Kyoto a Go Go

Russia's cabinet approved the Kyoto Protocol on global warming today, making way for the Russian parliament to ratify it later this year. It is widely expected to be ratified.

122 nations have already ratified the Protocol or acceded to it according to the United Nations. The Protocol requires that it must be ratified by no fewer than 55 countries that accounted for at least 55% of global emissions in 1990. Kyoto has surpassed the requirement of signatories but has so far only received pledges from nations representing 44 percent of total emissions and Russia’s participation would tip the scale.

As you may know, President Bush, pulled the United States out of the Kyoto Protocol as one of his first acts as president in 2001. Instead, President Bush (in less than four years) weakened our own air pollution standards, wanted to allow more mercury in our water, allowed mining companies to push their mining tailings into streams and creeks, pushed for the increased mining of coal, opposed increased fuel efficiency standards and stopped forcing pollution companies to pay for Superfund sites their cause.

I agree with the President that it's unfortunate that China and other developing nations are excluded from the CO₂ and other carbon emission reductions measures in the Kyoto Protocol, but that is not reason to reject the Protocol.

The United States, as the world's largest polluter, must take the lead and show some responsibility and lead the Protocol. It's not the end, nor should it be. It is, however, a big step in the right direction.

I for one do not want to live in a world dominated by this image:

And I know I'm not alone...

High Noon in Coral Gables

A little less than 27 hours remains until the first Presidential Debate from the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Florida. The debate is moderated by the man himself, Jim Lehrer of The NewsHour on PBS. I'm confident the next president of the United States will be elected because of his performance on this stage for 90 minutes tomorrow evening:

In other words, it's important for everyone to watch. Come on, it's Bush, Kerry and Lehrer for an hour and a half, it doesn't get any better than that on a Thursday evening. I for one will be watching at Doc's shindig.

After tomorrow, the next debate will be the Vice Presidential Debate held at Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio on October 5th. I’ll have an AED (Automated External Defibulator) ready in Vice President Cheney’s honor, and a bottle of Clairol’s 3-in-1 Conditioning Hairspray read to spray in Senator Edwards’ honor.

Slingshizzle has Voted

I am proud to announce that I voted today via absentee ballot in the November 2nd general election in the State of Idaho, First Congressional District, 15th Legislative District, Ada County.

On an interesting side note (for you poli sci folks anyway): the most contested race was for seat Four on the Ada County Highway District Commission. There are 9 people running for one seat...on the highway commission...the commission everyone in Boise hates with the passion of a trillion burning suns (just because the traffic sucks).

In fact, the only thing in Boise people hate more than the ACHD is public works projects.

In the last two years, the people of Boise, in their infinite wisdom, have killed proposals to build a new police station; to expand and improve the greenbelt along the Boise River; to create a state-of-the-art mass transit system; and finally to build a new convention center.

The new convention center is the best one of the lot. It would have been funded by, not a tax on Boise residents, but a fee imposed on hotel guests downtown. The fee would have been about $1 a night a room and would not have cost Boise a thing. The hotel lobby fought it tooth and nail, and the voters subsequently rejected it.

I guess that's Idaho politics for you:

why run against an unopposed U.S. Senator (Mike Crapo) when you can run for the Ada County Highway District.

And this too is Idaho politics for you (at least for the City of Trees):

why support public works projects which don't cost the city or taxpayer anything but will greatly increase the viability of our fair city when you can be dooped by libertarian and business lobbying groups?

I am also proud to say I didn't have any hanging chads on my ballot. Ada County, for reasons passing understanding, uses the same punch-card ballots that Florida used in the 2000 election debacle.

So, after I completed voting, I didn't have any hanging chads...just a few dimpled chads and one pregnant chad (but the pregnancy was an accident, I swear).

If you haven't yet, Vote on November 2nd!

News v. Spin

My colleague Mr. Lone Ranger over at My 2 Cents has repeatedly used the Drudge Report as a new source for his posts. Well, today, Drudge gave us one great example of how fair/balanced/believable he is.

The headline of the Drudge Report this afternoon was:

Kerry: Draft Likely to Return Under Bush

Wow, that's a big deal...it's almost like Cheney saying (then later not saying) "It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States."

So, I clicked on the Kerry: Draft Likely to Return Under Bush headline and it took me to this Yahoo! News Story: Kerry Says Draft May Return Under Bush.

