Politics
Mocket Research: Reasons for purchasing Sarah Palin’s new book
Nov 25th
[among those buying "Going Rogue" (Q11=1)]
Q12a. What was your primary reason for buying this book? (please select one response)
- 27% Looking for the tough cliches the MSM doesn’t want you to read
- 13% Cutting out photos to spruce up tattered Anita Bryant calendar
- 10% Researching next Russian history term paper
- 8% Nervously searching for veiled personal threats
- 6% Hoping to find definitive spelling of “youbetcha” to settle Scrabble argument
- 6% Able to exchange unread copy of “Faith of My Fathers” for Palin credit
- 5% Saving $99,971 in speaker fees for my trade group
- 5% Learning tips on how to score with professional snowmobile racers
- 5% Delighted to find folksy frontier wisdom printed on something besides beaver pelts
- 4% Mistaken for Tina Fey’s SNL tell-all
- 4% Throwing the bums in DC out, one revenge book at a time
- 3% Protecting our Constitutional rights to buy shit we don’t need
- 2% (Various chants / slogans ending in exclamation points)
- 2% Don’t Know
[among those not buying "Going Rogue" (Q11=2)]
Q12b. What was the primary reason you decided not to buy this book? (please select one reponse)
- 30% Not fully vetted by Oprah’s book club
- 14% Fully expect MoveOn.org to email line-by-line quotes from now until 2012
- 11% Following Sarah’s lead to be well read by avoiding reading
- 9% Waiting for the movie … not the porno, but the other “Going Rogue” movie
- 7% No index, no ego browsing, no dice
- 5% There can be only one “Maverick,” and Tom Cruise had me at Top Gun
- 5% Holding out for a REALLY batshit crazy governor’s memoir from Blago
- 4% Reading a political autobiography feels dangerously like becoming informed
- 4% Already sold out at my compound
- 3% Currently outsourcing all my reading to India
- 3% Jealous that another pretty conservative is more popular than Noam Chomsky
- 2% Book sales are for closers!
- 2% (Various expressions of solidarity with wolves)
- 1% Don’t Know
open letter to the city council
Nov 16th
This Thursday, the Austin City Council will vote on whether to approve a change in zoning for the Spring Condominiums at 3rd and Bowie. This blatant display of favoritism and developer welfare has moved me to a rare public statement of protest. I sent the following letter to the Mayor and Council members. You can voice your opinion (on this or any subject) here.
Honorable Mayor and Council members,
I wish to voice my extreme disapproval of the Spring project, and encourage you not to subject Austin to such a poorly-conceived and inappropriate response to the important issues of growth and densification.
Briefly, my concerns are this:
* The Spring is an inequitable project. Granting a massive windfall to one development group is patently unfair to every other group who attempts to develop projects in the DMU, or under any other zoning for that matter. It is also unfair to local residents who have made personal and financial decisions about living in the area based on the presumed zoning limitations of nearby structures.
* The Spring is a misdirected application of density. While it does add residential options to a (relatively) central location, it creates an island of density surrounded by neighborhoods, parks, and low-density businesses. The city should be emphasizing such developments in areas that offer the greatest promise and synergy with density: the CBD. The Spring is essentially a “mini-sprawl” development that hinders rather than helps develop a concentrated living area around shopping, public transportation, and services.
* The Spring subverts the entire planning process. Planting a skyscraper in the middle of the DMU promotes confusion by sending the message that zoning doesn’t matter. Requests for DMU zoning are bound to crop up in the surrounding areas in the hopes that each one will be next to win the skyscraper lottery.
* The benefits of the Spring can be better derived from better projects. Density, affordability, taxable revenue: all these claims are tangential to the project. There is plenty of land that is already zoned for equal or greater density in the CBD. It is unclear how affordable the Spring will be for how many locals, but the city has other avenues to create truly affordable housing (if it chooses). And while the Spring land value would certainly be increased by this decision, will the revenues offset the increase in congestion, infrastructure and services created from its existence?
* The Spring is … well … ugly. Austin’s skyline is defined by the Capitol and the UT Tower. We can take pride in a city that grows up and evolves around these landmarks. But now we’re looking at the prospect of a bare skyscraper with no visually comparable buildings nearby, sullying the lakefront no less. This is an eyesore and a joke waiting to happen, and I am saddened that I might have to look at this every time I run along Town Lake or walk downtown (which is often).
I will be present Thursday to speak against this project, and hope that you hear the valid concerns that myself and other constituents bring forth.
Respectfully,
waePoint
open letter to the Texas House
Apr 1st
Texas State Rep. Bob Griggs (Dist. 91) has authored House Bill 1522, which effectively introduces lane-splitting to Texas. Lane splitting is currently only legal in California, where motorcycles are allowed to ride between cars in congested traffic. The Texas bill is fairly restrictive, only allowing bikes to split lates at 5 mph above traffic that is moving at 20 mph or less, but it still promotes motorcycle commuting. The bill is currently stalled in the Law Enforcement Committee, and may not see the light of the crowded legislative agenda. To help break up the log jam, I’ve sent the following email to the Law Enforcement Committee members:
Dear Rep. X,
I am writing to encourage your support for HB 1522. Lane splitting is an easy and cost-effective method for reducing congestion, pollution, and fuel consumption in Texas’ rapidly-growing urban areas.
Motorcycle sales are at a 25 year high, and bike commuting is an appealing alternative for constituents who are looking for relief from increasing fuel costs. Lane splitting would further encourage current and future riders to leave their cars at home during rush hour. For the Texas cities grappling with new road construction, it would benefit everyone to have fewer cars taking up more space on existing roadways.
