The Dumping Grounds

"For the Love of Waffles," or "Ed Rollins: Not You Too!"

2009-04-27T01:41:00.002-04:00

I thought about making a post about this a few days ago, but then decided to let it pass. Much to my chagrin, this article is not only still on CNN's front page, it's featured.

So here we go.

I am surprised and appalled, Mr. Rollins. In the past I have enjoyed and respected your columns, and you have shown real insight on what makes a good politician. Not this time, Ed, not this time. The list of critically crippling flaws in this article is a long one.

For starters, I fail to see any waffling in the actions of President Obama on the issue of torture. He banned torture, released some documents, and stated he did not wish to prosecute those who endorsed the past torture. He then decided to let Eric Holder and Congress make the ultimate decision on whether or not to prosecute. I fail to see any breakfast pastries or open-toed footwear here. Obama did not change his mind, he simply is allowing his attorney general make a legal decision. Gasp.

The problem I have with Rollins' column is a much deeper one than this however. The issue I have here is this: somehow it has become a sin for a politician to change his mind. It is not a flaw or a weakness to change one's position (though to reiterate, the President DID NOT change his position in this particular instance). Frequently after careful consideration, an initial judgment may be adjusted, or new evidence may come to light, making a previous posture preposterous. The door needs to be open for this sort of change, it cannot all be tossed under one negative scarlet letter. It is precisely this sort of binary thinking that landed us with Dubya for a catastrophic second term.

Rollins spends quite a lot of time in this piece painting Obama as a waffler, a weak leader trying to please everyone. The opposition to this -- apparently Rollin's ideal leader -- is a horrifying caricature. A man who never changes his mind, making snap decisions and keeping them, always blindly clinging to one pole, and never EVER speaking to his enemies. There is a name for that kind of person: a stubborn jerk.

Obama's actions last week were in fact wise choices marking a good leader. What Rollins smeared as waffling was in fact one of the best skills a leader can call upon: delegation. Obama passed a legal decision to the person most qualified to make a legal decision: the Attorney General. Lets be clear here. Delegation is not waffling. Delegation is good leadership.

The deep seated issues in this article don't end here. Rollins implicitly buys into an ends-justifies-the means argument, and endorses the "war on terror" approach to modern policy making. These things, however, are a whole new blog post.

For now, I will leave it at a final point of agreement with Mr. Rollins: the torture policy makers should not be prosecuted. The proceedings would be ugly and messy, and no one would truly benefit. Furthermore, those people are largely out of power for the moment. Lets just keep those files on record just in case any of them attempt to regain a position of power.

2009-04-25T15:46:00.002-04:00

I apologize that this post is somewhat dated, but I chose to refrain from posting until now because this was used as a writing sample for a job application. Regardless, the commentary is still relevant.

A recent article from CNN.com, dated Friday, April 10, discussed the merits and timing of possible immigration reform promised by the Obama administration. It is titled "Immigration Reform: Will The Climate Ever Be Right?" The article, much like the broader debate in our society on this topic, is steeped in racist rhetoric and categorizes groups of people into a ranked hierarchy. I believe that in order to be true to our nation's fundamental principle of all people being equal, there must be amnesty at our borders as well as a fair and reasonable path to legal citizenship for those who wish to live in the United States.

The article places the debate on immigration reform in the context of the current economic downturn. Ian Henry Lopez a professor from UC-Berkeley, points out that it is common in hard times to search for someone to blame. That scapegoat will be an outsider, in this case illegal immigrant workers. This finger pointing is illustrated in frighteningly literal terms in the words of Robert Rector, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation. He states that extending amnesty and legal status to illegal immigrants would represent “a pillaging expedition on the American taxpayer.” This is a disturbing metaphor, one that clearly paints immigrants as villains and valued less than the American taxpayer. Even the moderate voice of dissent quoted in the article stumbles into the trap of placing lesser value on fellow human beings. Carol Swain, of Vanderbilt University, feels that now is bad time to be discussing immigration reform due to the poor economy. In making her argument, she claims that the illegal immigrants are “not entitled to remain in the country.” In the spirit of equality that is supposed to reign supreme in the United States, everyone regardless of their origin, is entitled to a fair shot at being a citizen.

