Shakesville

Quote of the Day

Yeah, it's still early, but can this be topped?

Elizabeth Dole:

Democrats have decided to play partisan politics with gas prices in a flailing attempt to distract from the growing economy.

Ho ho. Good one, Lizzy!

Via Joe in DC at AMERICAblog, who notes: "To Dole and the GOP, pointing out the pain being caused to American families by skyrocketing gas prices is partisan politics. Because to them, everything is politics. To American families, $3.00 a gallon (and rising fast) is a very harsh reality—that's something the GOP has really been missing."

It can probably be located in the same long-lost, sea-buried treasure chest as their social conscience, competence, and interest in accountability.

(Crossposted at AlterNet PEEK.)

Still crazy ####ing Joey.

From the Good News Dept. at Chud.com, it looks like Viggo Mortensen will be doing some more work with David Cronenberg in the near future:

Mortensen will help the new flesh live longer by reuniting with his A History of Violence helmer for his latest project, a London-based thriller called Eastern Promises. The story, written by Dirty Pretty Things scribe Steve Knight, follows a nurse looking into the death of a Russian girl during childbirth, who turns out to have been part of a sex-trafficking organization. The Vig plays a guy involved with the Russian mob who probably shoots people in the face.

The plot description doesn't immediately grab me, but Cronenberg's involvment does; Mortensen is just icing on the cake. A History of Violence was one of my favorite movies last year, and Viggo's work as the ambigiously historied Tom Stall was a big part of why the movie worked- the gradual unveiling of the character's possible culpability in the events going on around him made for one of the most affecting, and subtle performances I've seen.

Cronenberg's big thing is body horror, and I don't doubt this one will end up disturbing as hell. Huzzah to that, I say. Can't say for certain if this movie will get made, as he tends to dabble in any number of projects before he commits himself to one, but any casting is a step in the right direction. I wonder if there's any chance we'll see Maria Bello as the nurse...

Family Values

Brynn’s comment about the vileness of the phrase “family values” reminded me of a show I watched last night on A&E, The Secret Life of a Serial Killer—one of their ubiquitous crime/investigation programs, gravely narrated by Bill Kurtis. Although I’m generally fascinated by these kinds of shows, I had a particular interest in this one, as it was about a case in Indiana during the mid-90s that didn’t get a lot of media attention because the victims were gay men. (And what attention it did get in the major press was pretty infuriating, as the victims were described as “living on the margins of society” and all sorts of nonsense; the Indy gay press did a much better job with it.)

Anyhow, the killer was this total freak called Herb Baumeister, who fled to Canada and offed himself before he could be arrested. There were a lot of weird things going on with this guy, but on the surface, he was “normal”—he had a wife and three kids, owned a chain of stores, supported charities, went to church, etc.

His wife was interviewed for the program, and a couple of things struck me. In spite of her husband having been revealed as a closet homosexual and serial killer, she was still, disturbingly, waxing rhapsodic about the wonder days of yore when they met in college and fell in love. She spoke at length about how, during that time (the late 60s), everyone on campus just laid around doing drugs and talking about stuff, but she and Herb were Young Republicans, although “in those days, you didn’t come out as a Republican.” And she also went on about how they weren’t one of those couples who goes on romantic getaways and ignores their kids—they had “family love.”

Shiver.

I found it absolutely amazing that a woman who had married a serial killer—and, by the way, took him at his word when he told her the skeleton their son found in the backyard was just some old bones his physician father had left him; “I didn’t question it; Herb kept everything!” (yeah, like the skeletons of his victims)—still found the reserves within her to condemn hippies and parents who didn’t parent like they did. Unbelievable.

In the end, after their business had failed, they were losing their million-dollar home, and divorce proceedings had started, Julie Baumeister eventually led detectives to the place where their son had found the bones, where officials unearthed tons more. But in the interim, her husband had claimed at least two more victims. She said (paraphrasing), “Everyone seemed to know but me. I didn’t know anything; someone should have told me.” Right. It was everyone else’s fault for not cluing you in that your husband was a wacko. His being fired from a job for peeing on a letter addressed to the governor of Indiana was the first red flag, honey. Once you discover bones in the backyard, it’s time to call the cops.

