Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Yet Another Poem: penumbra

"penumbra"

whoever has eyes

glistening when immersed with light

steps crossing every path taken

one by one sounds and sights cascade

whoever has ears

echoing the vibrations of a multitude

voicing the interactions

in every wave of reaction

voicing the interpretations

let them see

each discordant note

recording the interdependence

conducting all perceptions through all others

conceive mere chaos

set movement into motion

let them hear

each particle drifting

diverse elements colliding

matters become but do not remain solid

understandings comprehend the mixture

underpinning every formed perception

lies among infinite shadowy traces

Friday, October 2, 2009

Another New Poem: sacrament

"sacrament"

breaking this body

I've dared to share

all vulnerabilities align

far better possibilities

allow chance

to overcome paralyzing insecurity

overwhelming my body

crying out for acceptance

expecting honesty

the highest form of intimacy

destroying the exterior

pulses of sensation

never feeling but merely felt

dejected ignored desperations

signify the only solution

beginning when you embrace

each mangled tinge of doubt

this in the remembrance of me

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Glenn Beck Gets Owned

"Honestly Glenn, I can think of plenty of things to fill the void of hate and fear left by religion in this country."



By the way, have a fantastic International Blasphemy Day! This entry is dedicated to all those who strive to ensure and protect free speech and free criticism of ideas everywhere.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Two Brand New Poems

I have composed two poems in the past week which I believe some of my readers may enjoy.


blank

the expression in your face

innumerable complexities comply

in the inherent order of systems

unknown to unsophisticated observers

reflecting upon the impossible

probabilities begin to resolve

understandings between us deflected

beyond the level of first impressions

dictate confusion and deception of appearances

consist of mere summations

present that which cannot be reconciled

acknowledged unrevealed depth

lurking near every thing formed

in ignorance which cannot contemplate

the feelings residing there




shattered

what frame can possibly support

the structure of narratives

society envisioned

individual interactions

never cease mingling

I may never stand out

of the way of contemplation

let alone

by my own perspectives

hesitate to be assimilated

by the viewpoints created

through our collective minds

enslaved to a reality

brought forth under subversive thoughts

propose demolitions of all windows

smashed and broken misconceptions

replaced the caresses

falling toward those who are willing

to follow the leap of imagination

bursting through the only obstacle

remaining is not breaking free



I'd really appreciate any constructive feedback you may have. Thanks!

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Lyrical Life: Dialogue

I'd like to share with you the lyrics from Part I of the song Dialogue by the band Chicago. This song was originally written in 1972, but the lyrics are still as fresh and relevant as ever:

"Are you optimistic, about the way that things are goin'?"

"No, I never, ever think of it at all."

"Don't you ever worry when you see what's goin' down?"

"Well, I'm tryin' to mind my business; that is no business at all."

"When it's time to function, as a feelin' human being, will your Bachelor of Arts help you get by?"

"I hope to study further, a few more years or so; I also hope to keep a steady high - woo, yeah, yeah."

"Will you try to change things - use the power that you have? The power of a million new ideas?"

"What is this power you speak of, and the need for things to change? I always thought that everything was fine - everything is fine."

"Don't you feel repression, just closing in around?"

"No, the campus here is very, very free."

"Don't it make you angry where war is draggin' on?"

"Well, I hope the President knows what he's into - I don't know. Whoo, I just don't know."

"Don't you see starvation, in the city where you live? All the needless hunger, all the needless pain?"

"I haven't been there lately - the country is so fine. My neighbors don't seem hungry 'cause they haven't got the time - haven't got the time."

"Thank you for your talk - you know, you really eased my mind. I was troubled by the shapes of things to come."

"Well, if you had my outlook, your feelings would be numb. You'd always think that everything was fine - everything was fine."

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

The Politics of Fear and Ignorance: Legacy of George W. Bush

I remember for the last eight years, I always questioned everything that President Bush did. Now I begin to notice how President Obama is also being questioned...however, maybe I am misguided here, but it seems that a lot of things that Bush was criticized for...I don't know...actually happened?

So healthcare is a secret plan to take away our guns? Of course, I remember those who suggested that Iraq was a secret plan to take away their oil, so I am not blind to the crazy partisan rhetoric on the left. Of course, I'm still not sure why we went into Iraq...

