LEFT of the HUDSON: June 2008

LEFT of the HUDSON: June 2008

blogspot hit counter

Monday, June 30, 2008

Nyack Hospital says it will cut ER wait times

I have been to the Emergency Room at Nyack Hospital three times. Once I waited six hours, although I had a fever of 103 degrees and could barely walk. I also waited five hours with a torn cornea and three hours with an inner ear infection.

I'm not ranting against Nyack Hospital. I have gotten good care there and so have my children. I'm even scheduled to go under the knife there in the near future. The wait times for the ER, however, are just atrocious, as any nearby resident can tell you.

You'll just have to count me as one of the skeptics that things will improve, even after I read this today.

Nyack Hospital, Nyack, N.Y., has launched its Emergency Room 30-minute service standard to cut down on wait times in the ER.

The hospital redesigned the ER using innovative methodologies to improve patient flow.

A wireless medical record system was installed, enabling medical personnel to quickly access a patient's medical history and initiate treatment. Wait times are also posted on the hospital's website.

Patients can expect to have their medical care initiated within 30 minutes of arrival, provided by nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and physicians.

If the wait goes beyond this time frame, patients will receive a letter of apology and a gift certificate to a local shop.

I'm hoping that one of those shops is Sign of the Times on Main Street as they've got some cool buttons and bumper stickers there. However, I hope not to be using the Emergency Room there for any reason if I can help it, despite the wait times. My big question is: If you die while waiting past 30 minutes, does the price of your gift certificate increase and can your family get those benefits?

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Nyack's unsafe sidewalks

A letter to the editor in today's Journal News:

Another year has passed, and Nyack's sidewalks are still difficult to push a wheelchair around, which I've experienced personally many times. The residents of Nyack should bring this concern up at their next village board meeting. The majority of sidewalk ramps do not comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act code. The curb edgings on Nyack streets are an inch in height at most corners, and also it's very difficult to maneuver a wheelchair around Nyack - and that does not include the hazardous blocked sidewalks from dining tables on Main Street and Broadway on weekends.

Traversing down to Memorial Park, with no sidewalks, is another area of a "no pedestrian safe zone" where there's a constant fear of being hit by a passing speeding vehicle.
Advertisement

Another sidewalk hazard is from First Avenue to the end of Upper Nyack along Broadway, where overgrown tree branches are low and shrub edges have spread into the walking path of sidewalks. The hedges and shrubs should be no further than the sidewalk edge and tree branches should have a 7-foot clearance above the sidewalk.

Nyack village leaders should address these problems immediately.

The Village of Nyack must have millions of dollars in its treasury to give away for many potential sidewalk injury lawsuits; leaders show a lack of respect for the villagers' and visitors' safety!

Eric Santiago
Valley Cottage

My take is below the fold.

I can't say that I have the same problems as Mr. Santiago. I do, however, often walk from my home in South Nyack into Nyack and I often take different routes. There is a lot of broken pavement, disintegrating curbs, and blocked passageways.

I do find it ironic that Nyack, a village that has turned metered parking into an expensive game of "gotcha" with its visitors, is also so unfriendly to pedestrians, and especially handicapped people like Mr. Santiago and the young mother I saw the other day trying to maneuver a double stroller throughout downtown without waking her babies. (Unfortunately, one missing chunk of sidewalk on Piermont Ave. disrupted her babies' sleep and the peaceful walk she was having.)

You would think that with the muni-meters, the higher parking fees, and extraordinary parking fines, Nyack would have sidewalks paved with gold. But it appears that the village is sitting on the money, unwilling to spend it on the village's neighborhoods.

Before I moved into the area, I always thought that the Village of Nyack had a bit of a Bedford Falls quality to it, but these days I'm seeing it turn into Potterville.

Saturday, June 21, 2008

Julian opens campaign with a bang and challenges Morahan to break with Bruno on property taxes

Greg Julian, who only recently announced his candidacy for the New York State Senate in District 38 fired a loud opening salvo today in his campaign against Senator Thomas P. Morahan. Julian has backed Morahan into a corner by challenging the Republican incumbent to either side with strapped taxpayers or to continue to support State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno's blockage of tax-relief measures.

Just today, Julian sent the letter (below) directly to Morahan via e-mail. LEFT of the HUDSON obtained a copy of the e-mail and is posting here as an exclusive.

Dear Tom,

Once again, measures that are in the best interests of the people of the State of New York and the NY State Senate District that you and I will be competing for, are being prevented from passage, solely due to Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno's refusal to permit them to come to the floor for a vote.

I know that as a long time Republican, it is difficult for you to break with your leader, Mr. Bruno. This fact notwithstanding, I urge you to join me in publicly calling upon Mr. Bruno to permit the Governor's proposal for a Real Property Tax Cap to come to the floor of the NYS Senate for a vote, tomorrow. The people are suffering under the present tax system that you and your colleagues have permitted to exist for too long. It is time for change.

Sincerely,

Greg Julian

Good work, Greg. Does anyone want to make odds on the likelihood of a response from Morahan?

Barack Obama's disappointing statement on the new FISA bill

Here's an excerpt from Senator Obama's statement on the new FISA bill which passed the House yesterday and will likely pass the Senate. I received it via e-mail this morning:

After months of negotiation, the House today passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act.

Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future. It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses. But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.

It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives - and the liberty - of the American people.

