Amygdala links have bad formatting.
I think the link is suffering from the same straight vs. curly quotes issue Tia had last week.
Fixed, although it was really annoying. It was the quotes.
In the future, if should be able to just take that chunk of text with the hyperlinks, copy it into notepad, and copy it back into MT to fix the quotation marks.
Gary's done a bang-up job on this issue.
Beyond that, well, hell. Is the American public so complacent that we just accept anything as long as it might catch a terrorist?
This is depressing.
Who's "if"?
The thing that pisses me off the most about all of this is that Arlen Specter refused to make Gonzales swear under oath. Over at Ezra's place Shakespeare's sister coined a new word for this sort of thing: oathish.
I've gotten to a point where I just don't know how to react to all this nonsense any more. I don't know what to do other than give money to Democratic candidates and hope that everything fixes itself in the next election.
Nothing's going to change as long as the DLC/TNR crowd heads our party. I think I agree with them on most matters, but they are just...well, we need a new PC-approved word. Both are soft on this very issue. Both are substantially more worried that Karl will win the "frame" battle than that substantive wrongs are being committed. Expect Bush to get out of this, us to do relatively poorly in the mid-terms, and then a bloody internecine battle for the party. Which means we'll lose in '08, too.
i'm hoping for an oval office blowjob. durn tootin' that would get people's attention.
Go for it, matty. Bush might let you in for that.
I think I agree with them on most matters, but they are just...
Sclerotic? Insular? Intellectually incestuous?
Oh, their sins go way beyond that, don't they? They're rather arrogantly persuaded that they're the soul of reason, and that anyone who wants them to stand up for anything is hysterical and angry.
I refer to them as Battered Wife Syndrome Democrats.
Ineffectual, preening, spineless goatlovers.
Or is "preening" not PC?
The truthfulness of this post is sad-making.
"Preening" is derogatory of metrosexuals. Also birds. Bigot!
Try "primping".
But I have no britches.
Even if he did swear an oath, he would later claim that members of the executive branch aren't required to fulfill oaths made to the legislative branch. Perhaps, just for the sake of making our ears bleed, he would cite the separation of powers as a reason for that.
It's a pretty brig, if I may say so.
Actually, I read "it's not the policy or the agenda of this President to authorize actions that would be in contravention of our criminal statutes" as a case of, it depends on what the meaning of "it's" is.
It is not now the policy or the agenda; it might have been yesterday and it might be again tomorrow. We do not disavow the possibility that we could and would authorize actions in contravention of our criminal statutes.
apo-
that certainly pushes the limits of my devotion to country. my biggest concern is that i'd have to take on cheney, hastert, the pro temp (is it still ted stevens?), and most of the cabinet before things got any better. and as much as i'd like to eventually work my way to someone not sane and / or grossly incompetent, i have a vicious gag reflex.
"sane" s/b "insane" - the very thought shuts down my brain.
LB--Ciro Rodriguez looks like an interesting candidat to give money to. He's running in a primary, but the guy he's running against, Henry Cuellar, is beyond DINO. Even Congressional Democrats are giving money to Rodriguez.
All that I know is what's been posted on MYDD by Glenn Smith, but Glenn's an experienced guy whom I trust.
Ciro Rodriguez: Use House Ethics Rules on the Corrupt
Apparently Cuellar votes with Tom Delay more often than some Republicans do.
But certain members of Congress, including ranking Democrats (two of them, anyway), were informed.
Without getting into the statutory niceties of whether Bush needed to inform all the members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, it seems that disclosure to ranking Democrats, and others in the Gang of Eight, gives Congress the notice sufficient to allow our system of checks and balances to work.
If it doesn't, then one must ALSO claim that our system of checks and balances is inoperable for "covert actions," which themselves only require disclosure to the Gang of Eight, and not to every member of both committees. I have yet to read or hear of any Congressperson making such a broad claim, or rendering any complaint generally about the notice requirements for covert actions.
