How the Heck am I supposed to Vote on these Initiatives

See my post on the Sacramento Street Talk blog.

In time for Mother's Day: I'm America's Worst Mom

See my latest post on the Sacramento Bee's Street Talk (my posts have been run twice in the Bee's Sunday opinion section). I'm the World's Worst Mom.

4 snouts up for Everlasting Moments

(:)(:)(:)(:) snouts up for Everlasting Moments now playing at the Tower Theater in Sacramento.

We really only went to this film tonight because it was the only non Hollywood hell film with decent review playing at a normal time. (10:15pm for the only evening showing of The Class? C'mon Tower!)

It defied my nonexistent expectations. Billed as an "epic Swedish melodrama" one could really be in for it. What a reviewer might say is that this is a truly unique story clearly told from the perspective of the girl growing up in this turn of the (previous) century family with a philandering alcoholic tempermental father and a beautiful long suffering, artistic and industrious mother. The film is as much about the mother's limited choices as a mother of 4, no 5, no 6, no 7 children in that time as it is anything else.

Nonetheless, it held both our attention for the 2 plus hours with its closely observed story, beautiful cinematography and strong performances (beautiful yet credible actors too--very 3 dimensional characters and well-written, although admittedly my Swedish is not strong--the father while drunk and boorish is also charming and handsome and passionate, one can see how the mother might stay with him despite all; the mother while exploring her secret passion for photography and a particular photographer is also sensible and focussed)

See it while it lasts.

Snicholsblog takes to the Street!

It's been a long dry spell for Snicholblog. What with our son still recovering from his long term illness and me entering ministerial school in January, I haven't had a lot of extra time. But the Sacramento Bee's editor and columnist Dan Weintraub has coaxed me out of bloggerial retirement and into a new blog he's created at the Sac Bee called "Street Talk" which is meant to cover the word on the street in Sacramento. For technical reasons, I'm just blogging now on a regular Bee log-in but soon it'll be picked up by Street Talk. I'll keep you posted. Hope the link above works. Here's my first post:

Sutter Middle School at Risk?

As the mother of two students at Sutter Middle School (one in 7th, one in 8th grade), I am concerned at the School Board's proposal to split several hundred students and some teachers off and send them to Kit Carson Middle School.

Republicans in the state legislature have forced local school districts to make these kind of insane proposals because they put their insane taxation pledges and policies ahead of the needs of California's children. So school districts' budgets have been slashed, and everything is up for consideration.

Sutter Middle School is rare oasis of success and creativity in California/Sacramento public education. Several years back, a new principal took over a Sutter Middle School with a dwindling central city population and breathed new life into it by attracting top teachers from all over the city, mandating daily physical education and setting high standards for schoolwork, attendance and discipline.

The model worked. Today Sutter is over-enrolled and is top of the wish list for students all over the area who pray for the lottery to pick them through the "Open Enrollment" process.

Fortunately for us, our children are among the precious few who are actually in district for Sutter, a situation so rare the school registrar actually does a double-take when she sees such addresses.

So why mess with success? Kit Carson Middle School nearby apparently has way fewer students than it needs and might have to close. So Sacramento Unified thinks the obvious solution is to break up this successful school to try to infuse Carson with new students and teachers.

Seems pretty crazy to me. Why not bring in a new principal and a new model and re-do Carson from the ground up? Or, if it's not serving the population, maybe it should be closed.

Evita Palin--Don't Speak for me, Sarah Palin

McCain Can't Type, but YES WE CAN

This YouTube video was made by disabled people who, unlike McCain, can type. It's very moving.

Prop 10 Girl Says No on Prop 10

If you want Sacramento to look like Phoenix, vote for Kevin Johnson

Please vote for Heather Fargo over Kevin Johnson for Mayor of Sacramento, here's why:

Heather Fargo is an experienced, competent mayor (which in our weak mayor city means chair of the city council) who is pro-environment, pro strong
neighborhoods and pro smart growth. She isn't perfect, and isn't the strong leader that I'd want all other things being equal and she's been wrong on some things (such as the arena), but she's from a neighborhood activist background and is accessible and trustworthy.

