Don't Spy on Me!

The new Facebook option of seeing everything about everyone you know has ticked off a lot of people. I think I have gotten about 43 requests to join anti-new Facebook thing. So, in respect to the mass movement that is happening, I post this awesome picture and officially declare myself against the new changes.

Condemned!

Dear loyal Patriot Blog readers,

Upon arrival at my off campus apartment yesterday, my roommates and I found the place in awful condition and, by chance, had it inspected by the Boston Inspectional Services Department. After the inspection, our apartment was actually condemned by the City of Boston due to how bad of a condition the landlord left it in. I wish I was kidding, but I'm not... Although we are laughing about it now, it actually sucks quite a bit considering we are now living in the basement of the apartment building until the proper renovations are done (supposedly by October 1). Why write this on the blog? Well, for one, some of you are my friends and I am sure would like to know about this. Second, we do not have internet just yet so the Patriot blog will be lagging unless I trek to the library (as I did today) to post. Worry not, however, because I am pretty sure the actual Patriot will be up and printing soon and the blog will no longer serve as our only source of information distribution to all of you.

Rage Against the Machine

- Earlier this week, activist and frequent presidential candidate Ralph Nader entered a new fray: baseball. In a letter to New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner in the New York Daily News, Nader attacked plans for the new Yankee Stadium which will host its first game on Opening Day 2009. I love the Yankees and I, um, like Ralph Nader too (cough) so I figured this was kind of a cool story.

- Joe Lieberman, in a move to save his failed/failing campaign for re-election as an Indy candidate in Connecticut, has released a bogus ad featuring a 29 second sunset so "Connecticut citizens could have a break from Ned Lamont's negative ads." Lamont has not run an ad since before the primary, first of all. Second, Lieberman had more negative ads than Lamont ever did. Ned Lamont also had the best campaign ad I've ever seen. The saga continues in CT....

- The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has challenged President Bush to a live debate to discuss the problems of the world. This, of course, will never happen. But just imagine how awesome it would be if it did.

- In a fundraising email today for Congressman Ted Strickland, Democratic candidate for Governor in Ohio, Senator and former presidential candidate John Kerry stressed the importance of defeating Strickland's opponent, former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, due to his efforts to "suppress" Democratic voters in 2004 in the battleground state he oversaw. This email marks the first time Senator Kerry has alledged any wrongdoing by the GOP during his campaign for President. And while he himself has not done so before, many other prominant Democrats have. Bobby Kennedy, Jr. famously wrote a great article in Rolling Stone covering his theories on voter fraud in 2004. Also, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), the man who will be Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee when we take back Congress and the man who is George Bush's biggest nightmare, also released a report called "Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio." While there is no mainstream movement to unveil the truth about the possibility of this within Congress now, expect Conyers to open up a can of whoopass on this matter once he holds the reins of the Judiciary Committee. That and wiretapping. And the Downing Street Memo. Actually, the entire Bush Presidency. (If you want to go hog-wild on the writings of Congressman Conyers, check out his latest report, "The Constitution in Crisis.") *The headline picture is Conyers is from a June 2005 protest when he marched 500,000 people down to the White House and demanded to talk to Bush about the war. The nerd behind the White House gate is some low-level staffer and they never reached beyond the gate. Nevertheless, badass....

Should Have Gone to N.O.

As we surround ourselves with news stories covering the 1st anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, I see it fitting to offer my opinion on something concerning the city of New Orleans. While the midterm elections are still acouple months away, people are already turning their attention to 2008 and the presidential election we will have that year. I mentioned earlier this week that TIME is already covering Hillary's presumed race. Everybody and their brother are going to New Hampshire and Iowa to test the waters. This is already happening. And so, I feel it is appropriate to cover the less sexy/less discussed issue of where to hold our convention that year. As it stands now, there are currently three cities still in contention: Denver, Minneapolis/St. Paul, and New York City. Last November, the DNC invited 35 cities to bid on holding the convention. In January, 11 cities responded and began the bidding process that means so much. Since then, all but three (the three above) have dropped out. And, much to my dismay, one of the cities to drop out was New Orleans.

