Home » Blog » Raging Grannies Protest Draws Police
You must be logged in to complete this action
Blog for America
Raging Grannies Protest Draws Police
These Raging Grannies (associated with the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom) aren't sitting at home knitting with a cup of tea—they're out being cited for trespassing after attempting to enlist in the Army in order to "bring their grandchildren home.""We would like to replace our young who are in the firing line," Ms. Birnie, 75, said.
The Grannies rallied outside of the Armed Forces Recruiting Center in Tucson, AZ, holding signs and flags, as well as singing songs in protest. Afterwards, the Grannies entered the Recruiting Center and read a prepared statement (Click "Read More" to view the statement read by the Raging Grannies) and told the recruiters inside that they wished to enlist.
Grannies reading a prepared statement
After being asked to leave, the Grannies went outside where police asked the recruiters to point out those who had been in the office. Nine people were cited at the event; five elderly activists and four journalists. The Raging Grannies have held protests outside the Tucson Armed Forces Recruiting Center every week for three years.
According to Lt. Col. Hickins, a Battalion Commander from Phoenix, the charges were pressed by the landlord of the building, not the Army itself. He declined to give any other information about the incident.
No one was expecting to be arrested for the action. "This is the only contingency we hadn't planned on," Birnie said afterwards.
Birnie said that the Raging Grannies have already contacted Mayor Walkup's office about the incident, but he was out of town for the day.
"My sense is that it's such an absurd charge that the judge will excuse it," she said.
The Grannies' offer to enlist may have been turned down this time, but if the war in Iraq drags on for several more years, they may be surprised to find themselves in boot camp one day.
One blogger has chronicled the entire event in detail. You can read the account at: http://www.buildpeace.blogspot.com
WHY RAGING GRANNIES want to ENLIST in MILITARY FORCES
9:00 am Wednesday, July 13, 2005 U.S. Army Recruiting Station, 2303 E. Speedway, Tucson, AZ
The Raging Grannies want to enlist in the U.S military forces to make possible the immediate return of all U.S. service personnel, and to set an example of what REAL diplomacy can achieve. We would meet with our counterparts in Iraq (women) and come to a mutual agreement of how best for Iraq to regain its own independence, as all U.S. troops, bases and corporations leave their country.
The Raging Grannies are angry about the U.S. maintaining a Permanent War Economy, using military might as the U.S.?s primary tool of Foreign Policy.
The Raging Grannies are angry about the U.S. military recruitment system that lies to young people about the reasons for needing more people in the military. We are angry that our young peoples? lives are at risk for reasons that have nothing to do with defending our country.
The Raging Grannies are angry that the U.S. is using and has used quantities of Depleted Uranium weapons in Iraq, and other places in the Middle East, jeopardizing the health and environment for 4.5 billion years (providing a source for birth defects, leukemia and other adverse health effects for our own service personnel as well as innocent citizens).
The Raging Grannies are angry that the U.S. is building 14 permanent bases in Iraq. We are angry that U.S. policies are driven by fear-mongering and growing losses of First Amendment Rights. We abhor the use of torture by U.S. forces against detainees.
The Raging Grannies firmly believe that:
The Iraq invasion was planned before 9-11 as documented by the Downing Street Memos;
The Iraq war has nothing to do with Al Quida (Saddam Hussein was not a part it);
The Iraq war has nothing to do with Weapons of Mass Destruction;
The Iraq war has everything to do with U.S. controlling access to Middle Eastern Oil; and that
The Iraq war is an illegal, immoral war that has everything to do with U.S. world domination.
We insist that Recruiters tell the truth to our grandchildren who come to serve their country.
The Raging Grannies want all U.S. corporations and military personnel (official military troops and mercenaries) withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan as soon as possible, and that the U.S. finance the re-building of what we have destroyed, with local people doing their own re-construction work. The military bases that have been built should be turned over to the Iraq and Afghanistan people to use as they can, for whatever purposes they may have. The U.S. should spend recruitment dollars to (instead) improve education for all students, and gain a boost in our economy for this investment.
LOL Renee! You beat me. I'll just have to be faster next time.
As a true liberal I believe that grannies would be great in the military! They could cook cookies for the younger soldiers. The terrorists wouldn't dare saw the head of a granny would they?
I was a bit startled yesterday to hear a clip of President Aquino of the Philippines arguing that impeachment ought not to be used as an alternative political process to remove someone from office.
I'd never thought of impeachment as an alternative to an election; as a way to get rid of an official whose performance didn't quite meet expectations. I'd always thought of it as a judicial proceeding, to remove someone from office whose high crimes and misdemeanors or gross negligence had proven him/her unfit.
But, I guess Aquino's point got my attention because it actually resonnated with the panel on which Judge Roberts served to make recommendations on the Independent Counsel law. In reading through the report of that group, I was struck by their assumption that the function of the independent counsel was to resolve a political conflict of interest. Now, whether the point of this assumption was to set a predicate for why the independent counsel option should be eliminated, I don't know. But, the conclusion for why it should was certainly reinforced by the recommendation that any findings by an independent counsel should NOT be forwarded to the Congress for possible impeachment proceedings.
Whatever the overt motivation for the considerations by the bi-partisan pannel, the conclusion clearly smacks of after-the-fact rationalizations. That is, they're rewriting history by arguing that the independent counsel option should be gotten rid of because it was primarily a political alternative for which there are other options--i.e. elections. It was almost as if the illegalities that had been investigated by independent counsels and led to indictments, prosecutions and convictions hadn't even occurred.
That's why it struck me as an after-the-fact effort to redefine something out of existence. Since Judge Roberts signed on to the report, one has to conclude he agreed (though he may have forgot). And, although after-the-fact revisionism might seem strange coming from an "original intent" conservative Constitutional expert, it is consistent with his advice, during the 2000 election recount debacle in Florida, that the legislature should simply change the rules mid-stream.
I guess that shouldn't be surprising. If one is committed to the proposition that the "original intent" of setting up a government was to deal with and control the unruly instincts of the population and that the power to do so rests in the executive, who relies on the legislature to codify into law what he wants to do, then whenever the executive fails to maintain control, the logical solution is simply to pass a new law, making more stringent measures OK.
Voila, the Pariot Act. Voila, the torture of people who refuse to speak. Voila, the incarceration of those who MIGHT voice an objection.