Wow, already the story has gone from "Draft Likely to Return Under Bush" to "Draft May Return Under Bush." And that's just the headline. When you actually read the quote, Senator Kerry said:

"If George Bush were to be re-elected, given the way he has gone about this war and given his avoidance of responsibility in North Korea and Iran and other places, is it possible [the draft]? I can't tell you."

So, from the Drudge Report to reality, the story has gone from Kerry saying the draft is likely under a second Bush term to "I can't tell you."

Now Matt Drudge and the Lone Ranger can say whatever the hell they want. It’s their right as American citizens. But don’t try passing Drudge off as news. I’ve already covered this issue once in my August post "BREAKING NEWS" and Liars but it bears repeating over and over again (as long as neo-cons believe the sh** Drudge spoon-feeds them each day).

Only one saying fully captures Matt Drudge Balanced News^TM:

Spins Way!

Rights

Idaho's Supreme Court today became "one of the first in the nation to acknowledge that sexual orientation, by itself, can't be a factor in modifying [child] custody agreements." I say one thing, THANK GOD.

If you follow the news in southern Idaho, you have probably heard about the child custody case of Theron McGriff v. Shawn Weingartner. The couple had shared custody of their daughters after their 1997 divorce, but Weingartner sought a change after finding out her former husband was gay and living with his partner. (from the Idaho Statesman)

I addressed this issue on the 3rd cent in May, when the case was before a state magistrate. You can read my post here: At issue in Idaho: should a parent's sexual orientation be a factor in determining child custody rights?

You can read the complete opinion and dissenting opinion here.

Come Fly the Iraqi Skies

Some good news has come out of Iraq today. CNN.com is reporting that after 14 years, Iraqi Airways is resuming scheduled flights tomorrow.

Although Iraqi Airways only has one working plane out of their 20 year old 16-plane fleet, we can expect flights from Baghdad to Syria and Jordan twice a week and flights to Dubai beginning shortly.

There are some catches though. A ticket to Damascus would cost $600, and $750 to Amman. A road trip to those cities costs about $40. Still, with all that nice rich oil we are pumping (for the Iraqis, of course), people in Iraq probably have tons of money to throw into air flights to Damascus. Democracy in Action!

Now that Iraqi Airways is flying again, American Brand IRAQI FREEDOM^TM can finally be displayed in a single item:

Now that's a bag I can barf in with pride! $200 billion well spent!

Liberal Kool-AidTM

Because, evidently, I cannot under any circumstances be correct in my opinion that assault weapons are probably bad for our communities and should be regulated and controlled, I've decided to share some of the so-called "Kool-aid" I drank to believe what I believe.

Perusing the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action website, I discovered something that I thought and had hoped had gone the way of Joe McCarthy. Now before I go on, I know some of you neo-cons out there support Senator Joe's actions in fighting te "Red Menace" back in the 50's. I mean, everyone's favorite moderate, Ann Coulter, likes McCarthy so much that she has this photo on her official web site:

(I understand this photo doesn't have anything to do with anything, but I just love Ann Coulter.)

Anyway, back to Senator McCarthy. The NRA seems to have taken a hint from his actions and established a list...a Black List. That's right, just when you thought it was 2004 and the words "equality for all" were true, the nation's leading Second Amendment defenders come up with a black list. You can see the entire black list on the NRA's web site here.

This black list includes actors, singers, authors, poets, religious organizations (including my United Methodists), businesses, news organizations, medical organizations, police organizations, unions, and the most feared organization on the face of the planet, the YMCA. And like all blacklists, the purpose is all too clear: to intimidate and silence anyone who disagrees with the NRA's extremist agenda. Well done NRA!

If you feel left out of the NRA's blacklist (as I did) you can sign up at nrablacklist.com.

On another topic, one of the U.S. Senators from my great state of Idaho is Larry Craig. Besides being a Senator and a driver of Volkswagen bugs, Larry is a member of the NRA's executive board. If you are an Idahoan who thinks this might be a bad thing, or a conflict of interest, I encourage you to visit this site: "End Larry Craig's singing career."

To those who think I’ve had to much Kool-Aid, I say, “OH YEAH!”

Firepower: Part II

Wow, the 3rd cent has gone national...I would like to express my gratitude to all those who posted comments on my last post. I am pleased to see some discourse on this issue, even though I find your arguments intolerant, narrow-minded and chillingly bigoted.