Illegal immigrants are not the only group cast down to a lower rank in this debate. The opposition to immigration reform, in their creation of scapegoats, have effectively stripped Latino Americans of their societal membership to full Americanness. President Obama in his campaign promised immigration reform, and also won 67 percent of the Latino vote. Critics of reform seem to feel there is causation in this correlation, and claim any amnesty granted to immigrants is a “naked party power grab.” Their argument creates a binary between “party interest,” in this case bowing to Latino voters' wishes, and “public interest.” Even the moderate Swain implies in the article that Latinos represent a “special interest group” as opposed to representing part of the public interest. By being labeled “special interest” and “party interest,” Latinos are cast as outside of the proper American public. In this racist optic, Latino Americans are seen as villainous outsiders along with the illegal immigrants. If the true American values –the essential equality and right to freedom of all mankind – are to be properly served, there is only one possible solution – a fair path to citizenship for all.

What death stirs up.

2009-04-03T13:31:00.003-04:00

Binghamton, NY. Friday April 3, 2009. More than 40 people were taken hostage downtown at the American Civic Association. Several gunshot wounds have been reported. A lot of (very tragic) excitement for a rainy day in the Southern Tier.

Along with my phone buzzing constantly - its nice to have friends and family who care about my well being -- the comment section of the local newspaper website is quite active. Let me share some real lovely sentiments. Hold on to your hats, this will be quite a ride into the inner psyche of an isolated post-industrial city.

"Yet another tragedy that could've been avoided if we stopped immigration, closed our borders, and brought our troops home to man them."

“Say your prayers, but what they really needed is at least one person in that building who believed in their OBLIGATION to protect themselves and was fluent witha legally owned concealed handgun to end this mess. The police and especially SWAT were not aroundfor the first how long??? This will only heighten the anti-gun idiots cry for stronger gun control for those LAW abiding citizens who understand the importance of protecting yourselves, your loved ones, and those who are unable to protect themselves, from cr@p like this! good luck to all involved and exposed to this mess. be properly trained, and practice, practivce, practice and have it on you at all times legal. Your family, your loved ones, and those sheeple who dont understand, are all depending on you.”

“Just a matter of time before something happened here, The new generation and all the immigrants have no respect for what went in to make this country. Its a spoiled society nowadays ,get a little stress and go on a shooting rampage. People have no accountability period.”

“There needs to be tighter controls at the border. That includes sending U.S. troops there instead of setting them up to be roadside bomb targets for those peace-loving Muslims. That might address the subculture of criminality that illegal aliens create in this country due to our basic human decency and naive respect for the human rights of all people. Illegal immigrants, and the rest of the world for a large part, do not play by the rules a succesful society adheres to.”

“Every person who is behind the anti gun agenda should be held accountable for the murders. They are responsible in pushing their agenda of victims being disarmed. One day they will be. More Americans seem to be waking up as to how important it is for more law abiding people to be armed. In this day and age its more important than ever.”

“As for me, I'll continue to pray for those still inside. If anything good comes from this, it could be : Obama Hussein and his sidekick Pelosi will see the light and stop pandering to the illegal immigrants and granting them more benefits than U.S. citizens. Gosh, maybe even, as "leaders" of our country, they could begin thinking about the actual realities this country faces. HA!”

“This is tragic and outrageous.

Diversity sucks. If reports are true that the shooter is an Asian, it will only confirm the horrible effects that third world immigration is having on traditional American communities. We need to detain and deport ALL third world immigrants, illegal as well as legal. We simply can't afford more anti-American massacres by third world immigrants and terrorists.