My comments, which don't approve of Senator Obama's message, follow:

Despite what Senator Obama says, it will not be "over", it only become retroactively legal so that it such spying can continue. I would never think I would win in a battle parsing words in Senator Obama, but the only thing that will stop is the illegality of the actions of the Bush Administration and the telcos. The spying will continue as it has before, but Congress just put its seal of approval on it.

This unchecked spying, in the wrong hands, is still very dangerous. And I can see President Bush adding a little "signing statement" to it granting the Executive Branch even more powers (and then giggling about it like a schoolkid).

I don't trust Bush, I don't trust the Republicans, and I don't trust the Democratic Leadership Council with my Fourth Amendment rights. Past history shows that when these groups get together, there's always an ulterior motive behind any compromise that they work on. Between the DLC (whose members I don't even count as Democrats), the GOP, BushCo, and the lobbyists that wrote this bill, these people are proven to be the among biggest liars and backstabbers in Washington, DC.

One of the things that makes me a Democrat is my belief that our party is one that protects the rights of all individuals against the government and Senator Obama appears to be the candidate that best personifies that belief. Therefore, I am disappointed that he's willing to cave on this issue and now I feel my wholehearted support is just a bit tarnished.

I also believe that we can protect America while simultaneously upholding our core values and beliefs, and when reading this bill, it is quite evident that it compromises those beliefs and fails the Constitutional litmus test. Senator Obama, who has lectured Constitutional law at the University of Chicago, must know this, too.

And last, I don't think we should make the assumption that Senator Obama is going to win the White House. We should always prepare for the worst. In the wrong hands, this legislation remains a real threat to the Fourth Amendment protections against unwarranted search and seizure.

However, while Senator Obama's statement doesn't make me feel any better and this capitulation is a real letdown, I still support him for 100 percent for president over John McSame, who would use such legislation to unfair and inequitable ends, just like his Republican predecessor has done.

Cheers to the Rockland Legislature for passing the Nontoxic Landcape Maintenance Act

Rockland County, NY legislators passed a bill on June 17, 2008 to eliminate the use of toxic pesticides on all county-owned or leased land. Rose Marie Raccioppi, the community organizer behind the bill, is a member of Beyond Pesticides, the National Pesticide-Free Lawn Coalition, and Orangetown’s Environmental Committee. She brought her concerns about pesticide exposure to the Rockland County Legislature last year, and advocated strongly for the passage of the Rockland County Non-Toxic Landscape Maintenance Act.

LEFT of the HUDSON praises the County's legislators for passing this bill. The legislation was introduced by Legislator Connie Coker (D, District 17) of South Nyack.

We hope that the Rockland County Non-Toxic Landscape Maintenance Act, as it is called, will serve as a guide to our towns and school districts in adopting similar laws in regards to pesticide use. Further, we believe that New York State should change the current law on the books that does not allow the state's municipalities to enact legislation that regulates the use of pesticides on private land.

Passing such a law in the State Legislature would allow counties such as Rockland to ban the use of toxic pesticides altogether if they so choose. We need to protect our children and ourselves from the unseen neurological dangers that pesticides (and even some fertilizers) pose. We also need to protect our river, which becomes choked with pesticides and fertilizers from runoff.

While Rockland County still lacks the legal ability to regulate pesticide use on private land, this legislation serves as an example to the residents of the county, hopefully making them aware of their own lawn- and garden-care practices.

We're especially concerned with pesticides as of late because of possible evidence that it may have a role to play in Autism Spectrum Disorders.

Women who live near California farm fields sprayed with organochlorine pesticides may be more likely to give birth to children with autism, according to a study by state health officials to be published today.

The rate of autism among the children of 29 women who lived near the fields was extremely high, suggesting that exposure to the insecticides in the womb might have played a role. The study is the first to report a link between pesticides and the neurological disorder, which affects one in every 150 children.

The study does not indict pesticides as the cause of autism, but it does raise the suggestion that further studies are needed.

But, in the meantime, we all know that pesticides are nothing but poison, and that they can and have been proven to cause cancers, immunological disorders, and neurological problems.

Again, hats off to the Rockland County Legislature for doing the right thing!

Friday, June 20, 2008

Eliot Engel joins BushCo and telco lobbyists in spitting on the Fourth Amendment

Just a day after Congressional leaders introduced an outrageous measure to expand President Bush's authority to spy on Americans, Congressman Eliot Engel joined with a majority of Republicans and a minority of Democrats, mostly conservative Blue Dogs and members of the hawkish Democratic Leadership Council, in adopting the new FISA bill. The bill, if passed by the Senate will also give retroactive immunity to telephone communications companies for assisting the White House in illegally spying on its citizens.

The ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and other civil rights and privacy advocates are upset by the ramifications of such a measure, which was conjured up behind closed doors in negotiations among centrist Democrats, Republicans, the White House and telecommunications lobbyists.

And unfortunately for us, today's vote is the beginning of the end in the battle against the Bush's warrantless wiretapping program set in motion by the White House soon after 9/11. It also rips right into the Constitution, making a mockery of the Fourth Amendment, which protects United States citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The FISA bill compromise reached by the Democrats added language to provide for a "judicial review" of each case of unwarranted wiretapping and datamining by the telcos. But, the whole judicial review is a ruse. The review only entails the acceptance of a piece of paper from the Attorney General that says "it's okay if Verizon spys on these people because the president wants to spy on them and he says it is perfectly legal."

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Our rights, as citizens of this country, have been greatly diminished. Our conversations, our e-mails, our most personal correspondence can be sifted through by our government without just cause. This gives the Bush White House unfettered powers to go fishing to find information against its political enemies, whether or not they have just cause or there's even a suspicion of criminal wrongdoing.

