Cutting to the chase... California's Proposition 8 was passed on November 4th which enshrined in California's constitution the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman. Does anyone else find it extremely ironic that this proposition was heavily funded by Mormons, a group who for many years practiced polygamy?
But I digress. In my humble opinion, gays and lesbians should not be treated like second-class citizens. I respect their fight for equal rights. It is not all that different than the challenges African-Americans have had to fight for for decades.
So when Prop 8 passed, I was very disappointed with California. The California I know is extremely supportive of gay rights. So why did Prop 8 pass? Simple: supporters of Gay Rights and Gay Marriage were less motivated to vote than the Religious Right were. That's it. It all boils down to votes. Dare I say that the No on Prop 8 folks were lazier than the Yes on 8? Perhaps.
Clearly, gays and lesbians came out in full force on election day to vote "No" on Prop 8. But despite the large gay population in California, gays couldn't win this fight on their own. They needed supportive straight folks to vote with them. And I might think that the most supportive community would be younger Californians.
But what was young people's response to the loss of Prop 8? Facebook. I have received several invites to Facebook groups in support of gay marriage. It may be all fine and well to "support" gay rights. It is another thing entirely to DO something about it. And it is yet another thing to do something EFFECTIVE to fight for this cause.
I fear that Facebook, MySpace, e-mail petitions and the like will lull young people into a false sense of accomplishment in fighting for gay rights. Why do I say this? Well, it's simple. If you want to fight for gay rights, you have to do one of two things: convince elected officials to pass supportive laws and/or convince the public to take the single most important political action they can do to effect social change: VOTE for the change.
If you want to convince an elected official to change a law, here's what you have to do:
1. Visit your elected official's office and talk to him/her
2. Call them
3. Send an handwritten letter
Sorry to burst everyone's bubble but politicians don't accept e-mail petitions so they are really a waste of time.
Facebook, MySpace groups, etc. preach to the choir so they are largely ineffective at changing minds. And in fact I think that may be destructive in that people use these groups as political action by proxy. They may end up taking action online and feel they are changing the world yet they never vote or never get to know their elected officials.
For this reason I will never join these useless online groups as a means of making political change. If you want to change the world, get involved in the world. Don't waste your time in cyber-space. Your community exists just a few feet from your computer -- right outside your door.
Sunday, November 09, 2008
Saturday, November 01, 2008
Enter the Wack Jobs
I just read an article on MSNBC.com about many prayer groups that have formed in the hopes that God will tip the presidential election toward a McCain win. Read this article by clicking here.
The long an short of it is that the religious right, seeing an Obama win inevitable have resorted to praying for John McCain to win. Forget about the irony that McCain is no darling of the Religious Right. Rather look at this as an interesting example of religion and politics in America and funny example about the hypocracy and stupidity of the Religious Right in American and religion in general.
What Hypocracy do I speak of?
If you believe that:
The long an short of it is that the religious right, seeing an Obama win inevitable have resorted to praying for John McCain to win. Forget about the irony that McCain is no darling of the Religious Right. Rather look at this as an interesting example of religion and politics in America and funny example about the hypocracy and stupidity of the Religious Right in American and religion in general.
What Hypocracy do I speak of?
If you believe that:
- there is a God
- He cares about American politics
- doesn't want his gay creations to marry
- doesn't want abortions
- sees that an Obama administration is ineveitable
- can do anything he wants (heck, he created the Universe afterall)
Monday, February 04, 2008
Check Out Electoral-Vote.com
Just a quick plug,
One of my favorite election websites is:
http://www.electoral-vote.com
The writer of this website tracks various elections, with excellent, impartial commentary and numerous poll results from around the country.
I read this site almost every day.
Enjoy!
One of my favorite election websites is:
http://www.electoral-vote.com
The writer of this website tracks various elections, with excellent, impartial commentary and numerous poll results from around the country.
I read this site almost every day.
Enjoy!
Super Duper Tuesday Is Upon Us
Look out! Here comes Super Tuesday. Err... or Super-Duper Tuesday, since this is the first time that we have had so many states participating in this de-facto national primary election day.
If you live in a Super Tuesday state, godfunit, go vote!!!
We in Hawaii have to wait a couple more weeks.
If you want to help "rock-the-vote" but don't live in a Super Tuesday state, you can help your favorite candidate from afar. I for one am an Obama supporter and they have taken online electioneering to the extreme. For example, check out this web resource on the Obama website:
http://my.barackobama.com/feb5calls
This website allows you to phone bank battleground primary states from your home, no matter where you live.