It seems plausible to me to say that Obama's plan is inefficient, to say that it's expensive, to say that it's wasteful, to say that it favors corporations over the rest of the country...I may not agree with those points, but those are constructive criticisms. To say that, however, Obama has ulterior motives that he is hiding, is a bit paranoid, I think. Further, where is the evidence? When has Obama said that he has a revulsion for guns? Has he done anything yet in his administration against firearms? What is the reasoning behind these fears?

People believe all kinds of crazy things, so I am not that surprised. We've got people who believe the U.S. government directly caused 9/11, people who believe that Obama was born in Kenya, people who think the moon landings were a fake, people who think the biological diversity of our planet can be crammed into the last few thousand years, people who think Obama is indoctrinating children with the same kind of speech that Bush 41 and Reagan made, and many other strange and unusual things.

America is a funny country. If you beat prisoners, you get off scot-free (see Abu Ghraib). But if you beat dogs, you get to go to prison (see Michael Vick). Do we really believe that dogs are more important than people who live in other countries?

And do you remember the gospel story where the Samaritan women asks Jesus to help her, and he says that he is only there for the chosen, and then the foreign woman pleads with him for a scrap from the table which even the dogs would eat? Can we not spare a table scrap of mercy and justice for the other human beings with which we share this planet?

Sometimes, it seems like America is obsessed with "the other". Barack Obama is "the other". People who live in cities are "the other". People who are Muslim are "the other". People who live in other countries are "the other". People who are gay are "the other". People who are intellectuals are "the other". What happened to give me your tired, give me your poor, give me your huddled masses, yearning to break free?

And yet I remember the American heritage of anti-immigrant sentiment. We hated the Irish, and we hated the Chinese, and hated the Eastern European, and made laws to limit the number of people from these groups who could immigrate to the United States. We interned thousands of innocent Japanese civilians during WWII because we were afraid of them.

America has been afraid for far too long. There is too much fear in America.

George W. Bush played on the public's fears, with his Orange Alerts and his war peddling (weapons of mass propaganda??) and his "Axis of Evil" rhetorical ploys, and this is his legacy: the political discourse in America continues to be poisoned with insecurity, anxiety, and blame.

I once thought that Barack Obama could be the kind of President to stand above all this, to inspire our country and renew our confidence and optimism, to lead with intelligence and vigor and honesty, to move our country in a more open and less fearful direction. Now I am not so sure.

Monday, August 31, 2009

The Challenge of Human Thinking

Does society allow those with depression to properly heal themselves?

I think about all the Van Gogh's and Hemingway's of the world. Too often, we're not expected to worry about ourselves, but rather we're expected to conform to the pre-existing patterns, expectations, and stereotypes of our individual cultures.

I believe that part of what's lacking is an understanding that society benefits from an improvement in the individual composition of its members.

The proverb "charity begins at home" sort of sums up my larger idea. We can't help others until we help ourselves; we can't take good care of anyone else unless we can also take good care of ourselves.

Sometimes, it's hard to focus on the more abstract parts of our lives, and society often makes it difficult for us to do that, but I think those who are able (and have the leisure) to do this, provide a great benefit to everyone else through practical innovation and cultural benefits.

Just as society is basically a bunch of individuals, I think it reflects the judgments of each individual human being. As each human is pretty bad at thinking about anything but immediate and short-term causes and effects, society as a whole shares this same blindspot.

I think it is the duty of every generation to spend some effort contemplating "unconventional wisdom". I believe that we need the status quo to retain the efficiency of past generations, but I also believe that we need modification to improve the efficiency of the status quo. Someone has to knock down and rebuild or shift the partitions of human thinking to renovate and expand the library of human knowledge.

I relish living in a time during human history when innovation and creative thought are held in relatively high esteem.

Almost every successful leader in history that has made a profound impact on the world, has made their mark by seizing the inherent optimism and hope of human beings and then harnessing their combined faith to build new and remarkable institutions and empires. How much has the depression of a leader such as Abraham Lincoln contributed to the course of history? His melancholy may have helped save the Union, and given him empathy to hold together a fragile republic during a time of chaos.

It is up to us to recognize the impact that history and science have on the events which are unfolding now so that we can improve our lot. That's what a leader does. And yet, intellectualism is a crime and ignorance is a virtue in modern American politics. I am depressed already.