I'd never thought of impeachment as an alternative to an election; as a way to get rid of an official whose performance didn't quite meet expectations. I'd always thought of it as a judicial proceeding, to remove someone from office whose high crimes and misdemeanors or gross negligence had proven him/her unfit.
But, I guess Aquino's point got my attention because it actually resonnated with the panel on which Judge Roberts served to make recommendations on the Independent Counsel law. In reading through the report of that group, I was struck by their assumption that the function of the independent counsel was to resolve a political conflict of interest. Now, whether the point of this assumption was to set a predicate for why the independent counsel option should be eliminated, I don't know. But, the conclusion for why it should was certainly reinforced by the recommendation that any findings by an independent counsel should NOT be forwarded to the Congress for possible impeachment proceedings.
Whatever the overt motivation for the considerations by the bi-partisan pannel, the conclusion clearly smacks of after-the-fact rationalizations. That is, they're rewriting history by arguing that the independent counsel option should be gotten rid of because it was primarily a political alternative for which there are other options--i.e. elections. It was almost as if the illegalities that had been investigated by independent counsels and led to indictments, prosecutions and convictions hadn't even occurred.
That's why it struck me as an after-the-fact effort to redefine something out of existence. Since Judge Roberts signed on to the report, one has to conclude he agreed (though he may have forgot). And, although after-the-fact revisionism might seem strange coming from an "original intent" conservative Constitutional expert, it is consistent with his advice, during the 2000 election recount debacle in Florida, that the legislature should simply change the rules mid-stream.
I guess that shouldn't be surprising. If one is committed to the proposition that the "original intent" of setting up a government was to deal with and control the unruly instincts of the population and that the power to do so rests in the executive, who relies on the legislature to codify into law what he wants to do, then whenever the executive fails to maintain control, the logical solution is simply to pass a new law, making more stringent measures OK.
Voila, the Pariot Act. Voila, the torture of people who refuse to speak. Voila, the incarceration of those who MIGHT voice an objection.
atrueliberal,
You really are cracking me up! Perhaps you could create another alter called: atrueneocon. That way you could represent the worst of both parties. You get an A+ for making your point while posting within the new blog rules.
p.s. A little humor never hurt anybody.
You really are cracking me up! Perhaps you could create another alter called: atrueneocon. That way you could represent the worst of both parties. You get an A+ for making your point while posting within the new blog rules.
p.s. A little humor never hurt anybody.
Perhaps it would be worth while to ask Judge Roberts what he understands "a nation governed by laws, not men" to mean.
I think most of us take it to mean that our representative draw up the laws to which we consent and then the executive sees that they are carried out.
That may not be what Roberts understands. It's certainly not what the current executive expects. The current executive obviously perceives the law to be a codification of what HE wants--a rubber stamp or validation after-the-fact of the executive intent.
Which is not unlike the pattern that made everything the Nazi dictatorship in Germany legal.
"Hey, I want the Jews gone and their property left behind. Pass me a law." And it was done. Then it was "hey, there's still some Jews left and not enough people working in the mine. Pass me a law and we'll fix that little problem." And it was done. Then they discovered that all those sick Jews were eating more than they were worth, so they passed a law and shipped them off to the ovens and got rid of the problem fast. And it was all legal.
I think most of us take it to mean that our representative draw up the laws to which we consent and then the executive sees that they are carried out.
That may not be what Roberts understands. It's certainly not what the current executive expects. The current executive obviously perceives the law to be a codification of what HE wants--a rubber stamp or validation after-the-fact of the executive intent.
Which is not unlike the pattern that made everything the Nazi dictatorship in Germany legal.
"Hey, I want the Jews gone and their property left behind. Pass me a law." And it was done. Then it was "hey, there's still some Jews left and not enough people working in the mine. Pass me a law and we'll fix that little problem." And it was done. Then they discovered that all those sick Jews were eating more than they were worth, so they passed a law and shipped them off to the ovens and got rid of the problem fast. And it was all legal.
Bravo to the grannies.........I am wondering though, come the parentsof their grandchildren arent protesting as well? Are they of that silly generation that continue to buy the excuse that their kids have to fight to preserve freedom, protect us against terrorists,defedn liberty etc etc.....I would imagine so..............
Theres something to be said for experience form the older ones.............
Theres something to be said for experience form the older ones.............
Kim, humor is a good thing, but after a few days of this, it gets a little old.
Waiting in breathless anticipation to see if one of the alter egos show up, and they start posting to each other again...
kheart wrote on July 26, 2005 10:04 AM
I do not like this story. Hiding behind the skirts of commercial property owners in order to deprive citizens of their right to assemble, to petition their government officials, and to question government policies is not nice. It is, however, one of the reasons government agencies prefer to lease commercial space. It allows them to insulate themselves from the citizens.
I do not like this story. Hiding behind the skirts of commercial property owners in order to deprive citizens of their right to assemble, to petition their government officials, and to question government policies is not nice. It is, however, one of the reasons government agencies prefer to lease commercial space. It allows them to insulate themselves from the citizens.
Renee,
I finally had the opportunity to read your diary and listened to the sweet wav file. Your daughter sounds like a little angel in her solo.
Like your Grandma, this is one of my favorites as well. Maybe because we are both Polish? (lol)
I finally had the opportunity to read your diary and listened to the sweet wav file. Your daughter sounds like a little angel in her solo.
Like your Grandma, this is one of my favorites as well. Maybe because we are both Polish? (lol)
Ilove these Grannie. I would like to see this same protest all around the country.
What could be more compelling than a lot of grandmothers who would give their lives for their kids? I think we need some raging Grandpas too.
What could be more compelling than a lot of grandmothers who would give their lives for their kids? I think we need some raging Grandpas too.
Your point is well taken, Anamaria.
The sad thing is atrueliberal does demonstrate how extreme fringe liberalism is viewed from the outside. (I am in no way implying that toward you or necessarily anyone here) The same can be said about the effect all the screaming, hate- filled radio and television commentators (Rush, Ann Coulter etc) have on the conservative agenda.
In my case, I have bigger fish to fry in life than to get in a tizzy over the likes of atrueliberal posting on this blog - or anyone else for that matter. I do realize, however, that I'm in the minority on this.