Although it seems to many that the location of the party's national convention does not matter, it actually matters a great deal. For most Americans who do not have time to follow the earliest stages of a presidential campaign (from about now until the primaries early in that year, the primetime national convention is their first exposure to the candidates for the highest office in the land. In 2004, easily the most anticipated election of our lifetime, both parties sought to stake out cities in which their message could be delivered. For the President and his party, choosing New York City was a no-brainer for one reason: 9/11. Why would the party not want to have their convention in the city that is largely responsible for shaping their policy? As for the Democrats, they sought to evoke themes of patriotism and history as they met in historic Boston. The DNC was filled with American images of patriotism and entire sections of hallways dedicated to John Kerry's service to the country during Vietnam. Both conventions clearly had messages both in speeches and location and, as we head towards 2008, it is important that we as a party find our message when picking a convention spot. This is why I believed (and still believe) that New Orleans would be the best host to the 2008 Democratic National Convention. Just think: what city better illustrates the divisions and differences in the United States? What better city showcases the arrogance and failures of George W. Bush's domestic management? What better city could be the host to a new beginning to the Democratic Party - a party of renewed hope in this country, in each other, in our party and ideals, and in our government? What better convention hall could there be than the Louisiana Superdome, the place of refuge for thousands of abandoned citizens? The list goes on and on. So while the Republicans meet in Cleveland, Tampa, or New York City, we should be the party who is down in the city that requires the most help from the next administration and administrations to come as we attempt to rebuild that great city. But, as of now, this is not going to happen. As for the other cities, I am not sure what message we would be sending. Each city has hosted a convention in the past (Denver hosted the 1908 DNC, Minneapolis the 1892 RNC, and New York the 2004 RNC and 1868, 1924, 1976, 1980, and 1992 DNC's) and hope to do so again in the near future. I'm sure that all the finalist cities will offer something for our party but none of them hold a candle to what New Orleans could have symbolized for not only our party, but our nation. I'll keep my fingers crossed that they get back in the running, but in the meantime I should get my Colorado game face on...

Obama in Africa

I think it is safe to say Senator Barack Obama is the most popular politician on the BC campus. After all, who didn't like the speech he gave on campus at last year's convocation? Nevertheless, while I think he is refreshing to the political scene, I am certainly not a member of the "Obama '08" Facebook club. In fact, after he rocked my world while I was sitting in the TD Banknorth Garden at the 2004 DNC during his maiden speech, I think he has kind of sold out and the idealism behind his being has dwindled. Maybe it's just me... I am still hopeful that time will tell. Regardless, I do give him points for his trip to Africa this week which is causing hoopla over there. And while his voting record in the Senate has not really inspired me, this article kind of did. Plus, I know everyone loves the guy so I figured I would throw it out as a crowd pleaser.

One Year Later...

It has been a year since Katrina and Rita ripped apart the Gulf Coast. Words can't describe the loss; of homes, of communities, and of lives.

A small tribute to those who lost everything:

| View | Add Favorite

Dog Days

I have been working some seriously long hours lately and have neglected to post on this blog in some time. However, I am moving back to Boston next Friday and the Patriot will be up and running shortly after school starts so I imagine.

Hillary Clinton is on the cover of TIME this week entitled "The Presidential Ambitions of Hillary Clinton" and features two boxes marked "Love Her" and "Hate Her." Although TIME's political coverage tends to not fall in line with what I'm feelin, I believe this article really does her presidential ambitions justice. She is the presumed front-runner but only because people have not realized how dangerous her candidacy could be to our party and are merely harking back to the golden days of 1993-2001 when Slick Willie was in the Oval Office. But Hillary is no Bill, and that is both a good and bad thing....

I will not go into a long post about why I think her candidacy is a terrible idea just yet (I will save that for later!), but I did want to post the link and at least get talking about this topic because it is coming right around the bend believe it or not. Most candidates claim that they will make up their minds following the midterm elections and before next spring.

Enjoy the article and I will see most of you back on campus in about a week!

(Side bar: GQ had a pretty cool interview with a presidential candidate I do approve of, Senator Russ Feingold. Check it out!)

What really happened on 9/11?

When I was in high school, I took a class I'll never forget. And even though it was billed as a science class, it was really a class about the mysteries of the Earth. Our teacher, a cooky kind of guy, would show us tape after tape of conspiracy theory (we didnt land on the moon, aliens have come to Earth, etc.) and I can honestly say I never really believed any of them. So yesterday, when someone asked me if I had seen the documentary "Loose Change," a film about how 9/11 was a hoax, I shruged it off as just another crazy conspiracy theory. And then I watched it.... 9/11 is by far the most signifigant moment in history our nation has seen. My grandfather saw Pearl Harbor, my father saw the assasination of John Kennedy. I saw 9/11. And when I am older and have children of my own, I am more than certain that there will be at least one moment when they are doing their homework and ask me, "Daddy, what's 9/11?" Up until yesterday, I had a pretty clear idea of how I would answer that question. But since watching "Loose Change," I'm not really sure anymore. I am not going to attempt, in this post, to explain all the arguments that are presented in this movie. However, I am going to tell every single person I know to watch and think about this movie as we approach the fifth anniversary of that horrific event. Whether you believe it is true or not is up to your judgment. While I hesitate to say I completely believe what is discussed in the film, I will say that the documentary makes certain points that are impossible not to believe. However, I find it hard to believe that anyone within the government would publicly take this film seriously. For a candidate or a sitting member of Congress to speak in favor of this film would be career suicide. Nevertheless, I think it is very important that this documentary be given some attention by those in the opposition party of our government, perhaps by someone like Rep. John Conyers who seems to write a report a year about the coverups and scandals of this administration. Either way, citizens should watch this documentary and I urge all of you to watch it with friends and family and spread the word. We need to ask questions. And now that we have seen that the country is less security minded than they were two years ago, I believe now is the perfect time for some credible and powerful people to look into the points made in this film. But, in the mean time, check it out for yourselves.