Big Brother has arrived and his name is George W. Bush. Congressman Eliot Engel, along with 292 members of Congress, is an enabler of this monster who occupies the White House.

In all, 105 Democrats voted for the bill and this roster is almost identical to the DLC, the centrist nano-party in the Democratic Party that usually sides with the White House's failed foreign policy and national security policies. One-hundred-twenty-eight brave Democrats voted against it, and 3 did not vote.

Immunity for telcos that clandestinely helped the NSA in its warrantless wiretapping is an undermining of the rule of law and the privacy of every citizen and resident this country.

As far as Engel is concerned, there is a little question of his campaign donations from the same telcos who lobbied so strongly to pass this legislation. For the 2006 election year cycle, Verizon Communications was the largest corporate contributor to Congressman Engel's campaign at $32,000 (final numbers are not in for the current cycle, but I expect the Congressman to get a big pay raise). But preliminary numbers are in for the Communications/Electronic PACs for this cycle; they represented the interests of the telcos as lobbyists. They have been among Engel's largest contributors in this cycle at more than $26,000 in donations.

I see a little quid pro quo problem with our Congressman and once again, I think he's got a lot of explaining to do to his constituency when he returns this summer during recess. More and more evidence is surfacing that beyond some bread-and-butter populist issues to appease some Democrats, this Congressman is nothing more than a Democrat in Name Only.

The True Sad Story of the New York State Senate (Part 2)

Sorry for the delay in publishing this (yes, I know I promised this video two days ago).

Here's more from Brian Keeler on how the "three men in the room" process of government operates in New York State.

Do you think New York State operates as a representative Democracy? Think again.

After viewing this video, you should be as convinced as I am that we need drastic reform in Albany immediately and the only way to do that is to establish a Democratic majority in the State Senate.

Monday, June 16, 2008

The True Sad Story of the New York State Senate (Part 1)

This video was recently sent to me by a friend. The speaker is Brian Keeler, who was a Democratic State Senate candidate for the 41st Senate District in 2006. Keeler points out that it's "three men in a room" who really operate the New York State government. He also points out how the Senate members are not accountable to their constituents and how they can obfuscate their true political motives and intentions.

I highly recommend that you click and watch this video.

I'll publish Part 2 here tomorrow.

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Building an economy that works for all Americans

Senator Obama tackles a critical issue in this video.

There are many families that are doing everything right, they're working their fingers to the bone to pay their mortgage, taxes, groceries, utilities, and transportation costs and yet they're going bankrupt. Their not buying fancy clothes, expensive cars, and going on exotic vacations. And they're not saving for retirement or college.

The American dream has slipped away from the middle class.

What we have today is not an economy that works for all Americans; it only works for the richest Americans. Despite George W. Bush and John McCain telling us that the economy is strong, we know different as we continue to see our economic equity slip away.

American families cannot keep up to rapidly rising costs while real wages remain stagnant. It's time to redefine and reset the American economy.

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Could defending Hagee end up defining Eliot Engel's political career?

Ten years ago, the Reverend John Hagee said this in a sermon:

"A hunter is someone with a gun, and he forces you," Hagee said. "Hitler was a hunter. . . . How did it happen? Because God allowed it to happen. Why did it happen? Because God said, 'my top priority for the Jewish people is to get them to come back to the land of Israel.'"

There is an audio recording of a sermon of Hagee's called "The Final Dictator."

On March 16, 2003, on the eve of the United States' invasion of Iraq, Pastor John Hagee took to the pulpit to warn of the coming Antichrist. In his sermon, "The Final Dictator," Hagee described the Antichrist as a seductive figure with "fierce features." He will be "a blasphemer and a homosexual," the pastor announced. Then, Hagee boomed, "There's a phrase in Scripture used solely to identify the Jewish people. It suggests that this man [the Antichrist] is at least going to be partially Jewish, as was Adolph Hitler, as was Karl Marx."

And let's not forget Hagee's denunciation of the Roman Catholic Church as "the Great Whore," from the Book of Revelation.

And then there's his Christians United for Israel (CUFI) members. They'll be the first to tell you that they're only supporting the State of Israel because they believe it must exist in order for them to be Raptured. (Oh, and count Tom DeLay as one of those believers.)

So why did Eliot Engel, when attending events in Rockland County this past weekend, tell those who concerned and even outraged by this matter that he doesn't believe that Hagee has said these things? Why does he still call Hagee a "good friend of Israel?" Why does he also insist that CUFI is a friend of Israel and not acknowledge that the organization supports Israel solely based on their eschaton beliefs?

I frankly don't understand why Congresman Engel is denying the truth about Hagee and continues to support him. Is there some quid pro quo involved? Has AIPAC cornered Engel into this situation? I'd like to hear why it's so important for Engel to attend this conference.

It doesn't matter if you've got 6, 12, or 20 years underneath your belt as a Congressman; not being straightforward with your constituency and not recognizing their outrage does nothing more than breed an environment of distrust.

Congressman Engel has had a few weeks respond to the objections by his constituents to his scheduled July 22 appearance at the Christians United for Israel Summit and has yet to provide us with an adequate response. I fear that his continued support for CUFI will be one issue that his constituents will not forget.