How many more innocent American lives are going to be sacrificed at the altar of Diversity and Multiculturalism, before Americans say "Enough is enough!" ??”

“There is a pattern here. This massacre is the latest in a long series of mass murders perpetrated by immigrants and non-whites with a chip on their shoulder.

Enough! Americans need to stop allowing millions of inassimilable third world immigrants to settle here and kill us.”

These are taken verbatim from pressconnects.com. It is disturbing to me that such a violent crisis precipitates such ignorant, racist, and bigoted comments.

I had planned when beginning this post to use this as a jumping point for some political commentary of my own. However, after a half an hour of immersing myself in my neigbors' opinions, I have lost the will to do so. What has happened today is a horrible tragedy, and it will never be explained in simple terms. The world is a complex place, filled with complex people making complex interactions. No sweeping generalities can explain or solve any of what we are faced with.

Amongst the flurry of heated posts, I found one glowing gem. I will you leave you with this, the most moving few sentences I've read today, posted by a panicked teenager.

"I'm in the highschool, we're under lockdown, and I'm a student in our Media Arts class. We have to sit in here for the rest of the day until they let us leave. This is serious, and you people arguing about who's fault it is, isn't solving anything really, so leave your ignorant, racist opininons to yourself. We all are sort of panicked. So..yeah. Try not to be so ignorant, k? :]"

2009-03-25T19:16:00.002-04:00

One would think that by now, over eighty years after the Scope's Trial, we would be done debating the teaching of evolution in public schools. Alas, we are not.

The issue is up for vote with the Texas Board of Education.

This is frightening, and has national consequences. The textbook market is so large in Texas, that what is curriculum in that state is reflected in the available textbooks nationwide. Textbook companies simply cannot make money with a book that does not mesh effectively with the wishes of the Texas Board. Don McLeroy, a member of the board, is a self proclaimed skeptic of evolution.

Don McLeroy, I fear you are not qualified to have an opinion with such leverage in this matter. Show me a degree in Biology, Biological Anthropology, even just some library time perusing the enormous quantity of peer-reviewed empirical evidence supporting evolutionary theory would earn a little of my respect. So long as it is something other than what your church or even the 'scientists' at the overtly bible-thumpin' christian Discovery Institute has told you.

Don't even bother reading this post

2009-03-15T03:30:00.002-04:00

This post is filler. Nothing more.

It seems to me that my drive for blogging does, indeed, ebb at times. The result is a stretch of time with no content, followed by this rather off topic post. So it goes.

It is about 3:30 in the morning. Most people would advise sleeping at this hour, but most people don't have the pleasure of living two houses down from Kennedy Fried Chicken in Binghamton. This time of night, on any given Thursday, Friday, or Saturday night, is in fact the noisiest time of the day. Given that there is nothing pressing for me in the morning, there is no point in sleeping quite yet. So I blog. So it goes.

I suppose some sort of content is in order.

Go see The Watchmen. What are you doing still reading this? Don't read this, you should be out the door right now on the way to the movie theater. I don't care if you've seen it already, GO SEE IT AGAIN!

I actually read a number of reviews claiming the film suffered from its reverence to the novel, that it was too rigid and stagnant with no room for interpretation. I say, the novel is perfect and it would be ludicrous to stray, and if it had, critics would simply cite that as a flaw. I felt the casting was superb, the acting was well done, and the soundtrack was nearly perfect.

In other Hollywood news, Crank, one of the most ludicrous and yet strangely satisfying movies of the past five years, has warranted a sequel. Here's looking forward to April 17, when we all once more get to enjoy "The Stath" kicking some serious ass, including his own, at an absurdly fast pace.

And to continue my tradition of linking to, and commenting on a CNN article: This tickles to me to no end. Not only does Lindsay Lohan have a warrant out for her arrest, but this news is the second most popular tidbit on all of CNN.com, only after brawling models. Ah, how our society prioritizes.

So it goes.