The sad thing is atrueliberal does demonstrate how extreme fringe liberalism is viewed from the outside. (I am in no way implying that toward you or necessarily anyone here) The same can be said about the effect all the screaming, hate- filled radio and television commentators (Rush, Ann Coulter etc) have on the conservative agenda.
In my case, I have bigger fish to fry in life than to get in a tizzy over the likes of atrueliberal posting on this blog - or anyone else for that matter. I do realize, however, that I'm in the minority on this.
MonicaSmith wrote on July 26, 2005 10:13 AM
???
I like the story because the Grannies have backbone. I certainly don't like it that they were cited.
???
I like the story because the Grannies have backbone. I certainly don't like it that they were cited.
The other thing, kheart - I suppose when you get to be that age, it doesn't matter how long your police record is! LOL
I just like it when anyone stands up for what they believe in.
I just like it when anyone stands up for what they believe in.
Tara, thanks so much for posting this about the Raging Grannies. They are a force to be dealt wtih!!
A few weeks ago I posted an article from the San Jose Mercury News that reported finding an email that impiicated the California National Guard in spying activities on the Grannies, as well as moms protesting the war in nearby Palo Alto.
The Grannies have a strong contingent in the Bay Area, and they have been instrumental in effecting change.
Hats off (on?) to the Grannies!!!
A few weeks ago I posted an article from the San Jose Mercury News that reported finding an email that impiicated the California National Guard in spying activities on the Grannies, as well as moms protesting the war in nearby Palo Alto.
The Grannies have a strong contingent in the Bay Area, and they have been instrumental in effecting change.
Hats off (on?) to the Grannies!!!
Looks good from NASA tv on the internet.
Mike*in*Raleigh*NC wrote on July 26, 2005 10:10 AM:
I think I agree with you the most as a true liberal. I mean really, just because the jihadists declare war on us don’t mean we have to respond in kind. So what if they blow up a building here and there, they are just expressing their frustration of western culture. They fear the loss of their own culture as a result of western influences. Don’t they have a God given (ohh,, I should say Allah) right to defend their culture? They really don’t have the resources to fight a conventional war, so killing the children and other otherwise non-combatants of the decadent west is a perfectible acceptable alternative.
They just want us to get out of Saudi, the home of Mecca, and stop supporting the Israelis. Heck what do we care if they blow up a few Israelis? Or even if Israel continues to exist, just because it is one of the few Democracies in the ME, what do we care, it’s no skin off our noses if they cease to exist. Heck, I’m not sure that Democracies belong in the ME anyway. I mean if the people of the ME really wanted a Democracy they would have it right? Obviously the people there prefer people like Saddam, and other tyrants. They like the father figure type controlling their lives.
We should just give up oil anyway, there are too many cars polluting our air already. People can walk or ride bicycles right? Heck we could get around on horses, that worked for a long time.
I think I agree with you the most as a true liberal. I mean really, just because the jihadists declare war on us don’t mean we have to respond in kind. So what if they blow up a building here and there, they are just expressing their frustration of western culture. They fear the loss of their own culture as a result of western influences. Don’t they have a God given (ohh,, I should say Allah) right to defend their culture? They really don’t have the resources to fight a conventional war, so killing the children and other otherwise non-combatants of the decadent west is a perfectible acceptable alternative.
They just want us to get out of Saudi, the home of Mecca, and stop supporting the Israelis. Heck what do we care if they blow up a few Israelis? Or even if Israel continues to exist, just because it is one of the few Democracies in the ME, what do we care, it’s no skin off our noses if they cease to exist. Heck, I’m not sure that Democracies belong in the ME anyway. I mean if the people of the ME really wanted a Democracy they would have it right? Obviously the people there prefer people like Saddam, and other tyrants. They like the father figure type controlling their lives.
We should just give up oil anyway, there are too many cars polluting our air already. People can walk or ride bicycles right? Heck we could get around on horses, that worked for a long time.
Godspeed the crew of Discovery !!
It still amazes me to watch a launch after all these years, starting with Shephard.
OK, off to work - everyone have a happy day!
It still amazes me to watch a launch after all these years, starting with Shephard.
OK, off to work - everyone have a happy day!
View is great from the external fuel tank cam. Earth in the background.
fuel tank seperation, camera shows the bottom of the shuttle.
Phil*from*Iowa. wrote on July 26, 2005 08:32 AM:
radom thoughts on no oil
Europe's great civilization was built before the age of oil ... we'll survive.
Flight as transportation for the masses will be the first test of rising energy prices as jet engines are real fuel hogs.
Just save me a little gasoline for a chain saw so I can cut my winter wood supply(lol)
They built a new elementary school in Cedar Rapids without ANY sidewalks leading to it.
The desert cities would have a hard time without AC.
yes oil is why we are in the Mideast and anybody that says otherwise is not credible
----------------------------
Phil,
Always like your insights.
Not only "…they built a new elementary school in Cedar Rapids without ANY sidewalks leading to it", they build that way EVERYTHING and EVERWEHERE (in suburban areas), shopping malls, residential developments, etc.
So, your kids can’t go to their friends without you driving them
The interesting part, WHY?
I think,
a) To burst gasoline spending.
b) To make you naturally exercise less, and therefore to consume DRUGS much more. Entire Pharmaceutical Industry relies on that consumption.
Sure, that is not because some “bad” guy sits and decides all this matters, - no, there is one single “entity” that drives all that “stuff” in this direction – RACING FOR PROFIT, “at any price”.
radom thoughts on no oil
Europe's great civilization was built before the age of oil ... we'll survive.
Flight as transportation for the masses will be the first test of rising energy prices as jet engines are real fuel hogs.
Just save me a little gasoline for a chain saw so I can cut my winter wood supply(lol)
They built a new elementary school in Cedar Rapids without ANY sidewalks leading to it.
The desert cities would have a hard time without AC.
yes oil is why we are in the Mideast and anybody that says otherwise is not credible
----------------------------
Phil,
Always like your insights.
Not only "…they built a new elementary school in Cedar Rapids without ANY sidewalks leading to it", they build that way EVERYTHING and EVERWEHERE (in suburban areas), shopping malls, residential developments, etc.
So, your kids can’t go to their friends without you driving them
The interesting part, WHY?
I think,
a) To burst gasoline spending.
b) To make you naturally exercise less, and therefore to consume DRUGS much more. Entire Pharmaceutical Industry relies on that consumption.