A decision looms for the Tappan Zee crossing and it may be an epic mistake

The study into a possible replacement of the Tappan Zee Bridge is proceeding to the next step. A verdict is coming soon on what type of mass transportation will span the Hudson River. And the NYS Department of Transportation now says that it may be ready to start construction in a short four years, if all goes well. Now, what had seemed like a long, drawn out process, seems like it's being made in haste. Residents, politicians, and environmentalists on both sides of the river are not happy, and they seem especially upset on the Left of the Hudson.

Choosing which form of mass transit — bus, commuter or light rail or a combination — would best help alleviate the traffic that plagues the bridge and Interstate-287 is on tap first, transportation officials said. That decision is expected within weeks.

Some lawmakers, environmentalists and residents, however, said reaching such a verdict now would be premature.

Selecting a form of mass transit while even larger questions — including whether the bridge should be repaired or replaced — are looming could have damaging effects on the surrounding communities, critics said. They say no decision of this scope should be made without a comprehensive, regional environmental review that fully incorporates community concerns.

Addressing the project in stages would minimize its potential impact and could threaten public input by speeding up the process, critics said.

I also believe that we're at a crossroads in our nation's history in regards to energy and transportation. Four dollar a gallon gasoline may soon give way to $5, $6—and some analysts even say $12—very soon. And remember that as gasoline is part of the commodities market, other sources of energy, whether they be diesel oil, nuclear, coal will all more or less track the price of gasoline. And we are far away from developing any viable and inexpensive alternatives to oil to counteract an energy crisis.

The shortsighted assumption is that technology will progress and we'll start driving more fuel-efficient vehicles across the bridge. Another assumption, also short-sighted is that mass transportation will become increasingly popular as people from Rockland and Orange Counties continue to commute into Westchester and the city.

But those assumptions are based on past behavior and any decision that's made on mass transportation better be as viable of a decision in 50 years as it is today. There's no sense in being hobbled with a mass transportation system, whether it be rail, light rail, or bus rapid transit, that won't prove to be financially sound or convenient for generations to come.

It's not even a question of the fuels that we'll be using in the future; it's a question about how our lifestyles may change. For example, our energy choices may become a determining factor on where people live and how products are shipped.

Already, many employers are allowing for telecommuting or short workweeks. This is only the first step in a move away from the commuter lifestyle. It's reasonable to expect that employment choices in the future will be made with a stricter definition of what is a reasonable commuting distance.

Taking a job in New York City may not make as much sense as trying to find a job in Rockland or Bergen Counties. Commuters may see 25-mile commutes to be too expensive and unbearable and may either opt for the more local job or may even move to be close to their place of employment.

Also, long-distance commerce may have reached its apex. We are nearing a point where it becomes better for our local economies and even less expensive for consumers to buy goods and foods that are produced and grown regionally. As as far as long distance shipping is concerned, railways are becoming a much less expensive alternative to long-distance trucking and will soon become more efficient than air cargo.

Eventually, what we'll likely see is an entire redefinition of how we do business and how we live. You'll see municipalities with much better integrated local economies. You'll see whole industries die off while you'll see others emerge. You'll find some municipalities thrive while others become ghost towns as local employment will be the determining factor in the welfare of towns and cities. The day of the bedroom community has passed.

As far as mass transportation is concerned, who knows if we'll need a rail line to extend from Suffern to Port Chester? Who could possibly predict if there will be enough demand for a rail system to take commuters into New York City? There's no way that we can extrapolate today's commuting behavior into the future and any attempt to build any business corridors along a cross-Westchester rail line might just be stymied by local economies that have organically redefined themselves.

It doesn't take a soothsayer to predict that big changes are coming in the next decade, and they're not necessarily going to be centered on alternative, renewable, and less expensive forms of energy, they'll likely be focused on dealing with the realities of limited and expensive transportation. Way before the day we'll be driving hydrogen fuel-cell cars and riding in energy efficient trains and buses, there will be a natural—but significant—shift in our lifestyle priorities. These shifts will be global and will emerge without and despite progress in fuel and transportation technologies.

And considering the realistic and psychological three mile span of the Hudson, Rockland may be an early adapter in regards to this shift.

In addition to this, I think that there are many other good reasons to delay making this mass-transit decision so soon. And many are others are cited in today's New York Times article as being concerned:

Selecting a form of mass transit while even larger questions — including whether the bridge should be repaired or replaced — are looming could have damaging effects on the surrounding communities, critics said. They say no decision of this scope should be made without a comprehensive, regional environmental review that fully incorporates community concerns.

Addressing the project in stages would minimize its potential impact and could threaten public input by speeding up the process, critics said.

“All of us want to move forward,” said Assemblyman Adam Bradley, a Democrat from White Plains. “But the question isn’t whether we should move forward. The question is whether we should move forward in a way that allows for the rights we hold dear to us to be upheld.”

I agree wholeheartedly with those sentiments, however I think the grave uncertainty of a looming energy crisis is an even more compelling argument. We have to be forward-thinking when making this decision and we can't make it assuming that new energy technologies will minimize the impact of a major shift in our new economic priorities.

No matter what the recommendations of the State Department of Transportation will be, they will be premature. We cannot make many assumptions in preparing for the mass-transportation needs of a new or restored bridge.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

And we put these things next to our brains? UPDATE: Are the videos a hoax?

Watch these three unbelievable videos, below:

And people laugh at me for using my bluetooth headset with my mobile phone as much as possible. I still do not trust the safety of cellphones.

In the meantime, I'm going to try to make popcorn with my cellphones and see if it works for me.

UPDATE: Wired magazine's blog is claiming that these videos are a hoax.