No matter who you support, take a little action to support your candidate. Don't do nothing because you can't do everything. Do SOMETHING. Here are a few simple things you can do to help make a difference:
By not voting, you are allowing others to decide for you who will represent you. I volunteered to work the polls in a couple elections in California years ago. The majority of voters who actually came out to vote were over 50, many were so elderly that they did not have the upper body strength to punch the hole in the punch-card ballots. Others were so senile they punched every hold on the ballot, thus invalidating their own vote.
If you are able (both physically AND mentally) please... FOR THE LOVE OF GOD... VOTE!!! Don't let Mr. and Mrs. Magoo decide who will lead this country in the difficult times we live in. If you don't like what is going on in the country, you have the power to make a difference. Remember your vote DOES count. Use it!
If you live in a Super Tuesday state, godfunit, go vote!!!
We in Hawaii have to wait a couple more weeks.
If you want to help "rock-the-vote" but don't live in a Super Tuesday state, you can help your favorite candidate from afar. I for one am an Obama supporter and they have taken online electioneering to the extreme. For example, check out this web resource on the Obama website:
http://my.barackobama.com
This website allows you to phone bank battleground primary states from your home, no matter where you live.
No matter who you support, take a little action to support your candidate. Don't do nothing because you can't do everything. Do SOMETHING. Here are a few simple things you can do to help make a difference:
- Drive a friend to the polls or caucus with you who may not have gone otherwise. By taking one inactive voter the polls, you have essentially doubled the vote
- Offer to phone bank such as the link to Obama's website above. Just a few phone calls with a convincing and encouraging word can help bring out more people to vote
- Talk to your friends and family
- Donate some money to your favorite candidate, as little as $25 goes a long way when you consider that it is combined with thousands of other small contributors like you
By not voting, you are allowing others to decide for you who will represent you. I volunteered to work the polls in a couple elections in California years ago. The majority of voters who actually came out to vote were over 50, many were so elderly that they did not have the upper body strength to punch the hole in the punch-card ballots. Others were so senile they punched every hold on the ballot, thus invalidating their own vote.
If you are able (both physically AND mentally) please... FOR THE LOVE OF GOD... VOTE!!! Don't let Mr. and Mrs. Magoo decide who will lead this country in the difficult times we live in. If you don't like what is going on in the country, you have the power to make a difference. Remember your vote DOES count. Use it!
Sunday, January 20, 2008
It's The Delegates That Count!
We just had the Nevada primary and while news reports show that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, the fact remains that in a primary election what matters is how many delegates each candidate won.
Believe it or not, Barack Obama won Nevada with 13 delegates won over Clinton's 12. And it is ultimately important how many delegates are going to vote for your candidacy at the national convention that really matter.
How can someone win more delegates if they lost the popular vote? First off, every state is different in how they allow primary elections to be run. For example, with the primaries held in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan (which had all it's delegates revoked due to violating a party rule), and Nevada, delegates are allocated either in proportion of the vote (if you win 60% of the vote you get roughly 60% of the state's delegates) or delegates are won on a district or county basis as is the case in Nevada (win popular vote in a county with 5 delegates, you win all 5 delegates). Some states are winner take all such as Florida, making it a real battleground.
According to MSNBC.com, Barack Obama won much of the northern half of Nevada (Reno) while Clinton had won much of the southern half (Las Vegas). Northern Nevada is sparsely populated. Apparently, Obama won more counties that had a disproportionate amount of delegates per residents assigned to them than Clinton. This is not much different the the problem that we have with the electoral college. Less populous status have a disproportionate number of electoral college votes (like Wyoming) than more populous states (like California).
To get the real scoop on who is winning the election I rely on delegate counts provided by MSNBC.com
As of now the delegate count is:
Barack Obama 38
Hillary Clinton 36
John Edwards 18
Believe it or not, Barack Obama won Nevada with 13 delegates won over Clinton's 12. And it is ultimately important how many delegates are going to vote for your candidacy at the national convention that really matter.