It may seem like I’m being a bit callous toward a woman who went through something almost unimaginable, but the sympathy I might have for someone else in her position was completely squashed out of existence by my thorough irritation at her insistent perplexity that her good, Republican, family values husband could have been capable of what he did. She seemed to use his conservative, family man façade as an excuse for her own ignorance—how could anyone know that a man like that could do something wrong?—a wonderment predicated on the pernicious assumption so pervasive in our society that Republicans have the market cornered on family values and goodness. Republicans don’t do things like that. Christians don’t do things like that. The implication, intentional or not, is always that it’s the “freaks,” like those horrible dope-smoking college hippies, who are twisted and evil. It’s liberals. It’s atheists. It’s gays.

But, of course, they were actually the victims of this splendid family man with his family values.

Time and again, we see this same formula play out, yet the conventional wisdom that the GOP is the party of moral values, that conservative Christianity provides the only acceptable moral model, doggedly persists. Haven’t we seen enough evidence to the contrary that this erroneous assumption can finally, at long last, be sent the way of the dodo?

That’s not to suggest that there are no bad liberals, atheists, gays, or no good conservatives, Christians. It’s just to suggest that it’s time to retire the exhausted good conservative v. evil liberal shtick. Being myself a carrier of none of the labels that this rule deems “good,” and also having never strangled 50 or so dudes for my own pleasure, I’m getting a little tired of the wide-eyed bewilderment any time one of the “good” guys turns out to be an evil shithead.

Must Read

Orcinus: Politics and the environment. Great stuff.

Lo, though he, like, totally walks through The Valley of good and evil...

What is he smoking?

President Bush today said he had tried to avoid war with Iraq "diplomatically to the max."

…Bush also explained, in unusually stark terms, how his belief in God influences his foreign policy. "I base a lot of my foreign policy decisions on some things that I think are true," he said. "One, I believe there's an Almighty. And, secondly, I believe one of the great gifts of the Almighty is the desire in everybody's soul, regardless of what you look like or where you live, to be free."

…"The Articles of Confederation wasn't exactly a real smooth start for our government to begin. And what you're watching on your TV screens is a new democracy emerging."

Nevermind what I'm watching on my TV screen. I'm more concerned with reading my president talking like he's an extra from Fast Times at Ridgemont High II: The Rapture.

John at Blogenlust, from whom I nicked the idea for the graphic, suggests perhaps if God is serving as Bush's Secretary of Defense, it's time for him to resign.

Creature at State of the Day, meanwhile, would like to know "When will reality return to this nation? Please, somebody tell me."

First, huh? Diplomacy wasn't even on GWB's to-do list when it came to Iraq. This is an all-out lie. Second, huh? He said, "to the max." The so-called leader of the free world has suddenly crossed into the Valley. And not even modern Valley, GWB is stuck in 1985 Valley.

Sigh. Like, wow, dude.

I know it's unpopular these days for a soulless heathen traitor like me to parse the words of an avowed Christian like our fine president, but I'd really love to know how it happens that the Almighty considers it a greater imperative to deliver the gift of freedom to the souls of those who are sitting on a shitload of black gold than to those who, oh, I dunno, aren't. Or, is that, perhaps, an agenda that is born of a more earthly source?

Frankly, I can't help but consider this further evidence that god does not exist, because I can't imagine any self-respecting deity letting Bush get away with invoking "the Almighty" in defense of ignoring one human rights tragedy to perpetrate another. Then again, maybe smiting is just unfashionable among the eternal these days.

(Crossposted at AlterNet PEEK.)

Tony the Pony

Via C&L, CNN is reporting that Fox anchor and former Goerge H.W. Bush speechwriter Tony Snow is "likely to accept the job as White House press secretary, succeeding Scott McClellan."

The sources said they expect him to announce his decision within the next few days.

A source familiar with the discussions said Monday that newly appointed Chief of Staff Josh Bolten asked Snow to make a decision by early this week.

That's adorable. Nothing warms the very cockles of my crusty old heart like a mendacious shill finally being able to slough off the restrictive bonds forged in the guise of legitmacy, at long last free of the need to insist while stifling a maniacal laugh that one is not a two-dollar administration whore. Now the dear Mr. Snow can sing it loud and proud. Ah, the sweet smell of freedom.