The clever parlor trick looks amazing enough, but there's a hitch: It's not physically possible, according to University of Virginia physics professor Louis Bloomfield.

"[The videos] are cute," said Bloomfield in a phone conversation Monday. "But that's never gonna happen."

In a microwave oven, energy excites the water inside popcorn kernels until it turns into highly pressurized gas, causing the kernels to pop. If mobile phones emitted that much energy, the water in the fingers of people holding them would heat up.
"It would hurt like crazy," Bloomfield said. "Cellphones probably warm your tissues, but studies indicate that's not injurious."
Bloomfield, author of How Everything Works: Making Physics Out of the Ordinary, dismissed theories bubbling up in comment threads about the videos that suggest harmonious vibrations are heating the corn.

"Ringing the phones doesn't help because they're interfering with each other and receiving a signal [from a cellphone tower] -- not transmitting it," he said. Furthermore, while it is possible to heat with sound, it's not likely to happen at the low volume emitted by a mobile phone. "It would be like gathering opera singers together to sing, and trying to make the corn pop," Bloomfield said.

Sunday, June 8, 2008

The co-opting and misquoting of Susan B. Anthony

People who claim to be upset that the Democratic Party "appointed" Barack Obama are firing away on the blogosphere, wildly claiming that women's rights were violated. And self-righteous and self-serving bloggers, like Larry C. Johnson, try to give these claims some legitimacy.

You can't argue with rants; you cannot reason with those that are unreasonable, but you can point out their historical ignorance. And they've got a doozy of one right now; the current rally cry co-opts and misquotes the words of one of our greatest Americans.

From Larry C. Johnson's "No Quarter," this morning:

“No self respecting woman should wish or work for the success of a party that ignores her” -Susan B Anthony, 1872.

And it's not just on Johnson's blog you find this quote. Google it and you'll find it's moving rapidly across blogosphere. Problem is, Susan B. Anthony never said that!

This is what Susan B. Anthony said, and it was in regards to the women's suffrage movement:

I have not allied and shall not ally myself to any part or any measure save the one of justice and equality for women; but the time has come when I strike, and proclaim my contempt for the tricksters who put their political heel on the rights of women at the very moment when their help is most needed. I never, in my whole forty years’ work, so utterly repudiated any set of politicians as I do those Republicans of Kansas. When it is a mere matter of theory, a thousand miles from a practical question, they can resolve pretty words, but when the crucial moment comes they sacrifice us without conscience or honor. The hubbub with the Republicans show they have been struck in the right place. I was never surer of my position that no self-respecting woman would wish or work for the success of a party which ignores her political rights.

This quote comes from pg. 794 from the book, "The Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony," by Ida Husted Harper. It was published in 1898.

If you look at the full context of the quote—without it being co-opted and twisted—it speaks in regard of Anthony's work in the women's rights and suffrage movement and speaks directly at her personal experience with politicians who have tried to deny women their rights, specifically their right to vote.

Today, nobody in the Democratic Party is denying the right of women to vote, nobody in the party is trying to take away from individuals or groups of individuals—whether they be women or minorities—their Constitutional protection to vote. What happened in Michigan and in Florida were unfortunate events put in place by politicians long before Barack Obama was even considered to be making a serious vie for the nomination. This was an unfortunate game of chicken where the fat-cat politicians in two large states tried to deny the voters from 90 percent of the states in having a real say in the candidate that we picked as our nominee. In the end, more people voted, and more votes really mattered, than in any other presidential primary season that I can remember.

How would you feel if you were a woman in Oregon, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Illinois, North Carolina, etc., if the Democratic leaders of Michigan and Florida had gotten their way and had virtually ended the primary season in the first three weeks? How would you feel if you were a woman in New York and men like Carl Levin, Mark Brewer and Ken Pruitt (a Republican male nonetheless) had cancelled out your vote?

I made calls to Pennsylvania for Barack Obama. I talked to many woman who were excited that, for the first time in their lives, their votes counted. The Pennsylvania primary wasn't an afterthought for the first time in their memory. Some of these women never voted in primaries before because they felt they didn't matter. But they voted and they were counted.

The momentum created by having such a large amount of delegates already decided by Michigan and Florida would have virtually ended the primary season for all intents and purposes. But the DNC stopped Florida and Michigan, and in 45 other states, women's votes counted, because an early-January juggernaut didn't decide the nomination.

Again, what happened in Michigan and Florida was unfortunate and I hope it never happens again, but please, this was not an attempt to keep women from deciding these primary contests.

Susan B. Anthony, if she were alive today, would have been proud to see that more women had a chance to decide the Democratic nominee for President than ever before. And again, I believe that if she were here, she would have been right behind Hillary Clinton on that podium and she would endorse a politician that supports women's rights and back Barack Obama for the presidency.

Friday, June 6, 2008

Taking my "Democratic" Congressman out behind the woodshed

Don't roll your eyes.

This isn't just ANOTHER diary of mine complaining about Congressman Eliot Engel's involvement with Rev. John Hagee's Doomsday cult known as Christian's United for Israel. This is a blog about how I'm making Congressman Engel's life tough, and how I'm reminding him that his obligation to the Democratic Party and his constituents far outweigh any quid pro quo agreement he may have in speaking at this conference of war-mongering, anti-Catholic and anti-Semitic nutjobs.

I was frustrated yesterday morning. I had blogged about Engel's involvement with Rev. Hagee on The Albany Project and on my blog Left of the Hudson.

