Former Oklahoma City Councilman and recently elected Oklahoma County Commmissioner Brent Rinehart has been playing the QueerHater publicity ace since before he even took his new seat.  I am taking this personally but not for the reason Occam's razor would suggest.  I'm pissed off because I almost voted for the prick.

(This being county politics and especially Oklahoma County in deep bright red Oklahoma there's quite a bit more below the fold and I'll do my best to find the shortest well lit path through the labyrinth of good old boy brinksmanship and petty spite that all too often defines local politics, especially in Oklahoma.)

An old friend of mine works for the college station which is predominately NPR programming.  She reads the headlines, weather and traffic during the local breaks during drive time.  This morning I heard her reporting on the State of the Union address.  In this report she made reference the problems the President saw with Social Security and that he proposed "personal accounts" as part of the solution.

It made me mad and sad so when I got home I shot off an email to my friend.

No, this isn't as silly as it sounds (one hopes.)  I don't really want The Rude Pundit to run the DNC.  But I do want the Chair of the DNC to be somebody who reads it once a day.  Why is below the fold.

(Two disclaimers: There's plenty below to get offended about if you're looking to be offended and The Rude Pundit is really Joe Biden and he found a way to get me half a million in taxpayer dollars to plug his rinky dink Batman website and if you don't like it you can lick the swass outta my taint.)

(Probably bad form but it sank like a stone last night.  Sue me or rate me down if this is too too tres gauche!  Either way I'll let it die after the single repeat, I swear.)

I've seen a solid two years (at least!) of speculation and hand-wringing that while the conservatives are willing to flog seven different Constitutional amendments as wedges that they have no intention of seeing through (and that have no chance in hell of being passed either way) we have nothing.

Well we can have one if we want it.  And it's a doozy.  Below the fold is where it lies and I'll concede that from a reality-based vantage point it sure looks silly, frivolous and doomed.

Sounds like a successful amendment wedge to me!

I've seen a solid two years (at least!) of speculation and hand-wringing that while the conservatives are willing to flog seven different Constitutional amendments as wedges that they have no intention of seeing through (and that have no chance in hell of being passed either way) we have nothing.

Well we can have one if we want it.  And it's a doozy.  Below the fold is where it lies and I'll concede that from a reality-based vantage point it sure looks silly, frivolous and doomed.

Sounds like a successful amendment wedge to me!

Pretty basic here.  No links, no snark.  Just a question.  Can we as private citizens legally follow our vote, see where it goes from polling place to tabluation?  If not, it could only benefit us to make the responsible entities say out loud why we can't or why only the officially sanctioned can.

 

My wife and I are proud liberals.  We are moving our family.  To Canada. I have wanted to for at least a couple of years and would still want to regardless of how the election fraud November 2nd turned out.  In other words the Bush administration has very little bearing on my decision (although in the spirit of full disclosure the second Presidential debate was the tipping point for my wife.)  Southwestern British Columbia seems an appealing place to live for many reasons -- simply: I have found a nice place where we would like to live.

Putting this plan into motion I assumed I would be the butt of much derision from Conservatives while we got all our ducks in a row for the move, which I expect to take 2-3 years.  You know the tune; typical gutless liberal hippy running away just because you lost an election, etc.

What I was not expecting was the preemptive ganging on from my fellow liberals.