we care about the education of our youth.

But transit workers?  We associate them with our commute, which is a drag.  We don't really seperate the MTA from the workers.  We just know that when our trains are late, rerouted, etc., that we just hate the whole idea of a commute.  So, when a strike causes massive delays, millions of dollars in lost revenue, let's just say that some PR work is needed to get the public on your side.  So, if there are convincing stories to tell about the union's side, they're definitely not getting out there. 

Link: apophenia: MySpace blamed for alienated youth's threats.

"Another beautiful MySpace article: Online Terror Threat Hits Local High School. The "terrorists" are two boys who are threatening to show up in school with machine guns. As a result of their posts to MySpace, most students didn't show up for school. The school district is pissed and blames MySpace for enabling students to "post their thoughts and ideas" without surveillance. They are deciding whether or not to sue MySpace."

I'm just glad most of the parents allowed their kids to stay home.  After Columbine, I think if my future kids told me they shouldn't show up at school because of some kids posted terror threats, I'd make sure they didn't go to school.  They should be thanking MySpace.  What if MySpace took those comments down before anyone saw them, and then those kids actually showed up at school, guns blazing?

Then, I'd sue MySpace.  But that's what parents seem to want.  "Take it down... hide their eyes...   keep them locked up."

If you're a parent out there, create a MySpace account.  Don't spy on your kids.  Ask them to be your "friend" on it.  If they don't want to be your friend, get your own friends on it. Get them to teach you how to put up music from your favorite bands.  Help them fix your template. 

I really think some kids might accept it, because they'll think its funny, but more than anything else, you'll seem like a parent who either "gets it" or is trying.  So, instead of getting freaked out about what's on MySpace, contribute your own content and join the crowd.

I made a change to something I wrote on my political post the other day, because the post inspired some offline communication and made me realize that I what I wrote and what I thought didn't exactly match.

That happens a lot, not just in political debates, but in focus groups, usability studies, religious discussions.

Often times, when someone argues a point or descibes how they feel about something, its the first time they've actually tried to articulate verbally that particular angle or view.  What happens is that they struggle with the vocabulary they want to use to describe a thought or an emotion, and using the wrong words can confuse, anger, etc.

People don't often know how to say what they feel.  That's why I like writing, and speaking of writing, I'd encourage you to check that post out.  At the moment, not by design, the comments are a bit of a conservative "love-in", but that's because no one has posted any dissenting views yet.  What can I do about that?

I went to WeMedia last week and I listened to Al Gore eulogize intelligent public discourse, especially in regards to politics.  He was dead on.

What do we talk about as a society?

Runaway brides.  A family of 18.  One missing white girl in Aruba.  iPods.

Once in a while a small group of us very loudly debates Iraq, gay rights, abortion or the death penalty...  once in a while.  But its far from mainstream.

Why?  Because we live in a culture of personal attacks.  Political discussion in our country today is devisive.  It doesn't seek solutions.  Ideas aren't exchanged... they're used to club others over the head.  Either you're red or blue.  You watch Fox or you read the Times.  Screaming ended Howard Dean's run for President.  Screaming.  We all scream.  Fuckin' screaming...   No, we don't want a screamer for President.  We pointed fingers and were agast.  In that world, what politician in their right mind would ever be transparent about their actual beliefs versus what a strategest told them pissed off the fewest people?

When's the last time you got into a political debate with someone where you actually felt like they a) were listening to your point b) were open enough to new ideas to actually have a change of changing their mind or c) didn't constantly bash you over the head with a canned comeback like, "but Kerry was a flip flopper" or "Bush is an idiot."

This has got to stop.  We're not getting anywhere.  I don't know if we just personalize everything to the point where we can't even think clearly or seek solutions but I think its choking our culture and dumbing us down.

It really came to a head for me personally on the issue of gay rights.  I'm quite sure what I'm about to write will anger somebody but that's kind of the point.  Instead of getting into an open, calm, exchange with me, I'm sure I'll just get called a name or just generally accussed.

One of my fundamental core philosophies is that everyone needs to make lifestyle decisions on their own, but moreover they need to accept that what's right for them isn't necessarily what's right for everyone.  In order to have your choices respected, you need to respect the decisions of others.  I learned that from a girl who does fetish modeling now.  Go figure.

That's how I feel about gay rights.  If two consenting adults want to get married, that's fine with me.  They should love each other and think it through, and not waste money on expensive food at the wedding that no one ever eats anyway.  I don't want to tell anyone who not to marry the same way I don't want to be told who not to marry.

Therefore, I disagree with the president...  the guy that I voted for.  The marriage amendment is ridiculous and I thought it was ridiculous when I voted for him.  I didn't vote on morals, though, the way some pundits tell me that we all voted.  I didn't believe that morals were on trial.  Maybe I'm just not politically savvy, but I honestly didn't believe that such an amendment would ever pass, so, to me, it was kind of a non-issue.  I also don't think Roe vs. Wade would ever get overturned either, regardless of how I feel about it.  (For the record, I'm against unwanted kids...  my personal preference for eliminating unwanted kids is through education, protection, etc...   my utopia is where no one gets an abortion because there are no unwanted pregnancies.  I wouldn't vote to overturn it, but I don't really like it... overturning doesn't solve the unwanted kid problem.)

HOWEVER, I don't support a national law allowing gay marriage either *correction:  I don't think a national law right now at this very second as the way to get to the goal of national support of gay marriage, because too many parts of this country just aren't ready for it*, and this is where its all going to break down.  This is the statement that will get people yelling at me and upset some people that I'm close to and some other people I'm really fond of.  What's going to happen is that their personal views are going to cloud their ability to actually listen to my reasoning, be open to my ideas, and respect them.  I'll just get lashouts and that doesn't accomplish jack.  That stifles me.  That makes me not want to discuss it and when we're not discussing it--not identifying causes, exchanging ideas, understanding we're just going to succumb to atrophy and apathy and move backwards as a society.