The blogs netted some results. A few local politicians quietly contacted Engel and asked him to drop his speaking engagement and a small group of his constituents complained to his office. Still, Engel was resolute-he was attending Rev. Hagee's conference in June.

Frustrated by a lack of results, I turned up the heat. Yesterday, I wrote a letter (quoted below) to my fellow Rockland County Committee members saying that I would not be carrying ballot petitions for Engel this summer. A large group of committee members are joining me. Then I sent my e-mail to Bronx and Westchester Democratic Committee Members and once again, many of these good Democrats have my back, one has even complained to Engel's fellow New York Congress member, Nita Lowey, who at least acted upset when she heard the news.

Since, traffic on my blog has taken off and my e-mail inbox is plump. But this is not as left self-serving as it sounds-it's not like I make any money from Google ads. The blog was set up last month solely because so many people in my area don't get enough local political news.

I just thought that I'd point out here that while blogs are effective, there's few things more powerful and viral than an e-mail chain. I'm thinking that the Congressman will have his phones off the hook today.

Here's my letter:

Dear Democratic Committee Members:
I will not be carrying a petition for Congressman Eliot Engel this week.

My action-or my lack of action-is my steadfast objection to Congressman Engel's unwavering support for Reverend John Hagee and his cult-like group, Christians United for Israel (CUFI).

This may also be viewed as an act of party disloyalty by some. But I maintain that my refusal to carry these petitions is a righteous protest, in the true spirit of the Democratic Party. I am protesting against Congressman Engel and argue that he has harmed the very morals and principles that guide this party and define us as Democrats.

On Tuesday July 22, Congressman Engel will be attending and speaking at the Christians United for Israel's Washington-Israel Summit, as he has done the previous two years. He will be giving the "Middle East Briefing" along with conservative and anti-choice activist Gary Bauer, noted Republican Party stenographer William Kristol, and warmongering and theocratic Congressman Mike Pence (R-Indiana). At other times during the conference, the dais will be graced by Democratic turncoat and Iraq War supporter, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), Rev. Hagee himself, former Senator Rick Santorum (R-Has Been), and Clifford D. May, the president of the neo-conservative Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the Chairman of a hyper-neurotic organization known as the Committee on the Present Danger. There are no other Democrats attending this conference.

More than a week ago, Engel's office was contacted by concerned constituents and members of the media who read about his attendance at the conference. Engel's press secretary promised a response last Thursday, but no response came. Congressman Engel is ignoring this issue, hoping that we'll forget about it and the local Democrats will let the whole matter slide.

So, why should you be so upset by this? First of all, Rev. Hagee is the same clergy member that has said, at various times, that Hitler was "doing God's will" by hunting the Jews and sending them back to Israel, that "gay sin" was the cause of Hurricane Katrina, and that the Roman Catholic Church is "The Great Whore" and the mother of prostitutes that was revealed in the book of Revelation.

Recently, an audiotape of one of Hagee's sermons surfaced where he claimed that the current "the Antichrist" is half-Jewish-as he claims Hitler was-and a "fierce" homosexual. This statement is obvious hate language that reveals contempt for non-Christians and the gay community. I find his words to be disgusting; I would never associate with anyone that would say such things about his fellow man.

Now, what about Christians United for Israel? As revealed by Max Blumenthal, in a revealing video last year (which you can access from The Huffington Post, YouTube and from some of the links I provided below), CUFI is a group that uniformly lobbies the government to attack Iran because it plays to the group's eschaton beliefs. Yes, CUFI is nothing more but a fatalistic Doomsday cult that believes a theoretical State of Israel is a necessary condition for the "War of Armageddon" and for like-minded Christians to experience "The Rapture." This group cares nothing about Jews or Israel, they only seek to put all the gears in motion and set ahead their Doomsday clock and watch this scenario to play out into a bloody war, a war which the group predicts will kill a third of the humans on Earth.

Members of the group are on the record in Mr. Blumenthal's video as stating that their support of Israel is based solely upon this Armageddon scenario. So why should we believe otherwise and why won't Congressman Engel? And now, the group sees Iran as an imminent threat to Israel and a possible and fortunate trigger to their end-of-the-world scenario. Therefore CUFI is currently lobbying the United States government to destroy Iran without questioning the validity and morality of such a war.

I find it totally unacceptable that a member of the Democratic Party-and our supposedly progressive Congressman nonetheless-continues to support, acquiesce to, and appease groups like CUFI. Without a doubt, CUFI is a dangerous group of maniacal war-mongering theocrats and dominionists. They do not represent even a negligible percent of Congressman Engel's constituency. So why does Eliot Engel, who we support with our signs, petitions, and donations, continue to support CUFI? That's one question I would like to see answered by the Congressman.

In the meantime, we have got to convince Congressman Engel to stop his continuing support of the CUFI cult and Rev. John Hagee. This is not just an unfortunate alliance, it is outright treason to our beliefs and to our party.

I sincerely believe that we are obligated as Democrats to stand up for the fundamental principles of this party and for the shared vision we see for this country. Our loyalties to individual politicians should be tempered by how well they adhere to these principles.

Therefore, anyone's choice not to carry Congressman Engel's ballot is not an act of party disloyalty, but a true patriotic act of believers in democracy, peace, and freedom. Please forward this e-mail to other committee members and colleagues if you are so inclined.

Since I wrote the letter, I have gotten many responses from other Democrats, including Democrats in the Bronx and Westchester County.