In other news, Treasury Secretary John Snow is reportedly on his way out. Odd, that. Since when is there only room for one snow job in the Bush administration?

(Crossposted at AlterNet PEEK.)

Who cares what picture we see?

From today's IMDB Movie & TV News:

Will 3-D Rescue Movie Business?

Digital 3-D cinema could be the motion picture industry's strongest defense against piracy, Titanic director James Cameron said Sunday. Speaking at the National Association of Broadcasters' Digital Cinema Summit in Las Vegas, Cameron said that Digital 3-D "offers a powerful experience which you can only have in the movie theater." He lauded technology that permits virtually any film to be transformed into a 3-D version, and indicated that he is considering releasing his 1997 blockbuster Titanic in 3-D. "Digital 3-D is a revolutionary form of showmanship that is within our grasp. It can get people off their butts and away from their portable devices and get people back in the theaters where they belong," he said.

Always nice to get industry advice from a blockbuster director who seems far more interested in announcing new projects than in actually finishing any of them. (A quick peek at his IMDB page shows he's involved with three different films, all still in the pre-production stage; hopefully, one of these will start filming before he reads more manga.)

Still, he may have a point. Hardly a week goes by, there isn't griping about the state of ticket sales these days, and endless speculation about what's keeping moviegoers away. These speculations tend to fixate on three theories: the ready access to downloadable, pirated material, the quality of the movies, and the quality of the theater experience itself.

I'm not sure how much I buy the pirate-phobia. The movies I've watched on my computer (wait- um- it was a friend's computer! From college! And he was totally gay, so go persecute him), they weren't movies I'd had any interest in seeing in the theaters anyway, or if they were, I wasn't choosing to forgoe a trip to the theater just so I could stay at home and spent three hours hunched over a monitor trying to fix the volume on a networked copy of Magnolia. If I could've gotten to see it on the big screen, I would have, and I'd argue that a lot of the folks who d/l movies would say the same. If you want something so badly you'll spend three days getting it off the Internet, you're probably someone who's still going to shlep to the cinema fairly often.

The dwindling audience, then, is probably made up more of dabblers than hardcore Bittorrent fanatics. If they aren't as deeply invested in cinema to begin with, then, it makes sense to assume that a drop-off in movie quality might make them lose interest, but that's a damnably difficult thing to judge. Especially when week after week, the number one movie in the country is the one with the worst reviews. As earnings decrease, studios turn to product they believe will be reliably profitable; and even though your average remake or sequel has less texture than reheated Who Hash, it practically guarantees a return on the initial investment, especially on video. So, sad to say, if theater attendance is dropping because of the number of crummy reheats, then the situation isn't going to get better any time soon.

There is, however, a certain inevitably in the decline of the big movie houses. The quality of legitimate home entertainment releases has made it easier than it ever was to come close to a theater experience in your own home, and while most of us can't afford projection TVs and massive stereo sound, not having your eyes and ears bleed is a small price to pay to avoid the endless hassles attendant in most cineplexes. Between cell phones, plot explainers ("Wait who's he?" "Oh, HIM, yes, I know him, I read this somewhere, he totally killed that other women." "Her?" "No, he hasn't killed her. Yet." "Now who's he?" "That's a lamp." "Really?" "It's possessed." "Ooooooo."), sticky floors, bratty kids, seat-kickers and a hundred other complaints, it seems impossible to justify the money and effort it takes to get to the theater, when you could just wait a month, and watch the whole thing at home.

That's where the 3-D stuff comes in. Clearly, in order for the big chains to revitalize, they need to offer an experience that we can't get in our living rooms, something that's appealing enough to entice an audience into taking out the small business loan required to get a pair of tickets and a large popcorn. 3-D is a possibility, especially the incredibly high tech method their describing. I'm not entirely sold, though. For one thing, it's gimmicky as hell, and for another, I wear glasses; I'm skeptical of any new 3-D process, as the old red and blue stuff never worked consistently for me.

Still, those cardboard specs were pretty boss. And I do remember being blown away when I went to Disneyworld with my parents and saw Captain Eo, so who knows. Maybe by the time Cameron gets around to putting out a new movie, the characters will actually have some depth.