Sure, that is not because some “bad” guy sits and decides all this matters, - no, there is one single “entity” that drives all that “stuff” in this direction – RACING FOR PROFIT, “at any price”.
Wow. Raging Grannies, thank you for putting yourselves out there.
I had to do a double take to see if my Mother in law, or any of her friend were there. Nope. But obviously some strong women.
I know where Jane Fonda's bus will be stopping in March!
I had to do a double take to see if my Mother in law, or any of her friend were there. Nope. But obviously some strong women.
I know where Jane Fonda's bus will be stopping in March!
atrueliberal wrote on July 26, 2005 10:42 AM:
Or even if Israel continues to exist, just because it is one of the few Democracies in the ME, what do we care, it’s no skin off our noses if they cease to exist.
--------
Hey, lots of inner-city neighborhoods don't exist anymore, and noboby's going to war over that. Right?
Or even if Israel continues to exist, just because it is one of the few Democracies in the ME, what do we care, it’s no skin off our noses if they cease to exist.
--------
Hey, lots of inner-city neighborhoods don't exist anymore, and noboby's going to war over that. Right?
MonicaSmith wrote on July 26, 2005 06:21 AM:
Patrick in LA wrote on July 26, 2005 01:24 AM
Perhaps the reason not everyone is in a panic about running out of oil is because many of us remember being able to get just about anywhere we wanted on our own two feet. It just takes a little longer to walk. But, considering how many people get killed on highways every year (over 40,000 = one every 15 minutes) it's likely that on average we'll all live longer walking. How hard will it be to return to a culture where transport is for heavy burdens, and humans move autonomously? What would it hurt to return to a system of neighborhood schools that children walk to and where they can study and play most of the day while public transport takes they parents to work out of the home? Of course, in the electronic age, work can be done most anywhere and we don't have to rely on oil for electricity.
----------------------
Nobody should be in panic "about running out of oil" except oil Corporations (and others related, like car industry).
May sound strange, but for regular, working people it'll bring relief and freedom, of course after some essential changes in their "lifestyle".
Patrick in LA wrote on July 26, 2005 01:24 AM
Perhaps the reason not everyone is in a panic about running out of oil is because many of us remember being able to get just about anywhere we wanted on our own two feet. It just takes a little longer to walk. But, considering how many people get killed on highways every year (over 40,000 = one every 15 minutes) it's likely that on average we'll all live longer walking. How hard will it be to return to a culture where transport is for heavy burdens, and humans move autonomously? What would it hurt to return to a system of neighborhood schools that children walk to and where they can study and play most of the day while public transport takes they parents to work out of the home? Of course, in the electronic age, work can be done most anywhere and we don't have to rely on oil for electricity.
----------------------
Nobody should be in panic "about running out of oil" except oil Corporations (and others related, like car industry).
May sound strange, but for regular, working people it'll bring relief and freedom, of course after some essential changes in their "lifestyle".
RE: Kim*in*IN on July 26, 2005 11:13 AM:
Looks like the DLC will be the anti-Dean and the anti-DNC, and I suspect that's where those "big money donors" that supposedly won't work with Dean are headed.
Business as usual. Let's divert all our energy and resources to fighting within the party rather than fighting the Republicans.
Looks like the DLC will be the anti-Dean and the anti-DNC, and I suspect that's where those "big money donors" that supposedly won't work with Dean are headed.
Business as usual. Let's divert all our energy and resources to fighting within the party rather than fighting the Republicans.
On oil, as a true liberal I think we are addicted to it. It’s time to quit cold turkey. Just think if we quit using oil our skies would be so much clearer. Think about the global impact. With the US no longer using oil, the demand would go way down. Third world countries could then buy it up at much lower prices. China’s economy could boom like crazy. We could go back to an agrarian type society living and working on farms, and sell food to the rest of the world. The world would be so happy and grateful that we gave up our ultra capitalist tendencies. They would probably subsidize our farming culture, giving us aid. Think about it if the US gave up it’s warlike tendencies, people from Mexico and South America would feel much more welcome, they would probably immigrate here in droves. People from other areas of the world would probably feel much more comfortable about immigrating too. They could come here unimpeded in large ships. We would need the people too, I mean without using gas driven motors for tractors and all manual labor would be important…
atrueliberal wrote on July 26, 2005 11:23 AM:
==================================================
Prety good post......what do you think of Jane Fondas feet?
==================================================
Prety good post......what do you think of Jane Fondas feet?
Charlie, I think atrueliberal means a freakierightie. Remember, they always say the opposite of what they mean.
We have a great local chapter of the Raging Grannies here in Rochester, NY. They've performed at some major protests in NYC as well.
Looks like Cincinnati's seeing the IRV light - w00t!!
We're not going to return to a non-technical lifestyle to deal with the eventual downturn in oil availability.
Stop thinking about oil, and think about energy. Energy is fungible, it can be converted from something appropriate for one use to something appropriate for another use. When gasoline is too expensive to burn in automobiles, we will find another fuel, not give up automobiles.
Dealing with the “energy issue” is critical to the future of the United States, and of the world. Almost more than anything else.
Why?
Because “energy” and its related issues touch on almost every other issue.
The COST of energy affects the economy, taxes, Social Security and education.
The AVAILABILITY of energy affects our foreign policy and domestic security.
The USE of oil for energy affects its use in other critical areas like agriculture (fertilizers), plastics and other products of petrochemicals.
Because of this, we cannot wait any longer to have a smart, coordinated energy policy. Because of this, we cannot settle for a knee-jerk solution. Because of this, we need to address our needs today, in the coming years, and decades into the future.
Energy today. Energy tomorrow. Energy for our Grandchildren.
We are not going to decrease our energy usage in the long term. The more advanced a civilization becomes, the greater its use of energy. So, as the world advances, its energy consumption will advance in lockstep. We are already seeing this today as Chinese demand is having a serious effect on world oil prices. Any solutions we come up with must take into account this need and desire for a high energy standard of living.
Nevertheless, we can use both technology and the political system to slow the rate of growth, allowing our ability to generate useful energy catch up with the rate of growth of demand. This will have the helpful and desirable side effect of lowering the cost of energy as the demand curve flattens. Establishment of the fuel efficiency standards for automobiles in the 1970’s (CAFE) bought us almost three decades of depressed prices. Unfortunately, we didn’t take advantage of that lull, instead we abused it. We can’t do that again.