I was not expecting any sort of response to my post and therefore did not include any reasoning for my position on firearms and my support for the Assault Weapons Ban. Well, here it is:

Let me first say, I understand that the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was a flawed piece of legislation. It was written with far too many loopholes and exemptions.

That’s why I support not just the renewal of the AWB, but the significant strengthening of it. Two bills are in congress right now to do that very thing. They are H.R. 2038 and S.1431. Unfortunately, now that the ban has expired, that Sen. Bill Frist and Rep. Tom Delay have spoken, and President Bush has hidden from the issue like a coward, it is very unlikely anything will come of it.

Now, before everyone has a complete conniption, I am not anti-gun. My step-father is an avid hunter. I enjoy target shooting with pistols and clay pigeon shooting with shotguns as much as anyone. About the most fun I’ve ever had was shooting his 50-caliber muzzleloader rifle.

I fully believe that he and all other law-abiding Americans have the right to own guns for hunting, sport shooting and personal defense (although I do not believe owning a handgun does anything constructive for your personal defense).

That being said, I am 100% anti-assault weapon. There is a good reason they are called "assault weapons." Here are the reasons why I am anti-assault weapon:

According to FBI data analyzed by the Violence Policy Center in their study "Officer Down" (which was endorsed by the International Association of Chiefs of Police), one out of five law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty from January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2001 was killed with an assault weapon. When it comes down to it on this issue, I’m going to throw my support behind police.

To Mr. Nelson at www.LifeLibertyEtc.com, you have your logic backwards. Yes, the Assault Weapons Ban did outlaw certain features on these weapons. I’ve heard other opponents of the ban say similar things recently: that the ban only outlawed certain weapons because of their "cosmetic features" and not because they are inherently more dangerous than other weapons.

Just for everyone’s information, the cosmetic features outlawed in the ban are military features such as silencers, flash suppressors, pistol grips, folding stocks and bayonets, all of which are designed to specifically increase the concealability and lethality of these weapons.

Back to my point, your logic is backwards because many of the weapons had those "cosmetic features" before the ban. After the ban was enacted, people just took off the bayonets, flash suppressors and silencers, making the same guns legal again. This is why I support H.R. 2038 and S. 1431.

I understand that the assault weapons which were banned were all semi-automatic, and could only fire one round at a time. However, the ban also outlawed high capacity magazines, which is where the great lethality comes from. Someone can pull a trigger quite rapidly and discharge a large amount of ammunition in a short amount of time if they have a semi-auto assault weapon and 50-round magazine.

While most rifles, especially those for sport shooting and hunting, are designed to be fired from the shoulder and depend upon the accuracy of a precisely aimed projectile, these formerly banned semi-automatic assault weapons are designed to maximize lethal effects through a rapid rate of fire.

Assault weapons are designed to be spray-fired (by pressing the trigger repeatedly) from the hip, and because of their design, a shooter can maintain control of the weapon even while firing many rounds in rapid succession. I know I’ve seen criminals and terrorists do it.

Banning these weapons does not infringe on anyone’s constitutional rights. If constitutional rights were infringed, the law would have been overturned, or a least challenged, in its 10 years of existence. It was not.

Outlawing "violent rap-music lyrics and violent pop-culture movies that glorify gun violence" as proposed by Alpine18, will not do anything to curb gun violence. We have always had violent movies and music. Other nations listen to the same music and watch the same movies and they don’t have the same amount of violence as the United States.

Something else is to blame. I’m not positive what is, but I am certain that rap music and pop-culture movies are not.

Assault weapons serve no legitimate sporting, hunting or personal defense purposes and have no place in our communities. Individuals, even law abiding individuals, do not have the right to own these sorts of weapons. Hunting rifles and shotguns are fine. Uzis, AK-47s and Street Sweepers are not.

I know many of you disagree with my position. That’s fine, it’s one of the reasons America is a great nation; our ability to think for ourselves. Even right-wing, pro-gun libertarians like you have the right to think and say and express yourself however you want. I’m just glad I live in a different state (although Idaho has more than it’s fair share of right-wing, pro-gun libertarians.)

Liberally Yours,

Slingshizzle
(a.k.a. a “blissfully” and “grossly misinformed dumb ass” who is also a “poor misguided youth” and a “sheeple” “dumbfuck”)

Firepower

I’ve been quite busy today deciding which 100-round clip I should buy with my TEC-9 purchase tomorrow...I’m just exercising my supposed right as described in:

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.