Add “sheep-harasser” to the list of heinous Bush attributes.

This article was passed on by Shaker Drew with the message: “This is totally classic…and just hours after Earth Day…” No kidding.

President Bush woke up early and rode his mountain bike along the Clara Burgess Trail to the top of Murray Hill, which affords a spectacular view of the Coachella Valley and Little San Bernardino Mountains.

The trail is considered strenuous for riding, with a 500-foot elevation gain. The total round-trip was a little more than 7 miles.

“He said it was a pretty tough terrain, but he enjoyed it,” Press Secretary Scott McClellan said.

Jim Foote, acting manager of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument, said the Clara Burgess trail is also among those monument managers ask people to avoid part of the year to prevent disrupting endangered Peninsular bighorn sheep.

The trail is one of about 10 in the monument under a “voluntary avoidance” program. People are asked to stay off the Clara Burgess trail from Jan. 1 to June 30 during the sheep lambing season, he said.

It was uncertain Sunday night if White House organizers accompanying President Bush knew about the “voluntary avoidance” program.

Probably just more bad intelligence, that’s all.

Like they’d have given a flying shit either way. It doesn’t really matter whether they’re acting out of ignorance, incompetence, or avarice—the result it always the same: Doing whatever the fuck they want with no regard for anyone or anything else.

I hope the next White House Press Corps dinner features an amusing video of Bush looking around the Oval Office for his missing copy of the San Jacinto Mountains National Monument wildlife guide. It will be the perfect complement to the main course—pan-seared Peninsular bighorn sheep flanks with a side of mashed spotted owl.

32%

Unpopular. Very, very unpopular.

(Meanwhile, IIRC 33% support impeachment hearings.)

ARGH

Evan reports on flourishing “crisis pregnancy centers”—Planned Parenthood doppelgangers that dupe unsuspecting women seeking abortion into crossing their thresholds only to harass and intimidate them.

Here's the kicker: Not only are there more of these BS Clinics than actual abortion providers in the US, but guess who foots the bill? That's right, you! They receive tens of millions in government grants...

Fucking awesome. I’m seriously so tired of this shit.

Teenage boys sue Rumsfeld

No, he’s not involved in any DHS shenanigans; he’s more like a pain-in-the-ass telemarketer ignoring the no-call list.

Six NY teens have named Rummy, David Chu, Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, and Matt Boehmer, Director of Advertising and Market Research Studies, in the suit, alleging they broke the law “by keeping an extensive database on potential recruits,” including records not expunged after three years as required by law and information such as social security numbers, which is also not legal.

The Pentagon has defended the practice as critical to the success of the all-volunteer U.S. military, and said it was sensitive to privacy concerns.

…The plaintiffs -- all 16- and 17-year-old students from the New York area -- were approached by military recruiters even after demanding that their information be stricken from the database, Lieberman said.

They want the court to declare the database illegal, force the military to stop keeping improper records and pay for their lawyers.

Is there anyone in this administration not doing something criminal? Just wondering.

No wonder they don’t like trial lawyers.

I Hate Tom Cruise

It's bad enough that I know who the guy is, and it's bad enough that news about his alien spawn is paid more attention than the criminal activities of Prezint Sneaky McLiesalot, but then he has to go and say something stupid like this: (Bold mine)

Is the Tom Cruise publicity machine finally taking a break from its jet-setting promotional ways? Not quite.

Less than a week after the birth of daughter Suri, Cruise has forsaken diaper duty and turned up in Rome for the Italian premiere of Mission: Impossible III Monday night.

But, lest you think Cruise, who appeared on ABC two days after Suri's birth to promote his spy sequel, would rather hype a movie than burp a baby, the couch-hopping star says he is cutting short his European vacation, canceling previously scheduled stops in London and Paris to return to Los Angeles to be with his new daugther and fiancee Katie Holmes.

"My mission impossible was to be here today," he said at a press conference. "I didn't want to come. My daughter was just born and I didn't want to leave her and her mother...I thought about not coming to Rome, but Kate said go and have fun."

Oh, Gawd... That was 100% Grade-A Cheeze.