I am not claiming that the wiretap program is a covert action. But if the disclosure requirements for the latter have long been accepted as adequate for checks and balances, then why are those same requirements suddenly inadequate for this program?
So, if there's a Constitutional Crisis, I assume that representatives of the three branches of government have to rumble.
So who should be selected?
then one must ALSO claim that our system of checks and balances is inoperable for "covert actions," which themselves only require disclosure to the Gang of Eight, and not to every member of both committees.
That's wrong. At a minimum, Congress can say, by law, "You are allowed to do X, and make decisions x that fall within the ambit of X as long as you fulfill obligations Y." Here, we are saying that Congress expressly said, "You may not do X" and the President did it anyway.
the house should send rep. herseth, for she is dreamy.
they will nead someone fair and pure, as cheney is powerful.
my money's on the judiciary, though. alito will say whatever it takes to win.
What's running over the separation of powers isn't the Gang of Eight/covert action allowance; it's the defining of the datamining program as a covert action in defiance of the statute.
Covert actions, fine. But let's not go calling everything covert actions. Change the law if you need to, that's the totally cool thing about having a legislative branch just up the road.
I think the plan is for the judicial branch to become a wholly-owned subsidiary of the executive, with congress to be spun off as a separate company.
I don't mean to diss on Rep. Herseth, who is indeed dreamy, but I was thinking someone a little feistier, like Byrd (why oh why did the filibuster king desert us?) or Feingold.
for the judicial branch to become a wholly-owned subsidiary
Ah, so you noticed Gonzales saying, "our framers intended that in a time of war, both branches of government have a role".
byrd's a pretty interesting case. he's pretty deferential on nominations, per his view of advising and consenting. it used to warm the cockles of my heart on long evenings at work to see him waving his copy of the constitution around and yelling that w/o a bona fide declaration of war, the iraq adventure waren't legal. for all his warts (as a wv'ian, i have somewhat complicated views about him), the guy actually cares about the legislature as such.
i think cheney would eat most senators alive, or fry them with his robot lazer eyes. perhaps herseth could attack his achilles heart.
"But certain members of Congress, including ranking Democrats (two of them, anyway), were informed."
Four (at any given time; the full list, given transitions, adds up to more).
"Without getting into the statutory niceties of whether Bush needed to inform all the members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, it seems that disclosure to ranking Democrats, and others in the Gang of Eight, gives Congress the notice sufficient to allow our system of checks and balances to work."
a) "checks and balances" don't work when you are forbidden to communicate with any other member of Congress on the topic, or even any other member of either Intelligence Committee, and you are allowed no input and hold no power to affect anything, but are merely informed, and that is all. Which is the case here.
b) We call "statutory niceties" "the law." It's illegal to not follow "statutory niceties."
c) "...our system of checks and balances is inoperable for 'covert actions,' which themselves only require disclosure to the Gang of Eight, and not to every member of both committees."
This is incorrect. The statute says the "commitees" must be informed; there is no exception made for special cases where only the two senior members are informed. We could play dueling quoting the statute, if you'd like.
"I have yet to read or hear of any Congressperson making such a broad claim, or rendering any complaint generally about the notice requirements for covert actions."
Then you haven't remotely been paying attention.
"But if the disclosure requirements for the latter have long been accepted as adequate for checks and balances, then why are those same requirements suddenly inadequate for this program?"
You are misinformed. I could point to endless citations demonstrating this, but that's really not my job.
I refer to them as Battered Wife Syndrome Democrats.
I prefer Knee Pad Democrats.
Herseth may be dreamy, but she ain't pure (pure Democrat, that is). I'm so sick of having to give cover to red state D's and absolutely pissed that I gave money to a woman who has more than once sold out the Left.
If we're gonna send somebody to throw punches (and we should), I'm going with Chuck Schumer or Tom Harkin.