The world in two colors

2009-03-06T01:23:00.003-05:00

I have a new pet peeve. His name is Binary. Say hello, Binary. Please admire his distinctive fur coat -- one half is black as the night, the other is the purest of whites.

It seems to me an aggravating tendency that people in our culture categorize everything around them into two clumps, with no middle ground. You are in or you are out. It's good or it's evil. They are our friends, or they are our foes (or in the case of current US foreign policy, they are terrorists or they are not). You're against abortion or you're for infanticide.

Here's a fun new one. You are for equal marriage rights for all, or you are for the inalienable sovereignty of the people of California. It is painful to read about Kenneth Starr blathering on about how, sure, it may be too easy for Californians to change the state constitution, but that it's still their right to do so. Even the judges of the supreme court, those we trust to rule with the most wisdom in all the land, fail to break out of this binary dialectic.

It pains me to be back on this topic. Proposition 8 is discrimination. Period. The exercise of one right of citizenship does not mean rights can then be stripped elsewhere. Certainly, some section of the constitution - whether it be California's or the nation's -- protects the basic rights of all citizens from being trampled by the fascist mob rule of a slim majority's right to change their governance.

This is a dark example of the dangers inherent to binary thinking. We live in a complex world, with no simple categories. There isn't just black and white; there is every shade of gray in between, not to mention every other color of the rainbow. Perhaps one day, people will stop forcing their world into little categorical holes, and my new irksome friend Binary will fade away.

Hope, Change, and breaking the rules.

2009-03-03T20:22:00.004-05:00

This is heartening. This is a large part of why I voted for Obama. Once again, we have a white house that respects the scientific method. For to long decisions were left in the hands of those who had money and political clout, rather than the qualifications to make them. This is an excellent step in the right direction.

Here is an interesting analysis on actions that need to be taken in regards to the current economic crisis. The basic argument is that big Health and Energy reforms need to be put off so Obama can focus on more short term interests -- "stopping the bleeding," as the metaphor in the last paragraph puts it. I however, take issue with this use of a biological metaphor — the country is bleeding, and needs to be stabilized before surgery. As a robust liberal democracy, the United States is in no way threatened with a permanent “death” that is implied by this terminology. The measures which would “stop the bleeding,” short term bailouts and the like, will have no meaningful effect in the long run if not implemented in tandem with substantial projects such as Energy and Health reforms.

Still the "bleeding" does have real effects on real people -- lost homes and livelyhood, etc. I don't wish to be insensitive to their needs. I just cannot forsee a total collapse. I can only hope Obama has the stamina to juggle all the demands of the Oval Office right now.

And now for something completely different...

I am just returning home from a speech on Solidarity, particularly pertaining to the fight against human rights violations of the Coca-Cola Company in The US and Columbia, given by Lesley Gill. Gill is an Anthropologist of some renown, having taught at Binghamton University, American University, and Vanderbilt University. She also wrote book, "School of the Americas," an excellent text that is taught in Social Anthropology classes here at BU (it also is a good read for anybody - not long or dense, it explains to you why you should be supremely displeased with the United States military, and the imperialism we impose over this half of the world).

I attended this lecture anticipating mind blowing revelations and a powerful oratory by a charismatic force of modern academia. I left severly underwhelmed. Sure she made good points, her arguments were sound, but they were boring. She may as well have handed out a short treatise on the topic and waited around for questions once we were all done reading. I realized quickly her flaw -- she failed to engage the audience, and instead simply spoke as if she were laying out her thoughts into a book.

Gill, like so many other scholars who write pulitzer quality nonfiction but still find themselves adressing a room full of snoozing students in lecture, relied too much on the academic tone. This tone is drilled into all University students, those who stray from it are penalized, and it is the only way into scholarly publication. I feel this is a sad state of affairs. Kurt Vonnegut would be very unhappy.

Moral of the story: brake teh RuLes. Throw. Standards. Out. The. F'n. Window. Write, speak, and present in an out of the ordinary fashion, and people will take notice. Then you may actually have a chance at getting your point across to them.