We need to address the energy issue in the short, mid and long terms.
Short is mostly conservation (things like raising the CAFE standards), and working with other countries outside the Mideast to broaden our "energy base".
Mid is things like expanding wind and solar, whose benefits need to be balanced against their "environmental" costs (yes they have them, mostly for those who live nearby...ask the folks on Cape Cod about the proposed wind farm offshore).
Long term is technology development, both of new energy sources, and of ways to waste less (superconducting transmission lines, more efficient electric motors, etc.)
Stop thinking about oil, and think about energy. Energy is fungible, it can be converted from something appropriate for one use to something appropriate for another use. When gasoline is too expensive to burn in automobiles, we will find another fuel, not give up automobiles.
Dealing with the “energy issue” is critical to the future of the United States, and of the world. Almost more than anything else.
Why?
Because “energy” and its related issues touch on almost every other issue.
The COST of energy affects the economy, taxes, Social Security and education.
The AVAILABILITY of energy affects our foreign policy and domestic security.
The USE of oil for energy affects its use in other critical areas like agriculture (fertilizers), plastics and other products of petrochemicals.
Because of this, we cannot wait any longer to have a smart, coordinated energy policy. Because of this, we cannot settle for a knee-jerk solution. Because of this, we need to address our needs today, in the coming years, and decades into the future.
Energy today. Energy tomorrow. Energy for our Grandchildren.
We are not going to decrease our energy usage in the long term. The more advanced a civilization becomes, the greater its use of energy. So, as the world advances, its energy consumption will advance in lockstep. We are already seeing this today as Chinese demand is having a serious effect on world oil prices. Any solutions we come up with must take into account this need and desire for a high energy standard of living.
Nevertheless, we can use both technology and the political system to slow the rate of growth, allowing our ability to generate useful energy catch up with the rate of growth of demand. This will have the helpful and desirable side effect of lowering the cost of energy as the demand curve flattens. Establishment of the fuel efficiency standards for automobiles in the 1970’s (CAFE) bought us almost three decades of depressed prices. Unfortunately, we didn’t take advantage of that lull, instead we abused it. We can’t do that again.
We need to address the energy issue in the short, mid and long terms.
Short is mostly conservation (things like raising the CAFE standards), and working with other countries outside the Mideast to broaden our "energy base".
Mid is things like expanding wind and solar, whose benefits need to be balanced against their "environmental" costs (yes they have them, mostly for those who live nearby...ask the folks on Cape Cod about the proposed wind farm offshore).
Long term is technology development, both of new energy sources, and of ways to waste less (superconducting transmission lines, more efficient electric motors, etc.)
I did it. I watched the Thank You again from Howard. Can't help it, I may be unrealistic in this horrible corrupt world but I STILL WANT HOWARD DEAN FOR PRESIDENT. No one else will do. No one is as honest and nobody else is as capable.
Kim*in*IN wrote on July 26, 2005 11:13 AM:
Everytime I see one of these montages, I just start crying.
What could have been...
Everytime I see one of these montages, I just start crying.
What could have been...
Linda - that's great that Cincinnati's paper has come out (like many papers are doing currently) in favor of Choice Voting.
STV and IRV are very important reforms that should be on the top list of our priorities - STV for representative bodies, IRV for single-person offices such as mayor, governor, president.
Now here is the irony.
Cincinnati used STV for its city council from 1925 to 1955. And it was a HUGE SUCCESS. Before this - it had a mixed system of single-member (26) and at-large (6) winner-take-all elections. It's reputation, at the time, was as being one of the worst governed cities. After the reforms - it was known as one of the best. (For a good discussion of the use of STV in Cincinnati read Robert Kolesar's chapter on this in Kathleen Barber's _Proportional Representation & Election Reform in Ohio_.
Here is what Kolesar says was one of the most significant factors in the "good governance" of Cincinnati that resulted from this reform. A new, local party emerged and was viable. It called itself the Charter Committee. And it united Democrats and independent Republican REFORMERS against the dominant Republican organization.
Now - the question is - if this was so good, what happened that it isn't used any longer.
The answer to that is simple. It was its success that led to its demise. Because of the self-interest of party elites - who did not like losing control. And because the reforms were made by initiative - and never gained a stronger, constitutional guarantee - they were also subject to repeal by initiative. And thus - the party elite - who could mobilize money and other resources to manipulate and manufacture public opinion - could (and did) eventually bring about the un-refrom back to winner-take-all elections (to the benefit of the party elite) - by doing just that - manipulating public opinion.
Now - how did they do that? They appealed to the lowest common denomenator (sound familiar?). And that was in particular - racism.
The repeal movement was led by the Republican machine. And it took a LONG TIME before they were able to succeed. They put the question to the voters FIVE times - before they were finally able to sway them to undo the reforms. And they went right for the WORST form of possible elections - winner-take-all at-large elections (that gives the power, exclusively, to the one largest organization of block voting - thus the Republican machine). Unfortunately - the Democrats, in their own self-interest, also played a part in this.
The key factor, however, was race. The system worked - it produced a very representative body (rather than a body dominated either by one party or a symbiotic relationship between two parties) - and it led to the representation of the African-American community on the City Council. Indeed - just prior to the ending of STV - Cincinnati almost elected its first black mayor (that shocked some of the "whites").
Now - the repeal effort came smack dab in the middle of the Little Rock "Crisis" - and the "white" districts voted to repeal it - whereas it was overwhelmingly supported in the black districts.
Immediately afte the counter-reform - the representation of African-Americans on the Council that had been achieved since STV was adopted - ended.
The fact is - the system works. But "the system" doesn't want a system that really works. The people have to become educated about it - and both want it (to get it) and remain educated and informed about it (to keep it).
STV and IRV are very important reforms that should be on the top list of our priorities - STV for representative bodies, IRV for single-person offices such as mayor, governor, president.
Now here is the irony.
Cincinnati used STV for its city council from 1925 to 1955. And it was a HUGE SUCCESS. Before this - it had a mixed system of single-member (26) and at-large (6) winner-take-all elections. It's reputation, at the time, was as being one of the worst governed cities. After the reforms - it was known as one of the best. (For a good discussion of the use of STV in Cincinnati read Robert Kolesar's chapter on this in Kathleen Barber's _Proportional Representation & Election Reform in Ohio_.