I don't agree with the murmurs that Mr. Thetan timed the birth of his baby to co-incide with the publicity machine of his new flick, but he makes it very difficult to remain skeptical when he burbles something that stupid.

Please, aliens, if you're reading this, take Tom back. We don't want him.

You Can't Always Get What You Want

Moss isn't growing fat on this Rolling Stone:

PRESIDENT George Bush can’t get no satisfaction — after Mick Jagger grabbed his hotel room.

The Rolling Stone splashed out £3,600 a night for the suite days before the US leader tried to book it.

Now Mick, 62, who has been a fierce critic of the Bush-led war in Iraq, is refusing to give it up.

Apparently Bush's people automatically assumed that Jagger and the Stones would just hand over all their rooms because Bush wants to stay there when he attends a summit in June. The arrogance is disgusting.

The hotel last night admitted US secret service agents vetted the accommodation — and confirmed that Bush would no longer be staying there.
An American Embassy official refused to say where he was now staying for “security reasons”.

I hear at Motel 6 they always leave the light on for you. BTW, this is the suite Bush wanted:

Opulent, isn't it? Not that world leaders (or "deciders") shouldn't stay in nice accomodations---but damn. Anyhow, Bush is going there for the EU-USA Summit. Here are highlights from the last summit, held here in DC last June.

More on Saving the Internet

Matt Stoller’s got a round-up you really need to read. Get the facts, then sign the petition

More on the Impeachment Maneuvers

Some background on Illinois’ rationale (via Gordon):

The Illinois General Assembly is about to rock the nation. Members of state legislatures are normally not considered as having the ability to decide issues with a massive impact to the nation as a whole. Representative Karen A. Yarbrough of Illinois' 7th District is about to shatter that perception forever. Representative Yarbrough stumbled on a little known and never utilized rule of the US House of Representatives, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives, which allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of a state legislature. From there, Illinois House Joint Resolution 125 (hereafter to be referred to as HJR0125) was born.

Detailing five specific charges against President Bush including one that is specified to be a felony, the complete text of HJR0125 is copied below at the end of this article. One of the interesting points is that one of the items, the one specified as a felony, that the NSA was directed by the President to spy on American citizens without warrant, is not in dispute. That fact should prove an interesting dilemma for a Republican controlled US House that clearly is not only loathe to initiate impeachment proceedings, but does not even want to thoroughly investigate any of the five items brought up by the Illinois Assembly as high crimes and/or misdemeanors. Should HJR0125 be passed by the Illinois General Assembly, the US House will be forced by House Rules to take up the issue of impeachment as a privileged bill, meaning it will take precedence over other House business.

In other words, things could get interesting.

Boy, I miss living in Illinois.

The I-Word

State legislators in Illinois and California have introduced proposals to impeach President Bush. In California, the amendment provides for impeaching Vice President Cheney as well.

Oh—and the Red Hot Chili Peppers are on the case, too.

No Wonder Those Pumps Look So Phallic

They help you keep in mind that you're getting screwed.

Yeeeowch.

Let's get a few things in perspective, here. With gas prices going insane and the cost of living becoming harder and harder to manage, it's time to start thinking about our priorities. From Senator Kennedy's Minimum Wage Act of 2005:

The number of Americans in poverty has increased by 4.3 million since President Bush took office. Nearly 36 million people live in poverty, including 13 million children. Among full-time, year-round workers poverty has doubled since the late 1970s—from about 1.3 million then to more than 2.6 million. An unacceptably low minimum wage is a key part of the problem.
The last time Congress voted to raise the minimum wage was in 1996. That increase raised it from $4.25 to $4.75 in 1996, and then in 1997 to its current $5.15 an hour.
Today, the real value of the minimum wage is more than $3.50 below what it was in 1968. To have the purchasing power it had in 1968, the minimum wage would have to be $8.70 an hour today, not $5.15.
In the past eight years, Members of Congress will have raised their own pay seven times—by $28,500. In those same eight years minimum wage workers have not gotten a single raise—they continue to earn $10,700 a year.
The current minimum wage fails to provide enough income to enable minimum wage workers to afford adequate housing in any area of this country.