Kathleen Sebelius, and the strange things Catholics say.

2009-03-02T15:39:00.004-05:00

The latest buzz in the political reporting world seems to be the nomination of Kathleen Sebelius to the Department of Health and Human Services. Upon reading about Obama's latest cabinet pick, I decided to do a smidge of research on her. (You'll please forgive this New Yorker if I've hereto taken no interest in the state affaris of Kansas). I liked what I saw. She stood up to private insurance agencies as State Insurance Commissioner, set an example of not taking money from private interests in seeking election, and poured much needed state support into health and education (see previous post as to why this is extraordinarily important). In a nutshell, she is supremely qualified for the cabinet position.

Ah, but what is this. No matter what is done on capitol hill, someone gets upset about it. Seems she is, as Bill Donahue so delicately put it, an "enemy of the unborn." Indeed. Despite what the Catholic League may suspect, I'm fairly certain no politician, not even those nasty Democrats, write in their journals at night about how they have made crucial steps in the war on fetuses. Leave it to someone like Donahue, I suppose; he did, after all, earn the dubious privilege of a South Park parody of him.

On a related side note, according to Sebelius' office, the rate of abortions dropped 8.5 percent while she was in office.

"Dear Diary,
Blast! Seems I have foiled my own diabolical plans with those health care reforms I signed.
Here's hoping the house won't spot the mandatory abortion clause on my next bill.
-Sibby the Baby Eater"

Why Republicans need to sit down and shut up.

2009-02-26T16:51:00.002-05:00

I just finished a comparative history book on revolutions written by Jack Goldstone. In his book, he argues that "state breakdown," which he defines very explicitly, are caused by the collision of changing demographics with inflexible state instituitions -- usually the way taxes are collected. Now, its by no means a perfect argument, there is much to be said about his use of secondary sources and his sociological perspective of history, but he makes many compelling points. Morover, he concludes his argument with an analysis of US decline. Though it was published in 1991, he makes some disturbingly prophetic statements.

He predicts some of the burdens the US will face: "payment of interest on the existing [foreign] debt, rescue of the savings and loan industry, repair of current infrastructure..." (emphasis my own). He also predicts "the next generation, regardless of its values, will face massive problems in reconciling state resources with state commitments."

So he knows the economic crisis we now face. How does he see it coming? Simple: we are making many of the key mistakes that triggered revolutions in France, England, China and the Ottoman Empire. Not to say we will have a new Reign of Terror in the states, but without the proper measures times could get worse.

The problem lies in "selfish elites." In the case of the US, the baby boom, he argues, has subtly lowered capital-per-worker, which slowed productivity and made the US less competitive on a global scale. The increased population polarized wealth - more people locked out from the high money positions, and more money for those who do make it to the top. In the competitive atmosphere that his generates, baby boomers and the following generations are increasingly disinclined to pay taxes.

So what we have is a larger population than ever before, demanding more and more services from the government -- the need to fix infrastructure which is wearing out faster, educate more kids, provide health care and welfare for more people, the list goes on. The kicker is, no one is willing to pay the taxes to pay for this.

To compensate for this disconnect between state resources and state commitments, the government looks to borrowing, running a deficit, and putting off loans. But we can't have an infinite line of credit to keep putting off, money has to be paid back sometime. So, the key to preventing total system failure is promotion of internal productivity in the longrun. In order to do that, a happy, innovative populous -- one supported happily by securely funded state services -- is needed.

One related issue, before I conclude, is short sighted, corrupt politicians. Our top officials are paid a small fraction of the top individuals in the private sector. So, the temptation is for them to use elected positions as a short lived stepping stone to the more lucrative privte sector. It is no surprise then that many of our elected policy makers make decisions based on what will make them and their immideate supporters happy right now, so they can land a cushy job at the top of some businees they benefited.

