Aside from what everyone else has stated regarding James Lee Witt, I've got to add that if Gore had gotten into office in 2001, he (being a massive policy and science wonk) probably would have maintained the levees better than Bush has over the past four years, and NOLA might not be under six feet of water right now. Moreover, I estimate that had Gore taken office, there's a 95% chance that we'd have enough National Guard troops available to truly be first responders.

As for Kerry? Well, at least he actually cares about work, and Edwards cares about the poor, so I can't imagine that the response would have been nearly as shoddy as Bush's was.

Posted at September 8, 2005 8:12 AM in response to If Only The Czar Knew

There are some differences between Hussein and Chavez:

1. We have not as of yet had a declared war against Chavez (the attempted coup notwithstanding)

2. Chavez has never invaded a neighboring country

3. Chavez has not been known to use chemical weapons, nor is there any evidence that he has ever contemplated developing nuclear weapons

Besides, we were not involved in a massive quagmire-esque conflict  during the Clinton administration and thus had Special Forces available to engage in such a mission. 

Posted at August 25, 2005 9:02 AM in response to Robertson's Influence

People, I've found, will tolerate all sorts of crap from their "superiors" (e.g., people they defer to) when they identify with those superiors (rural voters and Bush) or wish to be accepted by them (hazing by popular girls/frat brothers/etc.). However, it seems that the weak link in this loyalty is when the superior threatens the victim's children. Working-class Bush supporters tolerate the layoffs, the lies, and the broken promises by consoling themselves with Bush's "traditional values". But try to get their children to join the Army during <i>this</i> war and they get pissed. We must emphasize that Republican economic and social policies are hurting America's children--<i>your</i> children.

Relatedly, working-class women who don't see where middle-class feminism has benefited them could be persuaded that feminist policies could help their daughters without hurting their sons.

Posted at August 9, 2005 2:08 PM in response to Something's Still The Matter

See, I wouldn't argue that "Baby Mama" is glamourizing being a single mother--it talks about the difficulties, and that's actually a pretty good message to get out there. However, it does give us an excellent target that will appeal to soccer moms: deadbeat dads who don't pay their child support. These men carelessly spread their seed around and when the girl gets pregnant, and does the right thing by keeping her baby, they bail out.

 Additionally, the song can also be used to push for increased access to contraception. If a young woman has reliable access to birth control pills, she probably won't become a baby mama.

Posted at June 8, 2005 10:34 PM in response to Family Values