I also e-mailed the local newspapers, specifically targeting Riverdale, the heart of Engel's support base. Later, I noticed that one site accessed my blog several times (the original letter had links embedded in the text) and it was The Riverdale Press.

Yeserday, they published an article about Engel-Hagee.

As I'm not a resident of the Bronx, viral e-mail and Rockland County blog items were not mentioned but my blog that I posted on DailyKos was; they even borrowed heavily from the text and its major themes. I feel that I'm getting somewhere.

I also sent the e-mail to NY Democratic Assembly Members whose districts are in Engel's Congressional District. My purpose was so these elected officials know of Engel's stance and perhaps one brave member could stand for a resolution condemning the Congressman's actions (it's not like they never introduce or even pass such resolutions).

I got some nice responses, but Jeffrey Dinowitz, the Assembly member from the 81st district sent me this terse and dubious response, "Please do not send political e-mails to the taxpayer-paid assembly web site."

Wrong answer Assemblyman! There is absolutely nothing wrong with a NY State taxpayer contacting a politician about such matters. I wish Dinowitz should have been less of a weasel and more upfront with me; the real reason that he didn't like the e-mail is that he's the three time president of the Benjamin Franklin Reform Democratic Club, an organization of which Engel is the titular head.

Anyway, blogs are really good tools for getting your message out there into the community, but I don't think anything beats the viral e-mail. We've got several surprises in store for Congressman Engel, so stay tuned folks.

Thursday, June 5, 2008

Riverkeeper: Save our fish!

I love Riverkeeper. I love the Hudson River. I can't say anything better, so I'm just going to step back and cut and paste an e-mail I got today from Alex Matthiessen of Riverkeeper. We've got to save this beautiful resource.

We are very pleased to report that Governor Paterson has launched a decisive new program aimed at rebuilding and protecting fish species in the Hudson River. The governor’s initiative comes just two weeks after the release on May 15 of Riverkeeper’s report, The Status of Fish Populations and the Ecology of the Hudson (the Pisces Report) and the launch of our Hudson Fisheries Defense Campaign. That the governor took immediate action is a testament to the effectiveness of Riverkeeper’s work to protect Hudson River fish.

The Governor’s recovery plan for American shad, to be implemented by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), includes nearly all of Riverkeeper's recommended actions to protect the shad. These efforts will also benefit other imperiled fish species.

We applaud Governor Paterson and DEC Commissioner Grannis for their leadership on this important issue!

But one more critical step is needed. We need your help to tell the commissioner that the most important achievable action - requiring closed-cycle cooling at the five Hudson River power plants - must be undertaken immediately as a protective measure for all our fish. Please send a letter to Commissioner Grannis urging him to adopt closed-cycle cooling as policy for all power plants.

To learn more about this campaign please visit our web site.

Obama should select a woman for his running mate but NOT Hillary

Several months ago, I was at a party with several politically active friends. Often, we disagree on candidates, both locally and nationally, but it never gets personal. However, there was something odd in the air that night as one person in the room—a woman who I have a world of respect for—said she wouldn't support Obama if he were the nominee.

Of course, I told her that she'd get behind any Democratic candidate, and she answered no, she was behind Hillary and that it was a woman's turn to sit in the Oval Office. She's since changed her mind, but she's not what I'd call very enthusiastic about this election.

Being a male, I really don't understand this. I only want the best candidate to be in the Oval Office, but perhaps there's something I'm missing, something that I wasn't aware about. I've since been educated about the phenomena of feminists giving their all for Hillary Clinton, and now I think I'm beginning to understand their disappointment.

My wife, who is the smarter one in this marriage (I'm the good looking one), informed me that the White House represented the last glass ceiling, the last hurdle to jump for women in their struggle for equality. And as much as we talk about racism in the United States, misogyny and sexism are just as big of a problem and perhaps more accepted by society.

She put it to me this way: "You hear women called bitches every day and not just from the Neanderthal on the next barstool. It's in movies, TV shows, on the radio, in newspapers—everywhere!"

She went on,"and slut and whore (or as people like to say these day, 'ho') come up in conversation all the time and many times the speaker isn't joking. And how many times have you heard men call Hillary Clinton an 'old hag,' 'piano legs,' or even that C-word?"

My wife is right. Women as a group are plagued with derogatory terms thrown their way. Powerful and assertive women are automatically "ball busters" or "bitches." Powerful and assertive men are called "go getters" and "leaders."

But what does name calling have to do with anything? This type of language, hate language if you will, underscores a greater sentiment in society. Women are second class citizens in this country. So, for that reason, I am sad that the Democratic Party did not select a woman as its nominee. However, I maintain that Hillary Clinton is not the candidate that the party needed right now, Barack Obama was.

And what do you say to women on this issue. Do you tell them that they'll get their chance again? Presidential elections only come once every four years. So I say this not to appease women, but because I think it is very important: We must have a woman on the ticket with Senator Obama this summer.

Senator Clinton has made herself available, but there is a lot of bad blood between the two campaigns at this point. Clinton would have to backpedal on many of the terrible things said about Senator Obama during the campaign. And Bill Clinton, somebody has got to muffle that man. He was a drag on his wife's campaign and he would drag down a Obama-Clinton ticket as well, I fear.

Then there is also Clinton's sense of entitlement to the White House. This video, below, from the Daily Show really says it all. In fact, how can Senator Clinton be number two when it's always been all about her.

I also agree with former President Jimmy Carter:

The former president, who publicly endorsed Barack Obama shortly before polls closed Tuesday in the final two primary states, told a London newspaper that a joint ticket between the two former rivals would be "the worst mistake that could be made."