Sunday, August 30, 2009

Depression: Adaptation or Malfunction?

This article from Scientific American suggests that depression may play a different role in human behavior than had been previously imagined.

I found this article to be both intriguing and quite fascinating. Please read it for yourselves, and let me know your thoughts.

Monday, August 17, 2009

Why I Love Rocky (Embracing Desperation Part Two)

Sylvester Stallone's film Rocky is an American classic, and I must profess my admiration of the title character, Rocky.

Rocky is a boxer down on his luck, who comes out of nowhere to make an appearance in a title bout with champion Apollo Creed.

Americans have long embraced the underdog, but that is not the only reason I identify with Rocky.

Rocky is a somewhat stereotypical boxing/sports flick, but Rocky the character has great lines.

"Why are you a fighter?" "Because I can't sing or dance."

So many of us are terribly repressed and insecure. So many of us are moody and lack confidence. So many of us are too withdrawn and shy and think we've got nothing to say to anyone.

I have a lyric for everything. I think music is a proxy for the irritation of being alone with my own personality. My life feels like a Jackson Pollack painting. I'm just pouring everything out and letting everyone else say what it means, and I'm not really sure that it even means anything at all.

I emphatically agree with Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young that "fear is the lock and laughter the key" to the heart. I really do believe that.

There are so many people that are paralyzed by fear. Am I one of them?

There are so many people that wish not to be alone.

That's what Rocky wishes.

I love what he says to Adrian:

"I always knew you were beautiful."

That's how I feel - about everything, about the absurdity and uncertainty of my life and my existence, and my pursuit and perseverance not only of it, but in it.

Why do I persevere? To prove I'm no chump, just like Rocky. Rocky's not paralyzed by fear, even though he's terribly insecure. He just keeps on fighting.

"When the truth is found to be lies, and all the joy within you dies, don't you want somebody to love? Don't you need to somebody to love? Wouldn't you love somebody to love? You better find somebody to love."

Great Jefferson Airplane lyrics, there.

Fear and lust, there they are again. I wrote about those two things on this blog many months ago, and still those two specters pop up yet once again in my thoughts. Is this all there is to existence? Embracing desperation, indeed.

And that's what Rocky does. And that is why I love him.

He embraces desperation. He has no chance with Adrian, no chance against Apollo Creed, no way to make it in this world -- and what does he do?

He's desperate, so he keeps going anyway. I love Rocky.

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

Embracing Desperation

“Most men lead lives of quiet desperation,” - Thoreau.

Why do people lead lives of desperation? What are we desperate for? What do we want? What are our desires?

I think our desires, I think our desperations, give us a reason to live. I think if you cultivate that desperation, if you manage it and direct it, it will become productive.

I think our society overwhelms us with cheap antidotes to our desperation that are not worth the price. I think we sacrifice too much of our long term potential for short-term gratification.

I think we should acknowledge freely that much of our lives is spent in a state of desperation, but I think this desperation, this longing, can lead us to produce acts of beauty and kindness.

I think this desperation can leads us to be empathetic. It can also lead us to be single-minded and selfish.

We are nearly always desperate: so what are we going to do about it?

I think society refuses to acknowledge our desperation. It doesn’t sell. It’s not glamorous.

It’s been said that the truth will set you free. Perhaps, but more likely: the truth will set you adrift. But is that such a bad thing - isn’t that what freedom means? Isn’t that what freedom is – bearing some responsibility to set your own course?

Our desperation is our reason for being. Our quest for truth is our reason for knowledge: its absence compels us to find it.

When we don’t have something, that’s when we want it. If we never lacked, we would never have the joy of finding anything. Of course, if we never lacked, maybe we would have a different joy. It all depends upon whether we can appreciate what we have and where we are. If we didn’t lack, but could still appreciate our condition somehow, I don’t think we would be worse off.

Yes, we’re so desperate and gullible and afraid. That’s why advertising and propaganda succeed.

Yet it brings us together, and it tears us apart. We’re all desperate and gullible and afraid.

We all lack – we all find. It brings us together.

Quiet desperation is chronically undervalued – it’s used as a slur. It’s used as the symbol of the mid-life crisis. Life is crisis – life is change – life is transience. Why can’t we recognize and accept this?