How can someone win more delegates if they lost the popular vote? First off, every state is different in how they allow primary elections to be run. For example, with the primaries held in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan (which had all it's delegates revoked due to violating a party rule), and Nevada, delegates are allocated either in proportion of the vote (if you win 60% of the vote you get roughly 60% of the state's delegates) or delegates are won on a district or county basis as is the case in Nevada (win popular vote in a county with 5 delegates, you win all 5 delegates). Some states are winner take all such as Florida, making it a real battleground.
According to MSNBC.com, Barack Obama won much of the northern half of Nevada (Reno) while Clinton had won much of the southern half (Las Vegas). Northern Nevada is sparsely populated. Apparently, Obama won more counties that had a disproportionate amount of delegates per residents assigned to them than Clinton. This is not much different the the problem that we have with the electoral college. Less populous status have a disproportionate number of electoral college votes (like Wyoming) than more populous states (like California).
To get the real scoop on who is winning the election I rely on delegate counts provided by MSNBC.com
As of now the delegate count is:
Barack Obama 38
Hillary Clinton 36
John Edwards 18
Friday, January 18, 2008
Origins of the Primary Election System
Have you ever asked the question "Why do we choose our presidential candidates through primary elections?" Every four years, presidential contenders spend exorbitant sums of money to essentially get elected before the get elected. This may not be good for the country since the candidates need to raise funds to compete on a national scale against their opponents, funds which may come with many strings attached from special interest groups, unless you are a rich son of a bitch who can pay your own way (think Ross Perot, or Mitt Romney).
Do you think it's a good system? Do you think it is a bad system? You probably don't really care enough to even ask the question and have probably already clicked away from this blog to look for embarrassing videos of Britney Spear on YouTube. I know what I'm up against when I spend my time writing an obscure blog about topics only a political scientist might care to read about but if you can put aside your desire to now the latest about that blonde-haired train-wreck for just a moment you may find that the more you know about the primary system the better you may understand what the hell is going on in America for for the next few weeks.
In most countries, presidents are simply ceremonial figures who represent the unified power of the government. They are more like highly regarding civil servants who are expected to sign all legislation that comes out of the country's legislature, take part in national ceremonies, and be "guarantors" of the country's constitution. They are not expected to be "political" or call for certain legislation on this or that topic.
This presidential model is most common in many European countries where the country's monarchy was abolished. In other words, think of Queen Elizabeth II of England who is essentially a figurehead, leads ceremonies, represents the "Crown" (what we would simply call the "government") but doesn't involve herself in political matters. Most presidents in Europe take on a similar role as Queen Elizabeth II and so who the country picks to be president of their country is not an extremely important matter. Typically, the prime minister/premier/chancellor (the American equivalent being the Speak of the House) is the de facto leader of the country who sets the political tone for the country.
But unlike European Presidents, the American President is not a figurehead. The POTUS (President of the United States) takes on a great deal of political power. Since the U.S. Constitution separates power between three branches of government, the Executive Branch does have certain political duties to keep the legislature in check with the power to veto legislation. This makes it impossible for the Speaker of the House to take on the kind of power that Europe's Prime Ministers can yield simply because they have to consider the political desires of the President.
Okay... so where does this leave us? We have a country with a very powerful president when compared to many other states in the world. So we have a primary election because the people want to have a say in who gets selected for election, right? Sort of.
The primary system is a relatively new concept in American politics. The primary election only came about during in the early 1900s during the Progressive movement. Prior to that, the leaders of the political parties simply choose who they thought were the stronger candidates and left the general public out of the decision. Compared to the primary election system we have today, it was a much cheaper way of selecting viable candidates for the presidential election.
But one of the major criticisms of this old method was that in those days cronyism ran amok. These were the days where Congressional committee hearings were held privately, where friends and family were often appointed to high positions in the government over people where were actually more capable. Likewise, who the party leadership chose to lead the party in an election had little to do with the what the people wanted and more to do with who you knew and who owed you a favor.
Along came the the Progressives who opened up committee meeting with so-called Sunshine Laws, passed legislation to end graft and cronyism by creating a Civil Service that would take the most capable workers to lead government positions due to merit and not due to who one knew. Likewise, they pressed for a new system whereby the parties would select their presidential candidates at a nominating convention consisting of delegates representing their home state parties.
How those delegates were chosen have a history all their own. The parties choose their delegates based upon party rules. Unfortunately, for many years those party rules forbade African-Americans were basically from holding any position of responsibility with either party. It was during the middle of the 20th century when each state started to open up their primary in one of two ways:
1. They changed party rules to allow anyone who is legally allowed to vote to be able to caucus in the various delegate precints.