Kevin Johnson on the other hand says that his model city for Sacramento to follow is Phoenix, Arizona! Can you imagine?! That city is the epitome of random sprawl, air pollution, no thought put into development at all, in other words, he wants to exacerbate all the bad choices the Sacramento region has made (something Fargo has tried hard to avoid). He is close to Bob Thomas and the Tsakopoulos developers and shares their philosophies.

Although he's saying the right things about the environment now, he refused to even let the Sierra Club interview him and refused to fill out their questionnaire, showing contempt for environmental positions.

Another reason not to vote for Johnson: a Planned Parenthood mailer today tells me that Johnson says he's pro life. And then when you add in the questions raised about him as a property owner/landlord and with possibly sexually harrassing teenage girls, I just don't think we can afford to gamble with this guy. I don't think he knows what he's doing.

TOP 5 REASONS OBAMA SUPPORTERS SHOULDN'T REST EASY

Talking points from MoveOn.org:

1. The polls may be wrong. This is an unprecedented election. No one knows how racism may affect what voters tell pollsters—or what they do in the voting booth. And the polls are narrowing anyway. In the last few days, John McCain has gained ground in most national polls, as his campaign has gone even more negative.

2. Dirty tricks. Republicans are already illegally purging voters from the rolls in some states. They're whipping up hysteria over ACORN to justify more challenges to new voters. Misleading flyers about the voting process have started appearing in black neighborhoods. And of course, many counties still use unsecure voting machines.

3. October surprise. In politics, 15 days is a long time. The next McCain smear could dominate the news for a week. There could be a crisis with Iran, or Bin Laden could release another tape, or worse.

4. Those who forget history... In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote after trailing by seven points in the final days of the race. In 1980, Reagan was eight points down in the polls in late October and came back to win. Races can shift—fast!

5. Landslide. Even with Barack Obama in the White House, passing universal health care and a new clean-energy policy is going to be hard. Insurance, drug and oil companies will fight us every step of the way. We need the kind of landslide that will give Barack a huge mandate.

Islamophobes, Democracy Now, and Me

Democracy Now with Amy Goodman carried a terrifying segment last Friday on how 25 million copies of a DVD called Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West have been distributed in key battleground states in the last couple of months (at a cost of $50 million!). According to Democracy Now, the film features graphic, violent images and makes comparisons of Islam to Nazism.

You can listen to the story for yourself if you like, “Smearcasting: How Islamophobes Spread Fear, Bigotry and Misinformation”. I was struck by the guests mentioning the recent incident when a woman at a McCain rally called Obama "an Arab" only to be corrected by McCain, "no m'am, he's a decent family man and a citizen." The guests and I had noticed that McCain got kudos for proclaiming Obama's decency, but no one questioned the idea that calling someone "an Arab," meant that they were calling someone "indecent, not a family man and not a citizen."

One of the guests, Isabel Macdonald, communications director at FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting), and the co-author of FAIR’s new report “Smearcasting: How Islamophobes Spread Fear, Bigotry and Misinformation," talked about how the mainstream media has been relatively diligent and interested in contradicting a widespread "whisper campaign" against Obama claiming that he is "an Arab" and a Muslim. But none of the media have contradicted or covered the underlying assumptions of the campaign, 1) conflating regional origin with religion and 2) that being either an Arab or a member of the Nation of Islam is a bad thing.

McDonald pointed out that in Poland in 1990 back, when there was a whisper campaign that a the incumbent Prime Minister of Poland was "a Jew," the American media covered it as an Anti-Semitic campaign, not solely as a smear campaign against the prime minister.

Not to belabor the point, but it is not just Obama who is being smeared by this campaign, it is all middle-eastern people and followers of Islam. [Side point: isn't there part of you that would just love to watch Obama win the election and elect to be sworn in on the Koran, and then be like, "psych!!!"]

Okay, I also have to admit a love/hate relationship with Democracy Now. I love it because she and her team tell stories that no one else is telling. I hate it because every time I listen to the show, my blood pressure soars and I move an inch further out on my already left coast left fringe existence--and it's scary out here. Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you!

As a long-time lobbyist and a bit of a Sacramento (if no longer DC) capitol insider, I have been accused by close friends as being on the "quote unquote left" rather than just left. They later recanted, but I think some of my discomfort with Democracy Now actually bolsters their claim. I really like to have it both ways. I like to think of myself as changing the parameters of the possible, but operating somewhat with the boundaries.