We should accept nothing less than lives of quiet desperation.

Desperation is the basis for action – I think Thoreau wants us to be active. I don’t think he’s maligning the act of desperation so much as he is saying that it is not all that is necessary – that there is more to it than that.

If all we did was stay in the state of desperation, we will fail. That is what I believe he is trying to say, and I agree with that.

We can’t just experience desperation; we’ve also got to act. But our desperation can serve as our foundation for our actions.

But what kind of foundation are we building? Exactly what do we desire and why?

Most of our lives are not built on a strong foundation. What kind of desperation are we dealing with?

There are many corrosive desperations: fear and paranoia abound.

You can never be sure where you are. Sometimes, you do something with the best of intentions and it turns out horribly wrong.

If we never think about our desperations, and we leave them alone, then everything else that we do will be worse, because our desperations are what lie at the beginning of everything. We must check ourselves and our desperations because they are the foundation of everything we do.

We must ensure that our desperation is used for the benefit of others and not for ourselves alone.

Monday, June 29, 2009

The Politics of Attitude

You don't like it - you frown on it. Whenever it is mentioned, you have a visceral distaste. Many would say that you're unnecessarily critical of something that almost everyone finds useful, and that many people find essential. In fact, if it didn't exist, a lot of us wouldn't be here.

What am I talking about?

Sex?

Guns?

The answer is: both.

It seems that a lot of people have a very strong opposition to the idea of guns, or to the idea of sex, and tend to overlook situations where each could play a positive influence. There are a lot of people who take extreme positions against guns and against sex in both parties. It's time that we had a realistic, responsible, mature attitude about these things: as a country, we should realize that there are proper and safe ways to use and enjoy both items I have mentioned.

However, some folks are just doggedly determined to oppose both wherever they appear.

We don't need to abhor sex, or guns: we don't need to control them, we need to promote safe behaviors and encourage learning so that when people use these things, they'll know what they're doing.

For those who are reticent to approve of sex education: would you leave a loaded gun lying around your house, especially if you had children who knew nothing about firearms?

Of course not - that would be negligent.

Some people don't like guns - some people don't like sex very much, either. Fine. That's your personal preference, and you have the right as an American to have that preference. But don't impose your morality on me just because you are disgusted by other citizens' affinity for either quantity.

Our guiding principle should be that as long as the public safety and welfare is not infringed, individual liberty should be protected. That should be something to which everyone can consent.

Monday, June 15, 2009

We Aren't Special

As members of humanity, as citizens of this planet, we really do need to just get over ourselves.

When Newt Gingrich proudly stands and says, "I am not a citizen of the world", what does he think he means?

Where was Newt's car manufactured? Where did his clothes come from? Where does his food come from? Where do his beliefs come from? Everything that makes Newt, Newt, is inextricably linked to all of the other human beings on this planet.

Each and every one of us is a citizen of this world.

We inhabit this fragile, precarious global civilization - our hopes, our dreams, and our futures are intermingled and intertwined, for better or worse, with all of the other frightened, nervous wrecks who call this planet Home.

What we do affects everyone - what everyone else does affects us.

Americans tend to be a lot like the famous character Alfred E. Newman who starred for so many years in the magazine Mad.

"What, me worry?"

I give President Bush credit for good things that he did - AIDS funding in Africa being a prime example.

But there are too many members of his party that just don't give a damn about what happens in other countries.

We have heard for the last eight years (ever since 9/11) how much of a threat Iran could be. Bush listed Iran as one of the three "Axis of Evil" nations along with Iraq and North Korea.

We have heard about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad since he became President of Iran four years ago. We have heard about his threats against Israel and his denial of the Holocaust. We have heard about his advocacy of programs to develop nuclear technology.

Recently, we heard about the upcoming elections in Iran, where Mousavi challenged Ahmadinejad. Then we heard the reports that Ahmadinejad had "won" re-election.

But what have we heard since?

American news coverage of the resultant protests in Iran has been curiously silent.

All we hear about is what may threaten us - but when the Iranian people stand up for themselves, we don't hear about it.

And why haven't we heard about it?

Could it be because too many Americans are not "citizens of the world" and that news networks believed that Americans wouldn't be interested in the story?