2. They opened up the election of delegates to a popular vote
So here we are today, with a primary system that has evolved from a system that was kept behind closed doors and checkers with discriminatory rules, to a system that is open to anyone interested.
Do you think it's a good system? Do you think it is a bad system? You probably don't really care enough to even ask the question and have probably already clicked away from this blog to look for embarrassing videos of Britney Spear on YouTube. I know what I'm up against when I spend my time writing an obscure blog about topics only a political scientist might care to read about but if you can put aside your desire to now the latest about that blonde-haired train-wreck for just a moment you may find that the more you know about the primary system the better you may understand what the hell is going on in America for for the next few weeks.
In most countries, presidents are simply ceremonial figures who represent the unified power of the government. They are more like highly regarding civil servants who are expected to sign all legislation that comes out of the country's legislature, take part in national ceremonies, and be "guarantors" of the country's constitution. They are not expected to be "political" or call for certain legislation on this or that topic.
This presidential model is most common in many European countries where the country's monarchy was abolished. In other words, think of Queen Elizabeth II of England who is essentially a figurehead, leads ceremonies, represents the "Crown" (what we would simply call the "government") but doesn't involve herself in political matters. Most presidents in Europe take on a similar role as Queen Elizabeth II and so who the country picks to be president of their country is not an extremely important matter. Typically, the prime minister/premier/chancellor (the American equivalent being the Speak of the House) is the de facto leader of the country who sets the political tone for the country.
But unlike European Presidents, the American President is not a figurehead. The POTUS (President of the United States) takes on a great deal of political power. Since the U.S. Constitution separates power between three branches of government, the Executive Branch does have certain political duties to keep the legislature in check with the power to veto legislation. This makes it impossible for the Speaker of the House to take on the kind of power that Europe's Prime Ministers can yield simply because they have to consider the political desires of the President.
Okay... so where does this leave us? We have a country with a very powerful president when compared to many other states in the world. So we have a primary election because the people want to have a say in who gets selected for election, right? Sort of.
The primary system is a relatively new concept in American politics. The primary election only came about during in the early 1900s during the Progressive movement. Prior to that, the leaders of the political parties simply choose who they thought were the stronger candidates and left the general public out of the decision. Compared to the primary election system we have today, it was a much cheaper way of selecting viable candidates for the presidential election.
But one of the major criticisms of this old method was that in those days cronyism ran amok. These were the days where Congressional committee hearings were held privately, where friends and family were often appointed to high positions in the government over people where were actually more capable. Likewise, who the party leadership chose to lead the party in an election had little to do with the what the people wanted and more to do with who you knew and who owed you a favor.
Along came the the Progressives who opened up committee meeting with so-called Sunshine Laws, passed legislation to end graft and cronyism by creating a Civil Service that would take the most capable workers to lead government positions due to merit and not due to who one knew. Likewise, they pressed for a new system whereby the parties would select their presidential candidates at a nominating convention consisting of delegates representing their home state parties.
How those delegates were chosen have a history all their own. The parties choose their delegates based upon party rules. Unfortunately, for many years those party rules forbade African-Americans were basically from holding any position of responsibility with either party. It was during the middle of the 20th century when each state started to open up their primary in one of two ways:
1. They changed party rules to allow anyone who is legally allowed to vote to be able to caucus in the various delegate precints.
2. They opened up the election of delegates to a popular vote
So here we are today, with a primary system that has evolved from a system that was kept behind closed doors and checkers with discriminatory rules, to a system that is open to anyone interested.
Coming up next... Nevada
Aloha,
Before I begin this article I want to clearly identify myself as a supporter of Barack Obama. I don't just support him as a candidate, I literally support his campaign financially. I truly feel that Barack Obama represents my feelings, my hopes, and of course, my politics despite the fact that I am a white man. I see a lot of myself in Barack and believe that he understands the experience of many in America who have had to struggle financially and socially in an environment where being a little different can difficult for one's options in life.
That said, if Barack Obama does not win the nomination I will support whoever the Democratic candidate is.
Back to my post...