Democracy Now is outside the boundaries. Democracy Now isn't afraid to be arrested to cover the Republican convention. Democracy Now isn't afraid to criticize Democrats when they do the wrong thing.

I agree with all that. Yet, I'm so happy listening to my little National Public Radio. Sure, if I actually know anything about a given story, I'm angry that they missed it, but most of the time these days, I'm blissfully out of the loop, thrilled to hear one more story from the Obama/McCain campaign trail.

I think the struggle for me is how to stay aware, engaged and still calm and peaceful. How can I as an active citizen and a spiritual practitioner educate myself on the important issues of the day, be sufficiently aware that I want to do something about them, but not get caught up in anger, fear, resentment, and the sort of moral superiority and outrage that it brings up in me?

Step 1, I just subscribed to a podcast of "Democracy Now" as an experiment.
Step 2, meditate, meditate, meditate.

No answers today, only questions. For snicholsblog, this has been snichols.

Bill Magavern's Recommendations for November California Ballot

Recommendations for November Ballot

These are strictly my personal opinions, for whatever they're worth. Feel free
to forward them or post to web, but please do not add the names of any other
individual or organization by way of identification or affiliation. And get
ready for some change we can believe in. -- Bill

Proposition 1A --Yes
Safe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act.
If you’re wondering what happened to Prop 1, the Legislature replaced it with
1A, which is still a high-speed rail bond, but with significant improvements in
both fiscal accountability and environmental safeguards. This bond measure calls
for borrowing almost $10 billion, which is no easy sell, but creating a clean
and fast rail line linking most of the state’s population is a goal worth that
kind of investment. We need clean transportation alternatives to freeways and
airplanes, and if we don’t pass 1A it will be a long time before we have another
shot.

Proposition 2 -- Yes
Standards for Confining Farm Animals. Initiative Statute.
The Humane Society has a simple proposal: farm animals should have enough room
to actually turn around. Decreasing the density of confined animals will also
decrease pollution and help family farmers. The additional cost will be less
than one penny per egg.

Proposition 3 -- Yes
Children’s Hospital Bond Act. Grant Program. Initiative Statute.
Public borrowing for private institutions should have to pass a high threshold
of worthiness, and I think children’s hospitals meet that standard.

Proposition 4 -- No
Waiting Period and Parental Notification Before Termination of Minor’s
Pregnancy. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Sure, it would be great if minors discussed all important life decisions with
their parents, but having government require it is not going to make it happen.
A more likely result of passing this measure would be an increase in dangerous
amateur abortions.

Proposition 5 -- Yes
Nonviolent Drug Offenses. Sentencing, Parole and Rehabilitation. Initiative Statute.
Treatment and rehab programs for nonviolent offenders are more effective than
the lock-‘em up policy that the state has relied on in recent decades. These
programs will cost money, but will save higher amounts over time.

Proposition 6 -- No
Police and Law Enforcement Funding. Criminal Penalties and Laws. Initiative
Statute.
Does anybody really think that our prison populations are too small, or that
sentences are too short? This measure would throw a lot of money into the
prison-industrial complex without accountability for how the money is spent.
State money that now goes to schools and healthcare would be shifted to building
jails and funding other local responsibilities.

Proposition 7 -- No
Renewable Energy Generation. Initiative Statute.
A billionaire had a good idea – ramp up renewable energy standards. But he got
really bad advice, then his team refused to listen to experts who suggested
changes in the proposal, or to recognize that the Legislature and Governor are
already moving toward the nation’s highest and best clean-power requirement. So the ballot language
would actually obstruct development of the small-scale solar and wind projects
we need. Just about all the state’s newspaper editorial boards and major
environmental groups are opposed.

Proposition 8 -- No
Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry. Initiative Constitutional
Amendment.
Why is it that the proponents of this constitutional amendment are so worried
that their marriages will be threatened if gay people are allowed to keep the
right to marry?
Proposition 9 -- No
Criminal Justice System. Victims’ Rights. Parole. Initiative Constitutional
Amendment and Statute.
This measure’s billionaire sponsor, Henry Nicholas, is under indictment for
fraud, drugs and prostitution, but he poses as a champion of victims’ rights.
Victims already have a bill of rights under the state Constitution, and Prop 9
would duplicate existing laws and cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars
a year.