Now, everyone should mosey on over to the National Rifle Association and thank them for allowing deadly military-style assault weapons and large ammunition clips back on the street. Although the NRA claims today is “the end of a sad era,” I fear and expect a new and even sadder era beginning.

The NRA claims the assault weapons which will be legal at midnight tonight will be used for "target shooting, shooting competitions, hunting, collecting, and most importantly self-defense."

Let me just explain one last thing to everyone...no one uses or needs a 1700 rounds per minute UZI submachine gun for self-defense!

Finally, an America I can feel comfortable and safe in...

"Massive Suppression of Speech"

Today, U.S. District Judge Jan E. DuBois declared a Pennsylvania law requiring Internet service providers to block Web sites containing child pornography unconstitutional because it "the act cannot be implemented without excessive blocking of innocent speech in violation of the First Amendment."

You can read the text of the decision here.

The case was brought by the Center for Democracy and Technology and the American Civil Liberties Union against Pennsylvania Attorney General Gerald Pappert.

The ACLU and ADT argued that the technology used to block those Web sites was clumsy and that over two years ISPs trying to obey blocking orders were forced to cut access to at least 1.5 million legal web sites that had nothing to do with child pornography or even legal pornography, but shared internet addresses with the offending sites. When a service provider blocked the address for a child-porn site, it wiped out the entire cluster. (from MSNBC.com)

Judge DuBois wrote:

"There is little evidence that the Act has reduced the production of child pornography or the child sexual abuse associated with its creation. On the other hand, there is an abundance of evidence that implementation of the Act has resulted in massive suppression of speech protected by the First Amendment."

I agree entirely with the ACUL's position on this issue entirely, and am glad Judge Dubois made the right call. Now, before my counterparts at My 2 Cents and the 10th Cent speak out saying "SLINGSHIZZLE AND THE ACUL SUPPORT KIDDIE PORN!", let me make it perfectly clear that I do not support child pornography or challenge a state's right to reasonably stop the spread and production of child porn.

However, you cannot restrict legal speech to stop illegal speech. I agree with Judge Dubois when he wrote:

"The elimination of child pornography is an important goal and those responsible for the creation or distribution of child pornography should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law."

But again, you do nothing but hurt society and our freedoms as Americans when you restrict free speech in that pursuit.

Mark one up for freedom, just not conservative brand Freedom^TM.

4 Days and Counting

As you may or may not know, the Assault Weapons Ban section of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1993 expires THIS MONDAY, September 13th at 12 midnight.

President Bush has said he would sign the bill reauthorizing the ban (H.R.3831) if it was given to him by congress. However, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said:

I think the will of the American people is consistent with letting it expire, so it will expire.

and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said:

If the president asked me, it'd still be no ... because we don't have the votes to pass an assault weapons ban and it will expire Monday and that's that.

What does these comments and the lifting of this ban mean to you and me? It means that Tuesday morning, just about anyone can go out and buy a:

Norinco 86:


Mitchell JM:


All models of Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs, including the AK-47:


Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI:


Action Arms Israeli Military Industries Galil:


Beretta Ar70 (SC-70):


Colt AR-15:


Fabrique National FN/FAL:


Fabrique National FN/LAR:


Fabrique National FNC:


SWD M-10:


SWD M-11:


SWD M-11/9:


SWD M-12:


Steyr AUG:


INTRATEC TEC-9:


INTRATEC TEC-DC9:


INTRATEC TEC-22:


and all revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper:


or Striker 12:

What kind of world do we live in, and what kind of representation do we have in congress when we would allow these sorts of weapons back on the street?

God Help Us...

End of an Era...thank God

Aryan Nations founder Richard Butler, dubbed by many as the "elder statesman of American hate," has died at the age of 86. The time of death is unknown but according to Kootenai County Sheriff Capt. Ben Wolfinger, Butler died in his sleep and in regards to the cause of death, "Everything appears to be natural," Wolfinger said.

Butler, a longtime admirer of Adolf Hitler and white supremacist religious teaching, had moved to Idaho in the early 1970s, claiming later that he was impressed by its high percentage of white residents. To the dismay of many residents, the region became known as a place hospitable to white supremacist groups.