Here is what Kolesar says was one of the most significant factors in the "good governance" of Cincinnati that resulted from this reform. A new, local party emerged and was viable. It called itself the Charter Committee. And it united Democrats and independent Republican REFORMERS against the dominant Republican organization.
Now - the question is - if this was so good, what happened that it isn't used any longer.
The answer to that is simple. It was its success that led to its demise. Because of the self-interest of party elites - who did not like losing control. And because the reforms were made by initiative - and never gained a stronger, constitutional guarantee - they were also subject to repeal by initiative. And thus - the party elite - who could mobilize money and other resources to manipulate and manufacture public opinion - could (and did) eventually bring about the un-refrom back to winner-take-all elections (to the benefit of the party elite) - by doing just that - manipulating public opinion.
Now - how did they do that? They appealed to the lowest common denomenator (sound familiar?). And that was in particular - racism.
The repeal movement was led by the Republican machine. And it took a LONG TIME before they were able to succeed. They put the question to the voters FIVE times - before they were finally able to sway them to undo the reforms. And they went right for the WORST form of possible elections - winner-take-all at-large elections (that gives the power, exclusively, to the one largest organization of block voting - thus the Republican machine). Unfortunately - the Democrats, in their own self-interest, also played a part in this.
The key factor, however, was race. The system worked - it produced a very representative body (rather than a body dominated either by one party or a symbiotic relationship between two parties) - and it led to the representation of the African-American community on the City Council. Indeed - just prior to the ending of STV - Cincinnati almost elected its first black mayor (that shocked some of the "whites").
Now - the repeal effort came smack dab in the middle of the Little Rock "Crisis" - and the "white" districts voted to repeal it - whereas it was overwhelmingly supported in the black districts.
Immediately afte the counter-reform - the representation of African-Americans on the Council that had been achieved since STV was adopted - ended.
The fact is - the system works. But "the system" doesn't want a system that really works. The people have to become educated about it - and both want it (to get it) and remain educated and informed about it (to keep it).
With my new son-in-law over in the Middle East again, I keep thinking how Bush is responsible for increasing our vulnerability now when we travel...anywhere! If he'd just put all of our forces and money into Afganistan when it counted, instead of greedily and stupidly marching into Iraq for Cheney's Halliburton exploits, Osama might've been quickly killed. I'm sure Gore would NEVER have made such a perfect mess. Bush couldn't have done a worse job!
And the latest July 19 news from BacktoIraq3.0 :
News flash: Iraq is a disaster. I've been back one day, and the airport road was the worst I've ever seen it. We had to go around a fire-fight between mujahideen and Americans while Iraqi forces sat in the shade of date palms on the side of the road, their rifles resting across their laps. My driver pointed to a group of men in a white pickup next to me. “They are mujahideen,” he said. “They are watching the Americans.” Indeed, they were, and so intently that they paid no attention to me in the car next to them. We detoured around two possible car bombs that had been cordoned off while Iraqis cautiously approached.
Rumsfeld's assessment of “good progress” on the constitution is not accurate, as the committee to draw it up still hasn't completely agreed on how the Sunnis will take part.
When I was in Ramadi, I found the morale to be lower than expected. It wasn't rock-bottom among the Marines of the 1st Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, but it wasn't great. Most of the ones I talked to weren't confident they were doing anything worthwhile, and were instead focused on getting home alive. If a few Iraqis had to die to make that happen, well, war is hell.
I'm not sure who's winning this war, the Americans or the insurgents. But I know who is losing it: the Iraqi people. Those bumps in the road are their graves.
News flash: Iraq is a disaster. I've been back one day, and the airport road was the worst I've ever seen it. We had to go around a fire-fight between mujahideen and Americans while Iraqi forces sat in the shade of date palms on the side of the road, their rifles resting across their laps. My driver pointed to a group of men in a white pickup next to me. “They are mujahideen,” he said. “They are watching the Americans.” Indeed, they were, and so intently that they paid no attention to me in the car next to them. We detoured around two possible car bombs that had been cordoned off while Iraqis cautiously approached.
Rumsfeld's assessment of “good progress” on the constitution is not accurate, as the committee to draw it up still hasn't completely agreed on how the Sunnis will take part.
When I was in Ramadi, I found the morale to be lower than expected. It wasn't rock-bottom among the Marines of the 1st Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, but it wasn't great. Most of the ones I talked to weren't confident they were doing anything worthwhile, and were instead focused on getting home alive. If a few Iraqis had to die to make that happen, well, war is hell.
I'm not sure who's winning this war, the Americans or the insurgents. But I know who is losing it: the Iraqi people. Those bumps in the road are their graves.
Charlie,
Thank you. And I must say, you are amazing.(you can blush) Seriously though.
I am starting by emailing this tid bit of info to the list and my new friends here. (I've only lived here 2 1/2 years, but am trying to do what I can) And we'll see where this all leads.
Again, thank you for sharing your information.
Thank you. And I must say, you are amazing.(you can blush) Seriously though.
I am starting by emailing this tid bit of info to the list and my new friends here. (I've only lived here 2 1/2 years, but am trying to do what I can) And we'll see where this all leads.
Again, thank you for sharing your information.
Kim! That was so powerful! Loved it. And I know what Rove and Mehlman would do with it.....calling it "angry" and dissing our hero as they always do. That's the Rove method. I hear he is now even planning to dis Fitzgerald, the Republican who's so kindly slowed up the Plame investigation for 2 years so that icky Bush could be re-embedded in the White House!
It's hard to have HOPE with this LIVING EXCREMENT running the country.
It's hard to have HOPE with this LIVING EXCREMENT running the country.
Linda, I just got back from Cincinnati last week and had a great time with fellow progressives. The lady I met was in Hillary's class at Wellesley and told me about the graduation speech...quite gutsy.
There in Indian Hills, a Republican bastion, we laughed about how we'd better keep our voices down on the back patio! We went to the new opera there and I got leaflets from the very unhappy AfricanAmerican demonstraters in front of the Music Hall. Sounds like Cincinnati is a powder keg!