Tomorrow is the Nevada primary and latest opinion polls show Hillary Clinton ahead of Barack Obama, with John Edwards in third place. Here are the numbers from a Zogby poll on January 17th, 2008 (care of www.electoral-vote.com):
Clinton 42%
Obama 37%
Edwards 12%
Nevada is a caucus state just like Iowa and this may in fact bode well for Obama despite Zogby's polling numbers. Obama won Iowa primarily due an overwhelming number of first-time caucus-goers supporting his candidacy. Curiously, many of the caucuses in Las Vegas will be held at a number of Strip casinos, some for the first time ever, allowing casino workers to caucus conveniently where they work. With the endorsement of the Culinary Workers Union Local 226 (representing nearly 60,000 workers on the Las Vegas Strip) Barack Obama stands a good chance of at least winning Las Vegas and perhaps the entire state of Nevada. Of course a union endorsement does not necessarily guarantee all the workers of said union will vote his way but it certainly does help draw further attention to his campaign.
Before I begin this article I want to clearly identify myself as a supporter of Barack Obama. I don't just support him as a candidate, I literally support his campaign financially. I truly feel that Barack Obama represents my feelings, my hopes, and of course, my politics despite the fact that I am a white man. I see a lot of myself in Barack and believe that he understands the experience of many in America who have had to struggle financially and socially in an environment where being a little different can difficult for one's options in life.
That said, if Barack Obama does not win the nomination I will support whoever the Democratic candidate is.
Back to my post...
Tomorrow is the Nevada primary and latest opinion polls show Hillary Clinton ahead of Barack Obama, with John Edwards in third place. Here are the numbers from a Zogby poll on January 17th, 2008 (care of www.electoral-vote.com):
Clinton 42%
Obama 37%
Edwards 12%
Nevada is a caucus state just like Iowa and this may in fact bode well for Obama despite Zogby's polling numbers. Obama won Iowa primarily due an overwhelming number of first-time caucus-goers supporting his candidacy. Curiously, many of the caucuses in Las Vegas will be held at a number of Strip casinos, some for the first time ever, allowing casino workers to caucus conveniently where they work. With the endorsement of the Culinary Workers Union Local 226 (representing nearly 60,000 workers on the Las Vegas Strip) Barack Obama stands a good chance of at least winning Las Vegas and perhaps the entire state of Nevada. Of course a union endorsement does not necessarily guarantee all the workers of said union will vote his way but it certainly does help draw further attention to his campaign.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Welcome! Authors wanted!
Hello!
My name is Andrew Templeman and I live in the island of Kauai. As the title of the blog suggests I am a registered Democrat in the Hawaii Democraty Party. I was raised a Buddhist but consider myself more of an athiest/free-thinker than a student of any particular religion or philosophy. I have a degree in Political Science which I earned at San Jose State University. I am a business owner and work part time at a local hotel.
The theme of this blog is for everyone to share their ideas to make Hawaii a better place. The lifeblood of democracy is an informed and vibrant citizenry who care to action to better their condition and the condition of all their fellow citizens. As the author and administrator of this I plan on commenting on the news of the day (be it local, national or world news) as well as sharing ideas about how to make the system in Hawaii work better for the common person.
I invite comments on anything I write and hope that some of you who read my blog will be interested in authoring your own ideas here on the Hawaii Liberal blog. However, I ask everyone one basic rule: Be humble and polite in your postings. The internet provides everyone a degree of anonymity and, for some, being anonymous means being free to insult and disparage others without fear of being held accountable for their words. Therefore, this blog will be moderated.
That said, please enjoy this blog.
My name is Andrew Templeman and I live in the island of Kauai. As the title of the blog suggests I am a registered Democrat in the Hawaii Democraty Party. I was raised a Buddhist but consider myself more of an athiest/free-thinker than a student of any particular religion or philosophy. I have a degree in Political Science which I earned at San Jose State University. I am a business owner and work part time at a local hotel.
The theme of this blog is for everyone to share their ideas to make Hawaii a better place. The lifeblood of democracy is an informed and vibrant citizenry who care to action to better their condition and the condition of all their fellow citizens. As the author and administrator of this I plan on commenting on the news of the day (be it local, national or world news) as well as sharing ideas about how to make the system in Hawaii work better for the common person.
I invite comments on anything I write and hope that some of you who read my blog will be interested in authoring your own ideas here on the Hawaii Liberal blog. However, I ask everyone one basic rule: Be humble and polite in your postings. The internet provides everyone a degree of anonymity and, for some, being anonymous means being free to insult and disparage others without fear of being held accountable for their words. Therefore, this blog will be moderated.
That said, please enjoy this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)