Proposition 10 -- No
Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Renewable Energy. Bonds. Initiative Statute.
Another billionaire trying to make energy policy through the ballot, but this
one – Swift Boat campaign funder T. Boone Pickens – knows exactly what he’s
doing: trying to enrich his natural gas business. Like Prop 7, Prop 10 also has
drawn opposition from just about all the state’s newspaper editorial boards and
every environmental group that has weighed in, along with taxpayer and consumer
groups. Natural gas vehicles are relatively clean, but shouldn’t be subsidized
by long-term state borrowing and shouldn’t be favored over cleaner alternatives
like battery electric vehicles.

Proposition 11 -- Yes
Redistricting. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
CA needs to take redistricting away from the legislators, who have a conflict of
interest, and give it to an independent commission, as this measure would do. I
don’t buy many of the arguments of supporters – redistricting reform will not
make the Legislature more centrist or less partisan, which are over-rated virtues anyway. But it will make legislators
more responsive to their constituents, and will yield districts that are drawn
for their communities of interest and geographical compactness instead of the
self-interest of the politicians. Prop 11 isn’t perfect: it doesn’t cover
Congress, and the system of choosing the commissioners is overly complicated.
But it’s a lot better than the status quo, and is probably our best shot at
reform for a while, which is why the League of Women Voters and Common Cause
support.

Proposition 12 -- Yes
Veterans’ Bond Act of 2008.
This system of financing veterans’ home purchases has worked before, at no
direct cost to taxpayers.

Prescription: A healthier global warming plan

By Bill Magavern (published Thursday, October 09, 2008)

Even if pictures of stranded polar bears failed to warm your heart, global warming’s effect on your health should get your circulation going. As the California Air Resources Board takes on climate change with a plan scheduled for Oct. 3 release, Californians ought to scrutinize the effects that plan will have on our bodies.


Public health officials have predicted that human-induced warming will cause our elderly, outdoors workers and athletes to suffer increased amounts of heat-related illness, which in 2006 killed more than 100 vulnerable residents.


By taking action to slow global warming, we not only can lessen heat-related illness, we can also reduce the air pollution that plagues most of California. Curbing the pollution that causes global warming could prevent more than 3,000 premature deaths by 2020 and stave off an estimated 110,000 asthma cases, the California Air Resources Board has estimated.


Fortunately, the Global Warming Solutions Act, Assembly Bill 32, was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor in 2006. Air Board experts have been developing their scoping plan for meeting that law’s requirement that California return its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. A revised version of the plan should come out Oct. 3.


As they design measures to reduce greenhouse gases, Air Board officials should provide the additional benefit of improving air quality, especially in communities that suffer from the most severe smog, particulates, and toxic air emissions. Low-income communities and communities of color should not have to sacrifice their right to breathe clean air in an environmentally just world.


The good news is that many common-sense measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will also help us breathe easier. By raising the clean-energy standard for our electricity providers to 33%, allowing cities and counties to power up their purchase of renewable energy by combining buying power at the local level, and telling the automakers to put zero-emission vehicles on the road, California can combat climate change and air pollution at the same time.


But some proposals to address climate change could have drawbacks for local air quality if they are poorly designed. If the Air Board sets up a pollution-trading system for greenhouse gases, as it intends to do, permits to pollute should not be given away to the polluters. Handing out a valuable asset to the big oil and power companies would not motivate them to clean up dirty facilities in low-income communities as quickly as possible. Instead, polluters should have to pay for emission allowances through an auction. Funds raised through the auction should be used for public purposes such as energy efficiency, promotion of renewable energy and public transit, aid to low-income consumers, and providing training for green jobs.


Greenhouse gas “offsets” are another controversial issue. Offsets may have a role in reducing greenhouse gas, but they should be limited to assure the integrity of the emission reductions and fulfill the letter and spirit of the law. While projects such as planting trees or building clean energy facilities may benefit individual communities, regulators must not let polluters off the hook or those who breathe the air near polluting plants, landfills and kilns will suffer.


AB 32, which we strongly supported, drew much of its backing from the prospect that an enforceable cap on our state’s greenhouse gas emissions would spur the technological innovations required to fundamentally transform our energy economy, and that California would benefit by creating the green technologies that the rest of the country and the rest of the world will demand. Curbing global warming will require a rapid greening of our vehicles, fuels and power plants. If those sectors are able to comply with AB 32 requirements by outsourcing their emission reductions to other sectors and other jurisdictions, it could hold back the entire clean energy revolution.