Matty, it was those memories of Byrd's brandishing his pocket Constitution during the run-up to Iraq that made me suggest him. His arguments about the powers and responsibilities of Congress were rather similar to the ones I was screaming into the void of my representatives' mailboxes. Still, those are some interesting warts he's got--and I do recall reading, now that I think about it, some article about his deferential view of "advise and consent."
If it were a mano-a-mano knife fight, with Cheney in the Executive's corner, I think I might want Schumer.
"Gary?"
Yes. Sorry. Every time I hit the "set comment options" link, it wipes some or all of the ID info. Then when I fill in the ID info again, it goes back to ignoring the "set comments option" choice. Usually I catch that the ID info has partially or completely gone bye-by, but not that time.
"I'm so sick of having to give cover to red state D's...."
That's the drawback of living in a somewhat democratic system where people disagree. Compromise means we don't get everything we want; sometimes it sucks. It beats most alternatives.
Or crazy-ass Pete Stark. He's pretty plainly unafraid to mix it up.
"now that I think about it" s/b "now that you mention it"
So is there anyone left on the Supreme Court who wants to expand (or even retain) that branch's power, or are we going to have to reanimate Justice Marshall or something?
From apostropher's link:
Stark angrily denounced McInnis, calling him several names and daring him to fight. (Stark is 71, McInnis is a 50-year-old ex-policeman).Now, that's the spirit!
Reportedly, he called him a "fruitcake" and a "cocksucker."
I don't mind megalomaniacal Supreme Court justices because -- they don't have their finger on the nuclear trigger! They don't have command over the armed forces. They have no direct coersive force at their disposal at all. Why can't people see that? An "imperial judiciary" is quantitatively different from (and better than) an "imperial presidency."
quantitatively different
'bout 9-1.
I'm certain the people most given to talking about imperial black-robed unelected activist judges do know better, but don't give two, or any number of shits.
"checks and balances" don't work when you are forbidden to communicate with any other member of Congress on the topic, or even any other member of either Intelligence Committee, and you are allowed no input and hold no power to affect anything, but are merely informed, and that is all. Which is the case here.
Those members, if of firm belief that they have been informed of an illegal action which requires Congressional reaction, can choose to violate such confidences and inform other committee members, and thereupon take appropriate action, or insist that the Executive do so.
We call "statutory niceties" "the law." It's illegal to not follow "statutory niceties."
The post addressed checks and balances, not the National Security Act. So I limited my comment to the issue raised by the post. We call that "careful reading."
I don't think I agree with Andrew broadly, but his point about Rockefeller, for example, being slightly chickenshit insofar as he expresed his grave concerns by writing the Vice President a stern letter seems reasonable.
can choose to violate such confidences and inform other committee members, and thereupon take appropriate action, or insist that the Executive do so.
"Violate such confidences" under penalty of law? "Insist" with what army?
The post addressed checks and balances
"checks and balances" is shorthand for the Constitutional division of power and the standard justifications for it. If you are really talking about "checks and balances" outside of the legal and Constitutional "nicities," you are talking about nothing.
You can't possibly be this insipid, can you?
Democrats need to realize that they are well into Phase II as regards relations with the GOP and start reciprocating. No point in being an opposition party if you don't goddamn oppose.
"Those members, if of firm belief that they have been informed of an illegal action which requires Congressional reaction, can choose to violate such confidences and inform other committee members, and thereupon take appropriate action, or insist that the Executive do so."
You are arguing that Senators and Representatives, having sworn to not disclose classified information entrusted to them, should violate their oaths, break the law, and incidentally make themselves vulnerable to criminal prosecution, expulsion from Congress, and giving grounds for themselves and their Party to be called "traitors."
Interesting argument. We call that a "no-win" bind.
"...or insist that the Executive do so."
And so Jane Harman, senior Democratic member of the House Intelligence Commitee, and Senator Jay Rockefellar, Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and other Democrats have done. Effective, isn't it?
"Violate such confidences" under penalty of law?
If legislators started getting arresting left and right, though, it would start to get people's attention. Maybe.