A definitive answer may not be forthcoming - but this is at least one example of how detached many Americans are from the events which transpire in other countries.

People call Americans arrogant. Maybe the shoe fits?

We could do better by asking the shoe thrower.

Strict Interpretation?

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

Is it curious that some argue that strict constructionism be applied in the interpretation of the First Amendment, but not for the Second Amendment? And is it not also curious that some argue that strict constructionism be applied to the interpretation of the Second Amendment, but not for the First Amendment?

The NRA would likely contend that the 2nd Amendment extends thoroughly to individual rights. Many gun control advocates reply that the Amendment is really meant just for the more limited sense of a "well regulated Militia".

Many conservatives have argued that the 1st Amendment is more limited - Congress is only prohibited from establishing any one kind of religion, not prevented from establishing religious influence in general. Yet many others would reply that the 1st Amendment is really meant to protect all other kinds of individual rights in a broader sense of application.

So, those who argue that the 2nd Amendment should be applied broadly to individual rights, but not the 1st Amendment, why so? Also, those who argue that the 1st Amendment should be applied broadly to individual rights, but not the 2nd Amendment, why so?

I am not declaring or asserting that it is impossible to make such a justification - I just find it rather curious to seize onto a strict constructionism in one instance and seemingly abandon the same stance in another comparable instance.

Above all, please show your work. Thank you!

Sunday, June 14, 2009

What Do We Want From Politicians?

I hope that this entry does not read as a rant, and that impression is not intended -- but if that is the impression that is perceived, please consider that I have given fair warning from the beginning.

What does American society demand from the individuals who aspire to hold the most powerful executive office in the country, the Presidency of the United States?

Many attributes are sought in a capable executive - as a leader of America's bureaucracy, as the commander of the military, and as the foremost of our diplomats, enormous levels of skill, experience, and ingenuity are required.

However, many Americans seem to care mainly about things which I charitably define as "extraneous".

No, I don't want a President I would feel comfortable having a beer with.

We admire Lincoln because of his sober decision-making. In fact, he was a teetotaler.

Not that there's anything wrong with drinking -- but there's nothing wrong with refrain or sober responsibility, either.

I find it absurd and insulting that candidates like Hillary Clinton felt that they had to drink shots with "the people" in places like Crown Point, Indiana so they could be perceived as a "regular gal" or a "regular guy".

There are rituals which candidates must undergo perpetually -- certain constituencies, more powerful than others, must be appeased. These shamans of popular faith control the bedrock values of our society...

But I'm not talking about Rick Warren. I'm talking about Ellen DeGeneres, I'm talking about Oprah, and I'm talking about Larry King.

If we focused more on the candidates' qualifications and less on their dancing skills, I think this would be a better country for all of us, propelled by a more informed and cautious citizenry.

Now, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with Ellen, or Oprah, or Larry King, or even Rick Warren, that is inherently bad.

I just believe that politics is not the ideal territory of popular culture - or maybe I just resent the dancing.

Friday, June 5, 2009

Empathy for Conservatives/Our Shifting Moral Values

I have been thinking about the differences between how liberals and conservatives tend to perceive the world recently.

I have made a realization which has given me increased empathy for conservatives.

What will society be like in 100 years? 50 years? 20 years? What difficult and thorny ethical questions will arise due to new technology unveiled within the next few decades or centuries?

New advances in technology can be scary stuff, raising difficult ethical questions. I thought about how I would feel in a future society...how afraid I would be if I thought that the moral paradigm and the traditions of my society were eroding and deteriorating before my eyes.

And that is when a powerful observation struck me: this fear of erosion and deterioration may just be exactly how many conservatives feel today.

I now understand why people would be afraid of changes in society which could possibly be unnerving and apprehension-inducing.

The struggle that we all share is navigating a course between tradition and modernity. This, I believe, is the great moral struggle of every generation of humanity.

We have struggled to define our moral values in each civilization, in each society, and in each generation of human history. We witness this phenomena in the movement to end slavery, the 20th century civil rights movement, the gay rights movement, the controversy over abortion, the controversy over the death penalty (and which forms of execution are cruel or unusual and who should be executed or not), the struggle over gun control, the struggle over communism, the struggle over fascism, and the clash of other religious and political ideologies.