There in Indian Hills, a Republican bastion, we laughed about how we'd better keep our voices down on the back patio! We went to the new opera there and I got leaflets from the very unhappy AfricanAmerican demonstraters in front of the Music Hall. Sounds like Cincinnati is a powder keg!
Must get off the blog now. We have company coming for dinner and I have to get my house straightened up.
Peace.
Peace.
Singer, somethings gotta' give here. They may have had a Dem Mayor here these past few years, but you'd never know by all the internal behaviors and goings on here. Yes, very Repub and Indian Hill is hard core. BUT, Indian Hill also gives us some great Dems like PAUL HACKETT, John Glenn and Peter Frampton!!! lol
Ok, I'm off. Many calls to make, nuts to bake and a Parade to march in. oy, vey.
Linda, I'm hopeful that all of Ohio is not red! I grew up in the Bowling Green area and I know that so many would vote Republican even if a monkey were nominated.....which is what happened! Is it the Sinclair media takeover? Stupidity? Ignorance? Greed? My own brothers are hopeless spouters of Rove-talking points (lies) about all our anti-corruption efforts.
Well, gotta run off into the Baltimore heat. Thanks for my Howard Dean fixes!!! It will keep me inspired for the day!
Charlie Grapski wrote on July 26, 2005 11:57 AM:
Such that oil, being a finite resource (and thus having a limit and an end beyond which there is no more oil), is OK to be dependent on and act as if there were no limit or no end to the amount of this resource.
---
Yea, that's what I'm talk'n about. Being true liberals we know that oil is a finite resource, probably don't have more than a 6 month's supply on all of mother earth. You know, and those nazi's want to look for more in ANWR, come on! Probably no more than a couple gallons up there! Not enough to fill up one barrel. There are outrageous claims of shale oil in the Utah, Colorado area. Can you imagine the impact of drilling in such beautiful, pristine land? They claim tons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico, in the Sea of Cortez around Baja, off the coast of California, every true liberal knows they just want to pollute the oceans. And just because there are literally mega tons of coal in the US, and clean coal technologies, we know this is just bull. They just want to burn coal to pollute the atmosphere and kill our children. We see through those energy mongers like they are glass...
We need to cut down on the size of our automobiles! Look at all those gas hoggin hummers out there! What kind of nazi drives a hummer?
Such that oil, being a finite resource (and thus having a limit and an end beyond which there is no more oil), is OK to be dependent on and act as if there were no limit or no end to the amount of this resource.
---
Yea, that's what I'm talk'n about. Being true liberals we know that oil is a finite resource, probably don't have more than a 6 month's supply on all of mother earth. You know, and those nazi's want to look for more in ANWR, come on! Probably no more than a couple gallons up there! Not enough to fill up one barrel. There are outrageous claims of shale oil in the Utah, Colorado area. Can you imagine the impact of drilling in such beautiful, pristine land? They claim tons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico, in the Sea of Cortez around Baja, off the coast of California, every true liberal knows they just want to pollute the oceans. And just because there are literally mega tons of coal in the US, and clean coal technologies, we know this is just bull. They just want to burn coal to pollute the atmosphere and kill our children. We see through those energy mongers like they are glass...
We need to cut down on the size of our automobiles! Look at all those gas hoggin hummers out there! What kind of nazi drives a hummer?
rich^kolker wrote on July 26, 2005 12:34 PM:
We're not going to return to a non-technical lifestyle...
-------------
Whatever lifestyle it'll be it must benefit "all" instead of "few"...
We're not going to return to a non-technical lifestyle...
-------------
Whatever lifestyle it'll be it must benefit "all" instead of "few"...
One of my friends is a granny who was arrested. They had their arraignment yesterday and the court date is set for August 19th.
Tomorrow the Today show is supposed to be here to film their weekly protest. I will try to be there to take photos and interview the protestors and grannies.
I was wondering why my friend didn't respond to my last email, and then I go and find out she was too busy being cited by the police!
Tomorrow the Today show is supposed to be here to film their weekly protest. I will try to be there to take photos and interview the protestors and grannies.
I was wondering why my friend didn't respond to my last email, and then I go and find out she was too busy being cited by the police!
Charlie Grapski wrote on July 26, 2005 01:02 PM:
IRV isn't a total solution. There is still a way to fix those votes through procedural administration, as the Green Party discovered in the last presidential election.
IRV isn't a total solution. There is still a way to fix those votes through procedural administration, as the Green Party discovered in the last presidential election.
Linda*in*Cincinnati wrote on July 26, 2005 11:03 AM:
Hi, Linda. This is Cheryl in Tucson. Does your mother-in-law live in Tucson? You should put her in touch with me. We could go to lunch or something.
Hi, Linda. This is Cheryl in Tucson. Does your mother-in-law live in Tucson? You should put her in touch with me. We could go to lunch or something.
Singer wrote on July 26, 2005 01:55 PM:
I don't know. I think like Charlie even mentioned in the STV and IRV talk, they started the mind manipulation and it finally cracked them. Keep repeating the lie until it becomes the truth. People are going to have to wake up to this.
I received an email a short while ago telling me he had to let the cat out of the bag. His son is a right winger. He asked his opinion of Schmidt and received an unexpected list of descriptions not exactly flattering to Ms Schmidt. He and his wife WILL BE VOTING FOR PAUL HACKETT.
You can only hope that the right wingers pushed the envelope so far that a majority of people will now see them for what they are.
I don't know. I think like Charlie even mentioned in the STV and IRV talk, they started the mind manipulation and it finally cracked them. Keep repeating the lie until it becomes the truth. People are going to have to wake up to this.
I received an email a short while ago telling me he had to let the cat out of the bag. His son is a right winger. He asked his opinion of Schmidt and received an unexpected list of descriptions not exactly flattering to Ms Schmidt. He and his wife WILL BE VOTING FOR PAUL HACKETT.
You can only hope that the right wingers pushed the envelope so far that a majority of people will now see them for what they are.
cHeRyL! wrote on July 26, 2005 02:05 PM:
Yes, Sun City Tucson. I try to get them involved, but I haven't had much success. I'll try. Thank you for the offer.
Yes, Sun City Tucson. I try to get them involved, but I haven't had much success. I'll try. Thank you for the offer.