I'm so sick of having to give cover to red state D's and absolutely pissed that I gave money to a woman who has more than once sold out the Left.
What they do, though, is vote for Pelosi -- a good solid San Francisco Dem -- for speaker. The red state moderates look useless until Dems get back in power, but that's how we get back in power. It's the flipside of Chafee syndrome; individual positions are important, but what's really important is which side are you on?
Andrew-
I would have said all sorts of things in response to your 28, but in light of 37, they're unnecessary. But really - in what sense is telling a couple of people about the program, and then forbidding them to tell anyone else or to do anything about it a meaningful check on anything at all?
That's the drawback of living in a somewhat democratic system where people disagree. Compromise means we don't get everything we want; sometimes it sucks. It beats most alternatives.
Seriously, Gary, thanks for the condescension. Can I get a side of "I don't know what you're talking about" with that?
Those members, if of firm belief that they have been informed of an illegal action which requires Congressional reaction, can choose to violate such confidences and inform other committee members, and thereupon take appropriate action, or insist that the Executive do so.
Sorry, are you sugggesting here that it is appropriate or acceptable for the Executive to threaten legislators with legal penalties in order to prevent them from carrying out their constiutional duties?
LB--Of course you're right. I was reacting more to the "dreamy and pure" part of the statement. I'll probably send her more money this year, since I grew up in South Dakota and feel like it's a place I should try to change for the better.
Yeah; it does kind of suck, but she's at least better than the Republican-SD alternative. I sent her money last year, and had to swallow my gorge over something, I've forgotten what. But I still think sending her money was the right thing to do.
"If legislators started getting arresting left and right, though, it would start to get people's attention. Maybe."
By revealing the most highly classified material about one of the most secret programs of the U.S. government which is a program done under the aegis of fighting "the war on terror," is not, I suggest -- very strongly -- a winning political argument, or one that will cause glory and popularity to accrue to the Democratic Party.
If we want to throw away all hope of winning congressional elections, and Presidential elections, for possibly a generation, and certainly for several election cycles, that would be a great start, though.
"The red state moderates look useless until Dems get back in power, but that's how we get back in power."
Quite so. It's easy to criticize such office-holders when one doesn't live in a "red" or purple state, and doesn't understand the politics of the given state well.
I've lived in Colorado for four years and three months. We've just, in 2005, gained Democratic control of both the State Senate and the State House for the first time in a generation; it's the first time Democrats have had control of either house in umpty years. We've just elected the first Democratic Senator for the first time since Gary Hart, unless you count turn-coat Ben Nighthorse Campbell (who didn't suffer any difficulty in being re-elected as a Republican). We've made gains in the state Congressional delegation, though we're still in the minority.
We're on the verge of winning back the Governorship for the first time in many years.
But this is all balanced on a knife's edge. The polity here is taking the Democrats on a test drive, and that's all. We could blow it with the drop of a feather. And then go back to losing for another generation to come, having convinced the swing votes that Democrats don't really represent the moderate mix of views in Colorado, but instead represent the Bos-Wash corridor, and outsiders, and the most hated people of all in the West: easterners. And Beltway types.
Ken Salazar (and his brother John, also elected to the U.S. House in 2005, defeating the Republican) are very good Democrats. And they have a vastly better understanding of what flies in this state, and the situation I just briefly described, then Democrats who live elsewhere.
Purity isn't an option. Knowing when to pick your fights is mandatory.
As usual, Democrats, however, are ever-ready to form circular firing squads, and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I prefer not to. And I believe similar situations exist in most of the Western states (California being a Pacific state in this formulation), and in various other purple/red areas.
"Seriously, Gary, thanks for the condescension."
I'm sorry for phrasing what I wrote in a way that left you feeling that way.
Yeah, I didn't get a sense of condescension from what Gary wrote, either. And I'm perfectly fine with Red Democrats doing what they need to do to get elected. As long as they STFU and when we're attacking Republicans, and don't step on the message. No clasping Bush's knees to please your voters.
and the most hated people of all in the West: easterners.