So the solutions to our current woes are the following. Adequate taxation - which means those who are able, need to pay their share - that means all of us, especially te wealthy, and certainly more than we are paying now. Taxation is part of our contract with our government, a duty as a citizen, if we want services, we need to pay for them. Funding to public services and officials -- strong infrastructure for an industrious society, and strong leadership who govern for the long term good of the people. Finally, research and investments are needed to increase internal productivity.

These are tough things to demand. People will not like it -- it is an unfortunate part of the American Identity that we should and it is OK to hoarde as much for ourselves as possible. Short term sacrifice is needed for long term good, and a strong leader is needed to make that happen. Goldstone labels this leader "Effective" -- able to rally many groups and viewpoints -- and "Ennobling" -- able to convince their followers to focus on a common cause that does not benefit them in the short run, but does in the long run.

I think we have found, and elected that leader. President Obama fits the bill as effective and ennobling. I haven't yet read through the budget in detail, but what I see is promising. He is setting aside more and more for services, like health care and education. Investment in green energy will improve infrastructure and create long term productivity with new technology. He is even calling on the wealthiest families to resume their tax payments when some Bush tax breaks lapse next year. Even Governor Patterson, by calling for pay raises for a bunch of Albany officials, a controversial move to say the least, is exhibiting excellent foresight, whether he knows it or not.

So here is my message to those Republicans criticizing the big government "bloat" of the stimulus and budget: sit down, shut up, and suck it up for a little while. If you want the country you love oh so much to remain king of the international hill, everyone must make sacrifices.

2009-02-26T01:56:00.001-05:00

Jindal's volcano remark has some fuming

Mmmhmm.

Call and answer: Some thoughts on Obama and Jindal

2009-02-25T01:25:00.003-05:00

Jindal calls stimulus 'irresponsible' in GOP response

Obama outlines ambitious agenda for 'lasting prosperity'

Being a busy college student in the middle of a very busy week, (and living in a house with no cable television to boot), I did not get a chance to watch President Obama speak to Congress this evening. However, having checked up on it a bit on CNN.com, a few thoughts come to mind.

I like where Obama is headed with his budget. His three foci, energy, health care and education, are excellent causes in which the government should be promoting fervently. But that is hardly a big revelation. I have much more to say on why these things, in combination with one or two other big changes are the key to bringing the US out of the hole it currently is wallowing in. But that will have to wait for tomorrow (hopefully).

Jindal's response was less painful than I had expected. His critiques of the stimulus plan are nothing new, however unfounded as they are. The spending he calls out, however, irritates me to no end. Let us review.

$300 million to buy new government cars: This is the most reasonable beef he has. It always seems skeevy to be spending on seemingly "personal" expenditures in the gov't while the economy is in the dumps. However, there is at least one excellent reason that we should be spending on items like that, and I will go more into that tomorrow, time allowing.

$8 billion for high-speed rail projects: Modern mass transit is a field in which the US is lagging behind much of the rest of the world. A shiny new rail system will go a long way towards creating jobs and cutting carbon emissions in the long run. It is irresponsible of Jindal to critique green job initiatives.

$140 million "for something called 'volcano monitoring.'": Another sad case of anti-intellectualism from the right side of the aisle. Much like the "fruit fly research" Sarah Palin so maligned, volcano monitoring is fundamental research that can lead to knowledge applicable to a broad variety of vulcanology, seismology, geology, and planty of other -ologies. Basic scientific research such as this is one of the most productive investments our government can make for long term prosperity and sustainability. I'll go a bit more into that tomorrow as well.

Update

2009-02-16T18:56:00.002-05:00

Just did some tweaking of the page. Things you may notice:
New "Followers" gadget.
More links - some of the finest writers in my life (Abercorn's Diary may be NSFW, but very funny).
Newsreel - scroll down to see some headlines.