Butler’s church held that whites were the true children of God, that Jews were the offspring of Satan and that blacks and other minorities were inferior. (from MSNBC.com)

Unfortunately, the Aryan Nations still has a compound near Hayden Lake and new leader Ray Redfeairn vows to continue the campaign of hate and bigotry.

Another Malapropism (aka Bushism)

For those of you who have forgotten since last month, here is the definition of malapropism:

mal•a•prop•ism: n, the usually unintentional humorous misuse or distortion of a word or phrase; especially the use of a word sounding somewhat like the one intended but ludicrously wrong in the context.

President Bush gave the world yet another Bushism yesterday at a campaign rally in Poplar Bluff, Missouri. He was speaking about the increasing cost of health care in the United States, and his mistaken belief that frivolous lawsuits are to blame. He said:

But let me tell you what else we need to do. We need to do something about these frivolous lawsuits that are running up the cost of your health care and running good docs out of business. We've got an issue in America. Too many good docs are getting out of business.

President Bush then offered an unexpected reason for cracking down on frivolous medical lawsuits:

Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their love with women all across this country.

Wow, I don't even know what to say about that, except wow. I'm glad that the President is all for obstetrician gynecologists "practicing their love." If only I knew what that meant.

Hi Yo Silver, Away!

On behalf of the entire 3rd cent staff, I would like good luck and best wishes to my colleague over at My 2 Cents for his national radio show tonight. I'm truly looking forward to the second installment of the Lone Ranger Bigot Hour, Warmonger Hour and Liar Hour.

Remember to those of you lucky enough to here the show tonight, this is the person who will be speaking into the microphone:

The Lone Ranger Rides Again! Hi Yo Silver!

After the show, be sure to check out the 3rd cent store and load up with all your anti-Lone Ranger gear.

Now, let us all sit back and listen to Henry "Lone Ranger" Johnston elevate the discourse in our nation!

HOPE IS A NEGATIVE WORD

So, conservativesRgood over at the 10th Cent, in responce to my post Hope vs. Cynicism, believes:

HOPE IS NEGATIVE WORD

The republican party does not have to use hope because we know the economy is doing a good job and the future looks bright.

Well, conservativesRgood, I'm glad you have shown that in the struggle between the politics of hope and the politics of cynicism, the neo-cons like you have taken sides with cynicism.

It bears pointing out that the 2004 platform for the Republican Party contains the word "hope" or one of its modifiers (i.e. hopeful, hopefulness, hopes) 25 times, plus once more in a very unimportant place…the TITLE!

You can read the entire Republican platform here: 2004 Republican Party Platform: A Safer World and a More Hopeful America. Of course, according to conservativesRgood and his position on hope, the Republican platform title should say: "2004 Republican Party Platform: A Safer World and a More Negative America."

I have to give it to the 10th cent, truer words have never been written...

Hope vs. Cynicism

During the Democratic National Convention in Boston, Senate Candidate Barack Obama of Illinois said:

In the end, that’s what this election is about. Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or a politics of hope? John Kerry calls on us to hope. John Edwards calls on us to hope. I’m not talking about blind optimism here—the almost willful ignorance that thinks unemployment will go away if we just don’t talk about it, or the health care crisis will solve itself if we just ignore it. No, I’m talking about something more substantial. It’s the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a millworker’s son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too. The audacity of hope! (bold italics my own)

Uplifting isn't it. It is statements and beliefs like this that make me proud to be a liberal and a Democrat.

Well last night at the Republican National Convention, the "compassionate conservatives" struck back. I have to give it to the Republicans; they never let a message of hope go un-criticized.

Lt. Gov. Michael Steele of Maryland said:

We heard one word over and over again at the Democratic Convention: Hope.

But there is a problem, my friends: Hope is not a strategy. Hope doesn't protect you from terrorists, hope doesn't lower your taxes, hope doesn't help you buy a home, and hope doesn't ensure quality education for your kids. (bold italics my own)

That's not quite as uplifting, is it. No, not uplifting at all. In fact, you know what it is? THAT'S RIGHT...it is a shining example of the "politics of cynicism!"

Although I've said it many times, it's worth saying again: Compassionate Conservatives Strike Again.

Political Geekness

In my bored and aimless travels of the internet this morning, I came across the geekiest protest sign ever. This from the recent protests at the Republican National Convention in New York City:

It probably only makes sense to those of you who know HTML code. Well, to that protester, I <SALUTE/> you!