I whine about this frequently, but what is this? What did us poor, harmless Northeastern urbanites ever do to anyone?
You know, I thought Russ Feingold's television manner was great there. It made me want to see him run for president. He used language that was simple and direct, but he was well spoken, and he has a folksy manner and Midwestern that made him seem unlike those evil coastal elites, of whom LizardBreath is the exemplar.
What did us poor, harmless Northeastern urbanites ever do to anyone?
Tell them what to do. Not popular.
"No clasping Bush's knees to please your voters."
That's not something Salazar has been remotely guilty of, but some politicians and areas are far more Republican than the state of Colorado is overall, and, y'know, there are places and occasions that's necessary, too, if you want to keep that vote for a Democrat for Senate Majority Leader, or House Majority Leader.
That's the choice in some spots. It seems to be a necessary choice for Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, for instance. We could punish him for this, or we could enjoy having another Republican Senator from Nebraska. (Joe Lieberman doesn't get this excuse, mind.) Take your pick. A more pure Democrat isn't on the menu, and isn't going to be in the near future.
We, too, have to pick our battles. I apologize if I've again phrased this in a "condescending" manner; that is, at least, not my intent.
and the most hated people of all in the West: easterners.Keep in mind that I was born and bred in Brooklyn, and have spent most of my life living either there, or in Manhattan (various neighborhoods from the Lower East Side to Washington Heights), a brief stay in Queens, close to a year in the Bronx, and two years on Long Island. But also eight years in Seattle, a year in Boston, a large chunk of a year in East Lansing, Michigan, and now the People's Republic of Boulder, in purple Colorado (home of Colorado Springs and James Dobson).I whine about this frequently, but what is this? What did us poor, harmless Northeastern urbanites ever do to anyone?
The answer to that could be books and books and books. It's certainly worthy of many essays. Nutshell: one hell of a lot.
To not understand that resentment of Easterners is the overwhelming driving political force of all the Western states, and has been forever and ever, and I mean that in the sense of "since Lewis and Clark" -- it certainly hasn't lessened since Reagan days -- is to have absolutely no clue whatever about the politics of the West, I'm afraid.
And the list of valid causes just goes on and on and on and on. (Along with some invalid causes, of course.)
"What did us poor, harmless Northeastern urbanites ever do to anyone?"
Few words longer answer: have no clue about Western political history or public policy issues; act as if that is of no importance; arrogance; insist or act as if conditions in Northeast urban areas are the same here, or more to the point, vice versa; not notice that vast chunks of Western states are federal property and enact policies in regard to them that largely ignore the wishes of people living in said states (also ask Alaskans about this, and then wonder why Republicans keep winning there); have no idea what "water policies" are, or their importance (this would be an issue in California, save water is pretty much state-controlled there; not in the rest of the West); and so forth and so on.
Here's a minor cultural note. Ever watch tv? Ever notice that at every commericial break, you'll hear promo commercials for upcoming shows? Ever notice that they always say "starting at X o'clock, X-1 Central" or ""starting at X o'clock, X-2 Pacific Time."
Ever even notice that an entire region and set of states don't even exist (not even getting into Hawaii and Alaska, which are far worse outliers for obvious reasons), according to network tv? No? (Okay, you probably don't watch tv, and it isn't a fair question at you; but try a survey of people you know who have never have lived in the Rocky Mountain region on the question.)
That sort of thing is why. That easterners don't even notice that sort of thing, or the endless unnoticed daily ignoring in endless cultural and political issues, every day, in the national media and to some degree in national politics.
Being ignored breeds resentment. Republicans have successfully grasped that to a fair degree since Reagan days; Democrats back east are still more clueless than not. As witness your need to ask the question. Sorry.
Feingold seems to be the only senator who understands that asking a witness pointed questions more effectively elicits answers, or revealing non-answers, than bloviating at them. In a related thought, maybe Ted Kennedy should retire.