We must prioritize offset projects that will provide environmental benefits to California, especially in communities suffering from excessive levels of pollution. AB 32 requires CARB to ensure that its implementation rules “complement, and do not interfere with efforts to achieve and maintain federal and state ambient air quality standards and to reduce toxic air contaminant emissions.”
Strengthening our global warming plan will provide a bigger dose of health benefits to California’s poorest and most powerless residents as we reduce climate change.


Plus, it might help the polar bears too.

Tim Wise on White Privilege

Privilege

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION

by Tim Wise

For those who still can't grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because "every family has challenges," even as black and Latino families with similar "challenges" are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

White privilege is when you can call yourself a "f'ing' redneck," like Bristol Palin's boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you'll "kick their f'ing' ass," and talk about how you like to "shoot s**t" for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.

White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.

White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don't all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you're "untested."

White privilege is being able to say that you support the words "under God" in the pledge of allegiance because "if it was good enough for the founding fathers, it's good enough for me," and not be immediately disqualified from holding office--since, after all, the pledge was written in the late 1800s and the "under God" part wasn't added until the 1950s--while believing that reading accused criminals and terrorists their rights (because, ya know, the Constitution, which you used to teach at a prestigious law school requires it), is a dangerous and silly idea only supported by mushy liberals.

White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you. White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was "Alaska first," and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she's being disrespectful.

White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do--like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor--and people think you're being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college--you're somehow being mean, or even sexist.

White privilege is being able to convince white women who don't even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a "second look."

White privilege is being able to fire people who didn't support your political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being black and merely knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means you must be corrupt.

White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God's punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you're just a good church-going Christian, but if you're black and friends with a black pastor who has noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you're an extremist who probably hates America.

White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a reporter, and then people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a "trick question," while being black and merely refusing to give one-word answers to the queries of Bill O'Reilly means you're dodging the question, or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.

White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being black and experiencing racism is, as Sarah Palin has referred to it, a "light" burden.

And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren't sure about that whole "change" thing. Ya know, it's just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain.

White privilege is, in short, the problem

Call before (or after) you complain about the bailout

If you're as concerned as I am about the prospect of Congress spending $700 billion to bailout the corrupt financial industry (when they could be spending it to reduce the national debt, fund universal health care, beef up education, rebuild roads, end global warming, pick one), please take time out of your ranting against it to call and rant against it to your congressman or woman. I called my Senators Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer and my Congresswoman Doris Matsui. Don't take anything for granted. If you're not sure of the name of your Congressmember, use this tool: Find your elected federal, state and local representatives.

Here are two toll free numbers to call Washington and ask for your representative. Just say, I oppose the bailout. They may ask your name or zipcode. They may be too busy to do so. 800-828-0498, 800-473-6711,

Obama Best on Iraq, Lame on Economy

Initially I was pleased when I realized the Jim Lehrer was the moderator (much better than any of the random network guys, sorry dearly departed Tim Russert, you were not missed tonight) and that he was leading off with a question about the economy.

To me, Obama shoulda hit that one out of the park. But he couldn't and didn't. He couldn't because he isn't prepared to oppose an unprecedented $700 billion bailout of the financial industry. And although he tried to hit McCain pretty hard on supporting the Bush policies of deregulation that led to the massive failure, he alternated between campaign buzzwords like "wall street and main street" and a lot of inside washington jargon. He never really took it to McCain in this area. I woulda liked a bit of "John, this financial crisis is your fault. You bought the idea that big financial institutions would thrive without anybody making sure they were making good deals and you were wrong. And now you want to bail them out for their mistakes. Well, who is going to bail out the people who lost their homes?"

Obama tried to say that stuff, but he said it in such a way that my mother, who is an avid political watcher, literally fell asleep in the middle of one of his sentences. I've said it before, my mother is a reliable bellweather of what the average mainstream Democrat is thinking. It is not a good sign if she falls asleep when Obama is talking.

McCain on the other hand was feisty and plain-speaking on the economy and managed to push Obama into a corner by focussing on his earmarks and on McCain's record of weeding out pork barrel projects. The fact that Obama's 890 million dollars of day care centers on the south side or bridges in the loop pails in comparison to a $700 billion bailout cannot be said, and McCain knows it. The average person thinks hundreds of millions of dollars means something. And it does, but not in the context of a federal budget (jeez, it barely does in California).