"That would just accumulate the negative aspects of both candidates," Carter told the Guardian, saying that both candidates' vulnerabilities could overshadow that the ticket if the two team up together.

"If you take that 50 percent who just don't want to vote for Clinton and add it to whatever element there might be who don't think Obama is white enough or old enough or experienced enough or because he's got a middle name that sounds Arab, you could have the worst of both worlds," he said.

I'm sorry, but it's true. Hillary has a lot of negatives that have nothing to do with her gender and I feel that, along with Obama's perceived shortcomings, they'll just be another burden for the campaign carry (not to mention Bill). I don't think she cancels out his problems and he cancels out hers.

Still, I'm hoping that Senator Obama's Vice Presidential search committee select another admirable woman politician.

There are many names of women being talked about in blogs and by the media. They include Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill and Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano. Unfortunately, they wouldn't be able to help carry their own states. John McCain is from Arizona and McCaskill, who is still wet behind the ears as a Senator, narrowly won her seat, beating Republican Jim Talent, right on the heels of losing a bid for the Governor's Mansion.

Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius is very intriguing to me. Unfortunately, Sebelius doesn't have the national profile that Clinton does, but she's a true progressive that is very popular in a very red state. She's also the daughter of a former Ohio congressman and governor, John J. Gilligan. There should be a few votes in Ohio that would go to the hometown girl, perhaps even enough to help swing it back to blue.

It's my belief that the Democrat's road to victory in November is to put together a ticket that looks more like America. We've already broken the mold by selecting a black male, and if Sebelius is as or more qualified than the men also in the running for the Vice Presidential nomination, Obama's committee should pick her.

We need a woman on the Democratic ticket in 2008. This is not about appeasement, it's about time.

Monday, June 2, 2008

Hagee: Antichrist is Jewish like Hitler, homosexual; Eliot Engel still speaking at Hagee's Conference

Max Blumenthal, the blogger/reporter/YouTube documentarian that's been following Rev. John Hagee and Christians United for Israel over the past year, has uncovered remarks by Hagee where he states that the Antichrist is a homosexual and part Jewish, like Hitler.

Blumenthal also contacted the Press Secretary of Congressman Eliot Engel, a New York Democrat who is speaking at Hagee's Christians United for Israel Summit next month, and the Congressman has yet to denounce Hagee or cancel his appearance.

From Max Blumenthal:

On March 16, 2003, on the eve of the United States’ invasion of Iraq, Pastor John Hagee took to the pulpit to warn of the coming Antichrist. In his sermon, “The Final Dictator,” Hagee described the Antichrist as a seductive figure with “fierce features.” He will be “a blasphemer and a homosexual,” the pastor announced. Then, Hagee boomed, “There’s a phrase in Scripture used solely to identify the Jewish people. It suggests that this man [the Antichrist] is at least going to be partially Jewish, as was Adolph Hitler, as was Karl Marx.”

This “fierce” gay Jew, according to Hagee, would “slaughter one-third of the Earth’s population” and “make Adolph Hitler look like a choirboy.”

So, why are two notable Jewish legislators, Sen. Joseph Lieberman and Rep. Eliot Engle, standing by Hagee? Why are they looking the other way as he cranks up the hate speech and supporting his Christians United for Israel Summit?

Lieberman will be joined at CUFI’s conference by Rep. Elliot Engel, a Democratic congressman from New York with a fairly progressive voting record. On Thursday, May 29, I asked Engel’s press secretary, Joseph O’Brien, if Engel still planned to attend Hagee’s gathering in light of his remarks about the Holocaust. O’Brien told me Engel would respond shortly. So far, Engel has said nothing.

Engel is slated to speak on CUFI’s “Middle East Briefing” panel this July. He will be joined on the panel by Republican Rep. Mike Pence, Weekly Standard editor and New York Times columnist Bill Kristol, and Christian right activist Gary Bauer.

LEFT of the HUDSON was the first New York political outlet to discuss Engel's attendance at the CUFI Summit in depth.

And we should remind readers of Hagee's other statements: Hagee said that Hitler was doing "God's will," by hunting the Jews and sending them back to Israel. Hagee said that Hurricane Katrina was god's punishment for "gay sin." And last, this is the same Rev. John Hagee that has called the Roman Catholic Church the "Great Whore."

Let's not forget about Rev. Hagee's minions at CUFI. As a group, and without exception, these are people that are lobbying the government to attack Iran because it plays to their eschaton beliefs. Yes, CUFI is a fatalistic Doomsday cult that believes that there must be a State of Israel as one of the conditions for Christians to experience The Rapture. Members of the group are on the record as stating that their support of Israel is based upon their Armageddon scenario. And now, the group sees Iran as a threat to Israel and they seek to destroy it.

Again, I find it totally unacceptable that a member of the Democratic Party, and my Congressman nonetheless, continues to support and appeases groups like CUFI. This a dangerous group of maniacal war-mongering theocrats. They do not represent even the smallest percent of Congressman Engel's constituency. So why does Eliot Engel continue to support CUFI?

We've got to stop Congressman Engel for continuing to stand with the CUFI cult and with Rev. John Hagee. As a Rockland County Democratic Committee Member, I have made the decision not to carry Congressman Engel's ballot petitions this week, unless he cancels his CUFI appointment and apologizes to his constituents concerning this unfortunate alliance. Other Democratic Committee members are quietly joining me in this action. I am looking forward to them coming out about this matter publicly.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)