But, well, fuck it, here goes:   

I want to see gay marriage get nationally accepted, but in a peaceful way.  I hate division and that's why I hate politics.  I feel like the best way to do that is state by state.  I feel like, just a few years from now, all the "blue" states will have ok'd it... and that will be the tipping point, because of how interconnected our society is.  When half of the states are marrying gays, we'll see a gay marriage on television, just like when Ellen came out.  Remember, Ellen came out on TV just a few years ago and now?  Well, jeez, the whole damn country loves her and why not?  She's the blue fish in Finding Nemo... she speaks whale!  Put a really likeable gay married couple in a sitcom and boom, there go the rest of the dominoes.  Maybe it takes ten years... but what you won't have is bussing from the late 50's. 

I watch those videos of black teens getting bussed into white schools and the hate that it generated and I feel like that's what's going to happen with a federal mandate on gay marriage.  Do you think Arkansas is going to take well to federally legalized gay marriage?  Personally, I think they'll take better to it if it just kind of seeps unnoticed into their hyperconnected media culture without them realizing it.  Sure, ideally they'd all be ok with it on day one, but the reality is that they're not.  Why force them if they'll just get assimilated by the next generation of MySpacers, IMers--kids who have friends all over the world who grow up digitally tolerant/agnostic about such things. 

What sucks is that I've yet to be abliged in an intelligent exchange on this.  No one who believes in a federal gay marriage support law has been willing to just level with me, be open to my points and show/explain (not cry/yell) theirs.  And of course, it happens both ways.  Its not like people who are against it have been that open to sitting down and having a dialogue on it either.

Perhaps I'm wrong.  Perhaps I'm misguided.  I didn't say I was right.  I said this was what I believed, and as an analyst, I'm a truth seeker.  Show me where my logic is flawed, but don't cry out because of what I believe and refuse to engage me.  If you just say, "I can't believe you think like that, I can't even talk to you" what good does that to?  How does that solve anything?  Help me ask the right questions of myself and the world around me.

We're making it so that people are afraid to admit how they really feel.  They're afraid to say, "Hey, I'm wearing khaki's today, not because I'm anti-gay, but because I just don't want my clothing to become somebody else's political rallying tool, regardless of whether I agree with them or not."   

So, if you want to talk and discuss, feel free.  Let's share ideas... change/influence each other's perspective--something different than what goes on with most poltical blogs.  Most political blogs aren't true conversations, they're either love-ins for people who all think the same way or targets for people who disagree.  Where's the conversation there?  Do you spend more time debating others to affect them or debating internally with yourself because you're actually affected by what someone else said?

We might disagree, but if you can't respect the fact that we disagree, this isn't going to go anywhere...

Link: New York Daily News - Home - More schools than ever for 1.1M students.

Some 74 new schools are making their debut, swelling the ranks of public schools to a record 1,408 to house more than 1.1 million students.

I voted for George Bush...  not the first time, but the second.  I really didn't see much to John Kerry and didn't think I knew enough information as everyone else thought they knew to look back at Iraq and say it was a bad decision.  Actually, I still don't think it was a bad decision--its just obvious that there was no execution.

And now, again, our management team is proving they can't execute.

I don't think George Bush is evil.  I don't think he's a religious fanatic...   but right now, at this very moment, he has failed millions of Americans in the South.

Jason wrote a great post about what it would be like if Rudy was President now and I feel exactly the same way.  After September 11th, Rudy Giuliani's actions made him the Mayor of America.  He stood in the trenches, walked the streets, pitched in and got the job done.  He went to most of the firefighter and funerals... often times several a day.

We don't have that kind of leader right now... its obvious to me.

In fact, its not just Bush.  Its the whole damn government.  Check out Sen. Mary Landrieu getting raked over the coals by Anderson Cooper.  She was thanking the President who "will be here tomorrow 'we think'".  And she's a DEMOCRAT!!  What the hell was she thanking him for?

Frankly, I think all these people would have been safer if we bused them to Bagdhad.   At least there are some National Guardspeople over there from what I hear.

There are two tragedies here.  One is Katrina.  The other is our government leaders.  We knew this was coming...  a flood in New Orleans was one of FEMA's top three concerns just a couple of years ago.  And yet, its taken days for supplies to arrive, and armed looters run the streets.  And yet, no one wants to take responsibility.

Is it because they're poor and black?  I don't know.  I'd hate to think that.  I think its more the case that our government became obsessed with terrorism and forgot about anything else.  19 assholes hijack some planes in a really hack operation when you think about it... boxcutters... jeez...  and kill off three thousand people.  If that justifies every man, woman, and child fearing for their lives for "what Osama will do next" and $190+ billion to fight terrorism then what should a destroyed city (yes, New Orleans has been destroyed, let's not kid ourselves), potentally 10,000 dead, and millions homeless justify?

How about getting the bodies off the streets?   How about fixing a levee or two?   A few buckets of food airdropped from a plane wouldn't hurt either.  Days after the tsunami, I remember seeing footage of airdropped food...  how come I haven't seen it here?

What the fuck are we doing?

I think everyone in New Orleans should get a tax refund.   Every dollar they've given the government for the last ten years should go back to them, because clearly we haven't spent dime one for their benefit. 

I backed you George...   gave you the benefit of the doubt for going into Iraq... didn't quite like what you were doing with the place... but this...   this is awful.  Its unforgivable. 

For more good links on this top, check out everything tagged both Bush and Katrina on del.icio.us.