Obama regained his footing and beat the crap out of McCain on Iraq. He hammered on "you were wrong," repeatedly and really scored points in my book. For the first time, I really got a creepy feeling about how personal the Iraq war is to McCain because of his experiences in Vietnam. I used to think that might be a good thing. Now I think that he might drag on the war for "a hundred years" like some weird ancient zorro searching the countryside to avenge his dead father--he repeatedly made reference to knowing what it was like to lose and not wanting to go through that again.

Woah! This really sets off alarm bells for me. Who the hell cares whether McCain wants to go through that again? Could the decisions about the war possibly be prosecuted on the basis of what's right for the country and world? How about that?

My mom (see above) was rightly appalled by McCain's creepy condescending tone towards Obama--the repeated references to his "naivite" made him seem bitter and mean. The fact that she noticed it makes me hopeful that others will, but maybe only yellow dog dems.

I found it particularly telling that McCain scolded Obama for "saying out loud" that he might invade Pakistan. And there was another instance later when he also seemed to hint that he would share Obama's strategy and thoughts secretly but that he thought it was somehow naive or lame to share those thoughts with the citizenry. So we need to trust McCain like we trusted Bush to take care of us and do the right thing, even though he doesn't trust us to share in advance what kind of thinking he would have on key foreign policy matters? Now who's naive?

Finally, I think Obama misses an opportunity when he just sort of shares McCain's view of Russia/Georgia. I know he is trying to put the initial weakness of his response behind him, but I think there's a larger point and opportunity that's being missed, to wit, how can we expect Russia to respect international boundaries and law, when we haven't respected international boundaries and law? By acting virtually unilaterally in prosecuting his war in Iraq, the Bush administration has destroyed the United States' credibility and ability to play a constructive role in getting Russia to behave. Obama is clearly the President who would be better able to declare a new era of decency and rule of law in foreign policy and restore the US to a point where it could be taken seriously in this context.

Use McCain (not Bush) to beat McCain

A substantial part of the Obama team strategy seems to be to Bushify McCain, to convince the public that McCain is really George Bush in disguise. In my opinion this is a flawed strategy. Let's use McCain to beat McCain, not Bush. Here's why:

The clearest reason not to stick to this strategy is that it's too obvious. It's going after McCain's weaknesses, instead of his strengths. Karl Rove based the current Republican playbook on the opposite premise: campaign on your greatest weakness, go after your opponent's greatest strength. Hence, Bush's obstinance in the face of repeated failures was painted as "strength, stick-to-it-iveness, and tenacity" while Kerry's record as a war hero was "swift-boated" into question.

Here, I'd consider taking McCain himself straight on, apart from Bush. "He calls himself a 'maverick,' but he voted lock step for blah blah blah. He calls himself a 'reformer,' but he voted for big money interests on this this and this.

Also, I'm not sure how to get it out there, but I think the public oughta know that most of McCain's colleagues in the Senate can't stand him. He's known as cranky, mean-spirited, cruel and untrustworthy. And while I personally might find being mistrusted by U.S. Senators to be a badge of honor, the American public seems to want to have a President that it trusts, likes and feels comfortable with. McCain is not that guy.

Focusing entirely on tying McCain to Bush can backfire. If the public fails to see the logic and finds McCain to be his own man (highly likely, see below), no amount of Bush-bashing will transfer and McCain, in the meantime, is free to create his own image with the public.

An even more fraught version of this strategy was attempted in 2006 in California in the campaign to defeat Gov. Schwarzenegger from his second term. The entire strategy was to tie Schwarzenegger to Bush. All campaigns and slogans of the Democratic campaign focused on this one theme. Schwarzenegger equals Bush. You don't like Bush. Therefore you don't like Schwarzenegger. Schwarzenegger, meanwhile, had his own record, had scrupulously avoided appearing on the same dias as the President and sailed to a landslide victory against the unknown Democratic state treasurer Phil Angelides.

Granted it is a much easier case to paint McCain with a Bush brush than it was to paint celebrity moderate Schwarzenegger. McCain is a demonstrable social conservative and hawk who in the primary went out of his way to move as far to the right as possible and ingratiate himself with his base.