What is morality? What defines when an act is moral? Who defines it? Conservatives and liberals are largely answering the same questions -- they just tend to seek the answers in differing places.

We have a changing moral paradigm. Some people would deny this, but I contend that I have presented enough evidence to confirm this phenomenon's occurrence.

Conservatives and liberals tend to argue over which course to follow on the continually revising moral paradigms of human history. Conservatives seem to be largely guided by "tradition"; liberals seem to be largely guided by "modernity". Neither of these concepts is particularly well-defined; both seem quite nebulous. Neither concept seems to be a clear or resolute guide for future action; neither concept is fully coherent. Both ideas seem equally capable of badly misleading our decision-making. I do believe that over-adherence to either idea will produce disaster.

What is tradition? Yes, we learn from our mistakes, and we have derived ideas and beliefs to help us avoid them. I admire conservatism for trying to preserve our heritage of knowledge and experience and hedging against futile attempts to subvert our best practices. However, since our environment is continually shifting and evolving, there are many occasions where we find ourselves in need of new and inventive approaches for a changing world. I admire liberalism because I believe this way of thinking provides the capability to arrive at such bold solutions.

I must admit, conservatism is awfully appealing to me at times. I like the notion of sticking with tested and broken-in ideas over radical departures from known strategies. I am an incremental thinker; I have never been good at "out-of-the-box" thinking. When I make decisions, I try to build upon the best information that I have. Before I will try a new approach, I tend to re-try older approaches first to see if they work better. I tend to avoid risk in my personal life.

So why am I more liberal than conservative? I don't know for sure. Perhaps it is a function of when I grew into politics. I believe in change. I believe that we have adhered too much to tradition, and that we need new ways of thinking. The way we treat the environment, the way we treat minorities and the poor, the way we treat foreigners, the way we treat homosexuals -- the traditional approaches are not good enough for me. I want to go in another direction.

I have empathy for conservatives, but it has been apparent to me for many years that our country needs to travel in another direction. There are many policies which the Democrats espouse about which I am either ambivalent or with which I disagree. I do not know whether Obama's economic policies are sound. I am, as I have been for most of my life, largely ambivalent about the abortion debate, embracing neither the strong pro-choice nor the strong pro-life position. I wish that the Democrats would move faster and more radically on healthcare and gay rights.

The battles of the future will define and guide our moral values, just as they have in the past. I eagerly await further full and vigorous participation in the debates to come.

Monday, May 25, 2009

On Perpetual Fear

I have been pondering human emotion lately. I think the main two emotions which predominantly motivate humans are fear and lust.

I am thankful for both. If not for the intervention of these two things, I may not exist.

However, it seems apparent to me that our society relies too much upon fear.

When people who are afraid, follow those who wield fear, and use fear to convince others to join them, then I also become afraid.

No one should have to live in perpetual fear.

Society generally expects parents to be loving to their children. I agree that a moderate dose of respect for parents and authority figures, which could be also called fear, is healthy. However, if I only do something because I fear someone, then I believe that I am acting for the wrong reasons. If parents create an environment where their children are perpetually terrified of them, then most authorities would label that to be psychological child abuse.

No one should live in perpetual fear.

We inhabit a vast, exciting world with a multitude of opportunities and diversions. As an American, I am fortunate to live in a country where I have the opportunities and rights to pursue my ambitions and goals...I am thankful for the commitments of those who have sacrificed on this Memorial Day holiday. I am thankful to those who sacrificed so that I would not have to live in perpetual fear of an earthly dictator.

What a strange and terrifying, but eerily wonderful world we inhabit.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Michael Steele is Not Very Bright

Current National Chairman of the Republican Party, Michael Steele, threated Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter after he voted for the stimulus funding a few months ago.

Steele tried to warn Specter that the party would withdraw support from Specter if he did not tow the party line. Insurgent conservative candidate Pat Toomey threatened to unseat Specter in the Republican primary in 2010.

Now Arlen Specter is a Democrat!

Steele's cajoling has backfired. Terribly.

I am reviving this blog (for now) to state for the record just how amazed I am at the sheer incompetency of Michael Steele and his organization.

Thanks for the filibuster-busting 60th vote in the Senate, man! We Democrats really appreciate the help!