If Texas could find a reason for effectively eliminating its helmet law, then surely it can also support a motorcycle freedom that promotes a demonstrable public good.
Thank you for your consideration,
WAEpoint
You can send a similar email by visiting the committee website. From there, you can click on each member and then send a form email through their profile page.
charlie don’t dope
Dec 5th
The hot stove league caught fire this week with Jason Giambi’s open admission and Barry Bond’s increasingly tenuous denial of steroid use. In leaked testimony reminiscent of Clintonian wrangling, Bonds admitted to a grand jury that he had used questionable substances without knowledge that they contained steroids. Verbal end-arounds might indefinitely cloud Bond’s individual guilt, but the current steroid controversy is merely the latest reminder that Major League Baseball is anything but innocent.
In fact, impurity is a proud part of the baseball tradition. The modern home run record was defined by a carousing drunk in the 20’s, only to be re-written (in pencil, hopefully) twice in the last five years by two guys filled with more juice than Orange Julius. Even forgetting drugs and alcohol, infamous icons abound in baseball. Ty Cobb led with his spikes and erupted in racist assaults. Shoeless Joe was embroiled in the Black Sox scandle to throw the 1919 World Series. And of course the modern baseball pariah, Pete Rose, bet on baseball while still in the Major Leagues.
In my opinion, Pete Rose is the greatest baseball player of all time. I like the way he played, becoming the ultimate blue-collar sports hero through drive and dedication as well as talent. While not the most gifted athlete, his longevity and accomplishments speak for themselves. But as a human being, Pete Rose is a hard-headed dolt with a haircut as bad as his lies. He has dodged culpability through half-hearted admissions and continues to push for reinstatement without addressing the gambling problem at the heart of his banishment. Rose’s forced exclusion from the Hall of Fame says that breaking rules is more significant than breaking records.
There’s no clear indication that the gambling exploits of Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe had any impact on their performance; theirs is a punishment based on principle. But anyone watching home run records falling at the feet of unnaturally pumped athletes cannot question that drugs have boosted performance and left an indelible imprint on baseball. And so the great irony in the steroid controversy is that Bond’s career will be honored because it flourished in benign collusion with a league that kept the steroids issue in the closet longer than Rock Hudson. If Bonds remains a first-vote shoo-in for the Hall of Fame, as most commentators assume he will, it says that breaking records is more significant than making rules.
This lack of stewardship is threatening to bring governmental involvement, because Tom Delay’s Congress has a surfeit of ethical wisdom to dispense on the subject of principled leadership. I couldn’t care less if the government decides to smack MLB down, although it might be fun to watch the spoiled millionaires in the clubhouse and owner’s box squirm under a brighter spotlight. All I ask is that baseball figure out what it wants to be. If it wants to serve up entertainment with a side-dish of moral casualness, then fine; let Barry hit his homers, but put Pete Rose in the Hall beside him. We’ll marvel at their accomplishments, and still get a good laugh out of Pete’s thinning crewcut and Barry’s impending man breasts at induction ceremonies for many years to come. On the other hand, if we’re to believe that baseball is an American institution worthy of respect and monopoly exemption status, then some shit better start hitting the fan, and quick. Baseball fans would love nothing more than to see Barry Bonds forcibly humbled, and the players who followed the rules deserve to have their deeds protected.
Given their past performance, however, the baseball leadership will probably come up with a cowardly and misdirected solution to this whole saga. Since he is unwilling to stand up to Don Fehr and the player’s union, Bud Selig might opt to revise past records in light of their uncompetitive anti-doping origin. As part of some “throwback weekend” ceremony, Bud could dictate that an asterisk be returned to Maris’ name, since his home run record was the only one earned without a foreign substance coursing through his veins. It would be business as usual in the ethical wasteland of Major League Baseball.
Downer Ballot
Nov 7th
Posted by wae in News
2 comments
It’s election day, so I’ve had one eye on the election coverage to see if W. gets the mid-term smackdown he has coming. Somewhat belatedly, I just finished Richard Clarke’s 9/11 tell-all “Against All Enemies,” sufficiently frothing my ire to vote against those who would sell a failed personal vendetta as successful counter-terrorism policy.
For better or worse, Lloyd Doggett has been un-re-gerrymandered back into my district (or is that vice versa?). Upside: I get to vote for a solid Dem that I like. Downside: No real Congressional protest vote for me. The best I could do was pee in Kay Bailey’s breezy sashay back to another Senate term.
Perhaps I’ll take some solace in the fact that my Governor will be elected with over half of the votes going against him. But it’s no real comfort to know that those anti-Perry votes either went to a bland sacrificial Democrat, a tactless and content-free independent, or a woman who changes her name and party affiliation more often than her hairstyle.
Otherwise, voting was little more than an excuse to spin the “hi-tech” dial across a slate of unchallenged judges and dubious bond propositions. A reminder, if ever one was needed, what a fragile
shamconstruct our hyper-segmented form of democracy truly is. I hardly think that a litany of unopposed races and ballot initiatives shielded behind trite marketing slogans matches the Founders’ vision of representative democracy.If my vote is my voice, today’s response to six years of deception and mediocrity should have been a scream of outrage blasted in the face of the crooked and complacent. But all they got was a hushed “you suck,” mumbled under my breath.
Update: At least some other parts of the country had the option to voice their dissent. Democracy does indeed require a perspective beyond your own ballot.