However, left to his own devices to define himself, McCain has plenty to distinguish himself from Bush. He's made a career out of defying expectations. He has made campaign finance reform a centerpiece of his work. He has voted against anti-environmental legislation (sometimes) that has been opposed by the majority of his party. And of course, he served in the military and was tortured by the North Vietnamese in tiger cages.

Let's get out there and clarify for the public who McCain really is: he's not Bush, and you still don't want him. Or, alternatively, call him a meaner, creepier George Bush, maybe make him Dick Cheney, instead of Bush (Cheney's negatives are even lower).

Food for thought.

Strickland or Webb for Obama

I can't take credit for this at all. I'm basically just parroting my husband--but he knows everything.

Bill says that Obama should consider the following two people for veep:

1) Ted Strickland, Governor of Ohio:
pros: could swing Ohio; minister (Obama could say he's got a new minister!), centrist, Hillary supporter (unify the party), white male, he's a GOVERNOR not a Senator, has foreign policy experience.
cons: hmmm, well, white male, centrist, Hillary supporter (but that's just me).
Bill says just leave him to do the business of Ohio and campaign only in Ohio and neighboring key states, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky. All Obama has to do to win is hold all the states Kerry won plus Ohio.

2) Jim Webb, Senator from Virginia:
Pros: popular, Bible thumper, could maybe bring Virginia, centrist, is he another Hillary supporter?
Cons: another senator.

Okay, that's all for now. Trying to get back in the blogging game.

Can you tell the difference between John McCain and a Carrot?

Take this MoveOn.org quiz and see if you correctly answer 6 short questions about the difference between McCain and Bush--Click here to take the quiz.

Bonus points if you can tell the difference between McCain and a carrot on key policy questions: McCain vs. Carrot.

See Sam Shepard's Fool for Love at Capital Stage

(:)(:)(:)(:) for a very solid production of Sam Shepard's play "Fool for Love" now playing at the Capital Stage in Old Sacramento through April 27, 2008.

I've lost track of how many times I've seen this play produced. This is certainly the first time I've seen a production since I came to grasp something of the depth of obsession people can have for alcoholism and for each other. Sam Shepard gets it right on the money.

Jonathan Rhys Williams gives the standout performance as Eddie, the bad ass love obsession returned to make May miserable. His physicality combined with raw intensity is mesmerizing. He made me totally believe that he had driven 2000 miles to have May, that he thought that he had changed, and that he would never ever change.

Stephanie Gularte is stunning and believable as May, but she tends to push her performances a little over the top so that one is from time to time too conscious of her "acting." Also, having seen both Williams and Gularte in other productions, I am starting to form the opinion that Williams is the more versatile actor. Gularte has a way that she plays certain emotions and she tends to carry that way from part to part.

Most importantly, the chemistry and sheer obsessive connection between these two characters is established almost immediately. Without that, no production of this play could recover and this one has it in spades.

The play clearly is under a capable director in Janis Stevens (this is the first play I've seen that she's directed, so I was nervous). And Loren Taylor turns in a solid performance as The Old Man.

All and all another gem churned out by the increasingly reliable Capital Stage, Sacramento's newest professional theater company with (this year at least) the best deal in the region on season tickets, $50 total for 5 plays. See Fool for Love while its here and subscribe next year.

Oh, and if money and time is no object, join Capital Stage on a great sounding theater and wine trip to Ashland, Oregon next month.

The Truth About Me

Greetings from the Big Apple!

Okay, so it's been another long inexplicable period in which I haven't posted a thing. My readers are anxious, fretful even.

Here's the scoop: two things have been going. First, our son has been sick for another protracted period (continuously since the beginning of February, and most of January too). It's not life-threatening, but it's very debilitating and he feels terrible and has missed a disturbing amount of school.

For some reason, not actually sure why, this makes it very difficult for me to blog every day.

Secondly, a couple of weeks ago I started blogging daily on a new blog I helped create called The Truth About Us Movie Blog.

I trust I've told you about The Truth About Us, a new documentary about using spiritual principle to create the life you want. Among other reasons to watch it is that I am interviewed extensively. You can learn more about the film and buy the movie at www.thetruthaboutus.tv.

Most of you are loyal predominantly to read my political stuff. The stuff I write on the Truth About Us blog is about using spiritual principle to change your life.