2009-02-16T14:12:00.003-05:00

Here I sit, in a high tower of a high tower of higher learning. To be explicit, I'm sitting in one of the lush, picturesque libraries of Cornell University, killing some time on a borrowed laptop. While I may not attend the prestigious Ivy I am currently visiting, I cannot help but reflect on how my own institution (Binghamton University, just an hour down the road) has shaped my mind not unlike how my butt has shaped this thick cushioned seat. I feel that my program of study, Anthropology with a heaping side of History, has turned my mind into some kind of analytical machine I struggle turn off. Media is no longer simply entertainment. I pick apart movies, television and plays, pondering them for hours even after they are finished, looking for the meanings and objectives of the creators, like some little kid looking for cool bugs under rocks. And you know what? I'm glad. Couse I like looking for bugs under rocks. I spent many long summer hours doing just that. And this new form of curiousity leaves me feeling intellectually enriched, and doesn't leave so many muddy tracks on the carpet. I suppose the moral of the story is, let the buttocks of education squish your brain cushion, even if its just a little. Its loads of fun.

Also, a personally discovered fun fact: the only time one ever says "verbose" is when they are actually being verbose.

2009-02-12T00:12:00.001-05:00

So I pretty much never post anymore. Oh well.

Making CEO's look like jerks: Still wonderful sport in the capitol.

2008-11-19T16:51:00.002-05:00

So I find my drive for blogging somewhat diminished. Pre-election, I could have written two posts a day with all the passion I was feeling. Now... well so much for that. I can't say I've had any major insights regarding current events of late. Oh well.

Here's an amusing little tid bit to munch on:
Making CEOs look like jerks is fun.

Day 3: The Begining of a New Era, and yet...

2008-11-07T00:52:00.001-05:00

In this the first hour of the third day after we, the people, have chosen a new leader, I find myself not truly satisfied with the entirety of this historic first Tuesday of November. It is not a lack of confidence in our President-elect -- I am and have been an Obama supporter since this political season kicked off so long ago. I know he is not perfect, not the messiah come to lead us to some ideal America some make him out to be, but he will do well. The road ahead will be difficult, but he will surround himself with the finest people to aid us along the way -- people like David Plouffe, who orchestrated a damn fine campaign, and Rahm Emanuel, who I hear knows his way around Washington without ever needing to ask for directions, a fine skill for a Chief of Staff.

Nor am I dissatisfied with the state of the Legislative Branch. Even though it seems the Democrats will fall short of the coveted 60 seats in the Senate, at the very least a solid majority is blue in both chambers.

What mars for me an otherwise hearteningly progressive election is not the people put into office, but rather the ideas drafted into government frameworks. I am referring to, of course, the constitutional ban of same-sex marraige in Arizona, California, and Florida. While the population in general was nailing some of the final nails into the coffin of racial discrimination, we have at the same time institutionally embraced discrimination in a new way. This disgusts me to no end.

The arguments for enacting these bans do not hold up under rational scrutiny. Lobbying groups spout rhetoric of "protecting marraige," like it is some vulnerable village beseiged by the evil forces of the LGBT community. This is not the case, and perhaps the word choices used to describe it in the past, words like institution, have played a part in this erroneous reification. The "institution" of marraige is a relationship, and I challenge anyone to demonstrate how it could be made less meaningful by allowing two people of the same gender also engage in such a relationship.

The basis of these proposals, it seems to me, boils down to one thing: a repulsion by homosexuality. For whatever reasons, many people dislike their LGBT neighbors, and this is an opinion they are entitled to. For better or for worse, in this nation of ours, everyone can have, hold, scream, and publish their morals to their hearts content. However, these morals must never be written into our government. In the eyes of the government, all citizens are equal, with equal rights (this is, at least, how it should be). Marraige, as far as the state is concerned, carries numerous economic and legal conveniences, advantages, and rights. Proposition 8 in California and corresponding bans in Arizona and Florida explicitly remove these rights from a specific, targeted group. It is classic, horrifying discrimination, plain and simple. As Americans, no trike that, as decent human beings, we cannot let this injustice go unchallenged.