>>turn wrote on July 26, 2005 02:01 PM:
Whatever lifestyle it'll be it must benefit "all" instead of "few"...<<
You can't legislate results. If I choose to work hard, get advanced degrees, and therefore have the money to enjoy a lifestyle better than some others (and not as good as some others) I should be able to do so.
What you can legislate, or try to, is a level playing field, so nobody is prevented because of race, sex, religion (or lack thereof), etc. from having the choice.
If you want to live a low energy lifestyle, you should be able to make that choice, but that choice should not be forced on me so long as there are alternatives. And there are alternatives.
Whatever lifestyle it'll be it must benefit "all" instead of "few"...<<
You can't legislate results. If I choose to work hard, get advanced degrees, and therefore have the money to enjoy a lifestyle better than some others (and not as good as some others) I should be able to do so.
What you can legislate, or try to, is a level playing field, so nobody is prevented because of race, sex, religion (or lack thereof), etc. from having the choice.
If you want to live a low energy lifestyle, you should be able to make that choice, but that choice should not be forced on me so long as there are alternatives. And there are alternatives.
Charlie Grapski wrote on July 26, 2005 11:57 AM:
But this is OK if you want to live in a fantasy world - it only means that one day reality will hit you (and I mean HIT you). Reasonable people would have anticipated the problem long in advance and taken appropriate action to avoid it. But others - content to seek their own self-interest by manufacturing the consent of the ignorant and uniformed with empty rhetoric and logically flawed "arguments" - will fall like lemmings of the side of the earth as they follow their "leaders" to their own demise.
------------------------
Charlie,
I'd like to note, that your statement above is very close to the definition of a "freedom" in a wide philosophical sense.
"Freedom - is a conscious necessity".
But this is OK if you want to live in a fantasy world - it only means that one day reality will hit you (and I mean HIT you). Reasonable people would have anticipated the problem long in advance and taken appropriate action to avoid it. But others - content to seek their own self-interest by manufacturing the consent of the ignorant and uniformed with empty rhetoric and logically flawed "arguments" - will fall like lemmings of the side of the earth as they follow their "leaders" to their own demise.
------------------------
Charlie,
I'd like to note, that your statement above is very close to the definition of a "freedom" in a wide philosophical sense.
"Freedom - is a conscious necessity".
Singer wrote on July 26, 2005 01:55 PM
Assume that people vote Republican because they do not want to be involved in the nitty gritty of government. When you assume that, then it follows that any effort to get them involved will back-fire. They'll just conclude that they were right all along. So, what you've got to offer is a better candidate, somebody with more experience, someone who works hard and shares their values.
Then they'll vote for that person just because you understand them and they like you.
Assume that people vote Republican because they do not want to be involved in the nitty gritty of government. When you assume that, then it follows that any effort to get them involved will back-fire. They'll just conclude that they were right all along. So, what you've got to offer is a better candidate, somebody with more experience, someone who works hard and shares their values.
Then they'll vote for that person just because you understand them and they like you.
rich^kolker wrote on July 26, 2005 02:18 PM:
You can't legislate results...
-----------------
Yes, I can't, life (reality) will...
With all of the rest agree.
You can't legislate results...
-----------------
Yes, I can't, life (reality) will...
With all of the rest agree.
LOL! Went to the Maryland Athletic Club the other day and saw that obnoxious big ol' Hummer......broken down in the parking lot! Had to be towed. We have no sympathy for broken down gas hogs in urban areas.
Well, Monica, I've found that these Repugs in my own family are far too hopeless for logic (I was a philosophy major in college). They obviously don't have the values of which you speak! Then there's my mother! Bless her heart, she'll agree with you on all your lines of thought and then go right out and vote for BUSH! First signs of dementia? Habits die hard in Repug-land!
Belated response to all you excellent Raging Grannies.
A wonderful woman named Ruth, from NH, died this year of kidney failure. But even one month before her death, she was out protesting.
She protested every year against the war and each year she was arrested. She would be brought before the judge, and each time she would be told she was on probation for a year. So she would wait one year and a day and go protest again.
What's interesting is that when a woman in her 80's gets arrested, it makes the papers and the locals get pretty upset about it!
Go Grannies!! ♥
I hope your judge is also gentle.
XOXOXXX
A wonderful woman named Ruth, from NH, died this year of kidney failure. But even one month before her death, she was out protesting.
She protested every year against the war and each year she was arrested. She would be brought before the judge, and each time she would be told she was on probation for a year. So she would wait one year and a day and go protest again.
What's interesting is that when a woman in her 80's gets arrested, it makes the papers and the locals get pretty upset about it!
Go Grannies!! ♥
I hope your judge is also gentle.
XOXOXXX
send in the grannies 122 sex offenders in zip code 33311
test
did I just get shunted to the good blog?
Robert's talking about shooting people in the last one.
did I just get shunted to the good blog?
Robert's talking about shooting people in the last one.
now that would be cool if Tara had a toogle switch
Tara...the ultimate cool kid
Rich ... good to see you here...you too can be a cool kid(lol)
Tara...the ultimate cool kid
Rich ... good to see you here...you too can be a cool kid(lol)
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
Videos of some of the 64 House Healthcare Heroes standing strong for a public health insurance option
Congressman Emanuel Cleaver
Congressman Lloyd Dogget
Congressman Keith Ellison
Congressman Bob Filner
Congressman Phil Hare
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Blog for America
-
1 Turncoat Senator vs. 410,649 Americans
By Mary R on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM EST -
Send a message they can't miss
By Mary R on Nov 17, 2009 12:00 PM EST -
Will the real Democrat please stand up?
By Mary R on Nov 11, 2009 2:03 PM EST -
3 Million and Counting
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:47 PM EST -
Is Sen. Nelson listening to Nebraska?
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:31 PM EST
Recent Blog Posts
-
Sunday items
By Gerry Lykins on Nov 22, 2009 8:25 AM EST -
Friday finds
By Gerry Lykins on Nov 20, 2009 7:48 AM EST -
1 Turncoat Senator vs. 410,649 Americans
By Mary R on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM EST -
Nationalize all Health Insurance companies
By Carl B on Nov 19, 2009 3:05 PM EST -
Hanover Township 2010 Primary Election Candidates
By Trudy Zaja on Nov 19, 2009 2:26 AM EST
-
By Renee*in*Ohio on Jul 26, 2005 9:34 AM EDTRaging Grannies, the brothers Dean, and DFA are first!