Again, the numbers are from 2005, but you get the idea. And as to the people that moan that raising the minimum wage will inevitably end in the End of the World as We Know It:

History clearly shows that raising the minimum wage has not had any negative impact on jobs, employment, or inflation. In the four years after the last minimum wage increase passed, the economy experienced its strongest growth in over three decades. More than 11 million new jobs were added, at a pace of 232,000 per month. There were ten million new service industry jobs, including more than one and a half million retail jobs, of which nearly 600,000 were restaurant jobs.

More answers to common arguments about the Living Wage here. In the meantime, oil companies are posting record profits, with one particularly oily customer making out like a bandit.

April 14, 2006— Soaring gas prices are squeezing most Americans at the pump, but at least one man isn't complaining.

Last year, Exxon made the biggest profit of any company ever, $36 billion, and its retiring chairman appears to be reaping the benefits.

Exxon is giving Lee Raymond one of the most generous retirement packages in history, nearly $400 million, including pension, stock options and other perks, such as a $1 million consulting deal, two years of home security, personal security, a car and driver, and use of a corporate jet for professional purposes.

Read that again. The biggest profit of any company ever. And who's paying for Jabba to fly around in a private jet?

We are.

Last November, when he was still chairman of Exxon, Raymond told Congress that gas prices were high because of global supply and demand.

"We're all in this together, everywhere in the world," he testified.

Funny, I don't recall being "in this together" with Lee Raymond. Am I going to see any of that $400 million? Will I get a driver for my car, and not pay for the gas? Will I get a free trip anywhere I wish to go in a private jet? What about people that use a vehicle to make a living and feed their families? Is he in it with them?

Somehow, I doubt it. Doesn't look like Raymond has missed many meals.

It's good to be the king.

And as to that "supply problem" security blanket, there are certain people that would argue with that:

DOHA (AFP) - Saudi Arabian Oil Minister Ali al-Nuaimi said that markets determimed the price of oil and that the current level was not due to supply shortages.

"The market determines the price," Nuaimi said on his arrival in Doha for an informal meeting of the 11-member OPEC on the sidelines of an international energy forum.

"You know and I know that the reason for the price being where it is is not shortages of supply."

[...]

Dealers said they expect ongoing concerns over Iran's nuclear programme will keep crude prices above 70 dollars until the crisis is resolved.

It's also easy to lecture about the importance of fuel-efficient vehicles when you can afford five (five!!) Humvees.

What sparked this was a post by Greg Saunders that puts the whole thing into perspective in 3,000 words. Reminding you that a picture is worth a thousand of 'em.

Post it, print it, circulate it. Americans may be apathetic voters, and the easily swayed might be distracted by shiny objects such as abortion or "gay marriage," and some of them still think that the war in Iraq is hunky-dory, because at least "we got rid of a brutal dictator," but nothing will motivate someone more than a hard rabbit-punch in the pocketbook.

We're in deep trouble, America, and it's the Republicans that sat back and crowed "Make it so." And the lilly-livered Democrats sat back and let them go to Warp 10.

You’re paying at the pump. Get payback at the polls.

The time to demand results is now.

(Once there was a man who decided he knew everything... once there was a cross-post he threw in my face...)

WWJD?

Sign a petition in support of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, apparently.

The signers include many influential evangelical Protestants, a few rabbis and an official of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

But both the organizers and gay rights groups said what was striking about the petition was the direct involvement by high-ranking Roman Catholic officials, including 16 bishops. Although the church has long opposed same-sex unions, and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops had previously endorsed the idea of a constitutional amendment banning such unions, it was evangelical Protestants who generally led the charge when the amendment was debated in 2004.

"The personal involvement of bishops and cardinals is significantly greater this time than in 2004," said Patrick Korten, a spokesman for the Knights of Columbus, a lay Catholic group.

The Catholic bishops and many of the other religious leaders involved have pledged to distribute postcards for their congregants to send to their senators urging support for the amendment.

I sure wish I could run an oppositional political campaign equal in scope and organization to this one and do it all with tax-exempt status.

Smoke gets in your eyes

The senator from Briggs and Stratton

You wouldn't think that air pollution would have many proponents, but then, you probably haven't met Kit Bond. Smog has a dedicated ally in the senior senator from Missouri; a New York Times article exposes Bond as a long-standing foe of regulations that would reduce the amount of smog produced by small engines by mandating the addition of a golf-ball sized catalytic converter...

Like the Michigan Congressional delegation that argued on behalf of automakers decades ago, Senator Christopher S. Bond, Republican of Missouri, has repeatedly put hurdles in front of regulators. Mr. Bond operates from a position of strength in these matters. He is chairman of the appropriations subcommittee that controls the budgets of agencies like the E.P.A. and the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

While Briggs & Stratton is based in Wisconsin, it has two factories in Missouri. The possibility that increased costs will squeeze tight profit margins has led Mr. Bond to argue that tightening small-engine standards nationally would take 1,750 jobs from his constituents and send them to China.

Briggs & Stratton has employed a two-pronged scare tactic, claiming (one) that a catalytic converter would present a fire hazard, and (two) that such a mandate would force them to raise prices "across their product line" by at least 30 percent. Both B & S and its legislative servitor, Bond, are guilty here of what George Bush famously called "the soft bigotry of low expectations"; they would have you believe that the hard-working employees of Briggs & Stratton just aren't smart enough to engineer a converter device that would safely reduce emissions, and at a reasonable price. Never mind that four other small engine makers seem to have managed the engineering side of it, and never mind that the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the addition of a convertor would mean an average increase of only $20 to 25 per machine.

As initial objections fall before actual science, Bond has engaged in a series of legislative efforts to delay and limit the adoption of new regulations, just as Briggs & Stratton seeks to obstruct progress by calling for yet another bought-and-paid-for study. It remains to be seen if their efforts will stop the EPA from doing its job.

Addendum: It should be noted that Democrat Herb Kohl, a senator actually from the home state of Briggs & Stratton, voted in 2003 to support a Bond-backed measure to obstruct tougher small-engine smog regulations.

(Cross-posted for your convenience...)

What’s Kerry smoking?

Some Dems have started grousing (once again) that the prominent roles played by Iowa and New Hampshire in the presidential nomination process leave too much power in the hands of “small states with overwhelmingly white populations.” And in a move that actually smacks of a hint of progressivism, “the party is considering adding, during those early weeks, one or two states in other regions to draw diverse electorates into the process.” And what’s Kerry’s response? He writes a column lambasting the idea and accusing the party of “making a mistake in trying to 'fix' something that is not broken." Gee, I don’t suppose this has anything to do with the fact that Iowa and New Hampshire voters came through with an unexpected amount of support for him in the last election, do you?

On ABC's "This Week," the Massachusetts Democrat bridled when told an unnamed Democratic strategist said that, by supporting the status quo, "you're basically saying only white people's votes count in those early states."

"That's so much bunk," Kerry responded. "I don't know how to describe that comment in any other way than to say that that's absolutely ridiculous. The converse of that is to suggest that the people in New Hampshire and Iowa are insensitive to those issues and don't care about them." (Link.)

Well, no. The converse of that is to suggest that the people in New Hampshire and Iowa simply don’t see presidential candidates through the same prism as people of color, because sensitivity and concern for their issues isn’t the same as having lived in their particular set of circumstances. In fact, I would also argue that the majority of residents in New Hampshire and Iowa don’t view candidates in the same way as southern whites, or southwestern whites, either. Even a state like Illinois, with a much more racially diverse and larger LGBT population, views candidates differently—which shouldn’t be construed as a slight against Iowa or New Hampshire, but simply a recognition that in a diverse party, diversity should be respected.

There’s nothing ridiculous about that suggestion, and I would expect Kerry to be clever enough to know that, which makes me suspicious of his motives. Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, South Carolina, West Virginia, Hawaii, and D.C. have all “asked to be considered for an early nomination contest,” with a decision expected later in the year. Does Kerry really think that the Dems’ wouldn’t nominate a stronger candidate with the input of one of those states, or does he just look at that list and see his own presidential ambitions circling the drain?

If it were up to me, I’d prefer to see a state like California, with a truly diverse population—from race to class to sexual orientation—be a key part of our nominating process, but, failing that, I’ll settle for something that at least brings a decidedly metropolitan flavor to the primaries, which is why I’m hoping they pick D.C. from the above list.