Tim,
Dial down the ad hominem a little. I'm not insipid, and you're not an idiot. Or so we'll pretend.
If the informed members are convinced that this is a serious breach of law, then they have a number of options available to them---indeed, the same options as the entire committee would if they had discovered via an authorized disclosure of classified information that the President had broken the law. They can disclose the matter to the Congress generally, and act to impeach the President. Or, also with Congress, they can pass remedial legislation on the matter.
That doing so risks prosecution is not unique to the limited disclosures of this program. The risk would seem to apply whenever members of Congress are informed of classified activities that they believe to be illegal. This touches upon one of the general problems with classified activities in a democratic regime, but I don't believe that it is a problem unique to the limited disclosures of this program.
That said, I'm certainly open to revision.
Yeah, I didn't get a sense of condescension from what Gary wrote, either.
Meh. Perhaps I'm overly sensitive. It struck me as an unasked-for Civics 101 lecture. Sorry if I overreacted, Gary.
Herseth: blonde but not (like Granholm) Canadian. Your ideal political fantasy, second only to Benazir "Binkie" Bhutto (also not Canadian.)
The DLC/TNR people have always been willing to weaken the Democratic Party if that's the only way they can maintain control.
The Democrats' weakness has never been issues per se, or hasn't been for a long time. Part of it is the inability to project an image of strength -- weeniness and seeming opportunism. Part of it is weakness in on the ground campaigning (the kind of stuff Rove does in the last three days of a campaign.)
The biggest factor is their lack of a propaganda machine to match the Republican Wurlitzer.
The DLC controlling faction openly mistrusts the rank and file and fails to build grass roots organizations for fear that they'll pull the party left.
It is not now the policy or the agenda; it might have been yesterday and it might be again tomorrow. We do not disavow the possibility that we could and would authorize actions in contravention of our criminal statutes.
That reminds me…
SCHUMER: And that is: Under the legal theory, can the government, without going to a judge—this is legal theory; I'm not asking you whether they do this—monitor private calls of its political enemies, people not associated with terrorism but people who they don't like politically?
GONZALES: We're not going to do that. That's not going to happen.
I read this as an admission that they're doing it right now, and have done so in the past.
"Sorry if I overreacted, Gary."
No problem.
While the two Dakotas, Wyoming, Idaho, Montana and Alaska may be in part responding ito condescension from ignorant bullying easterners, they're also throwing their weight around because they have about five times more power in the Senate than their population would justify. They do the victim thing whenever necessary, but the cards are stacked in their favor.
Ramp up the ad himinem a little, Tim. I don't have the energy tonight.
Or you could ramp up the ad eminem, and declare that Andrew's argument is invalid because he is not the real Slim Shady.
As a survey along the lines of what Gary mentioned, I thought I would ask those who are unfamiliar with the west a question: what time do you think a show advertised as showing at "8/7 Central" airs in the Mountain Time Zone?
I would just add that, depending on the nature of the illegal executive action, those members who disclose and move to impeach, or move for some action short of impeachment, may well be labeled heroes rather than traitors. Yes, it's a risk. No, it's not unique to this program and these disclosures.
There are alternatives, of course. We could provide for whistleblower protection for those who disclose classified information when they do so for the purposes of exposing illegal activity. I believe that currently the law specifically exempts such disclosures from legal protection. Aside from the passage of such a law, the use of impeachment, the power of the purse, or the creation of an independent counsel for this purpose, there aren't many other options.
If the fewer number of people who live in sparsely populated areas don't get as much national attention and weight as the many more people who live in densely populated areas, and this fact bothers them, then perhaps they should either 1) grow up or 2) move.
It's going to be awesome when Jesus comes back and kills all the Republicans.
(I'll ask Gary, MHS and anyone else from the west to refrain from giving away the answer to 78, please.)
78: I want to answer, but I am from Ca and thus may be cheating by doing so.
If the fewer number of people who live in sparsely populated areas don't get as much national attention and weight as the many more people who live in densely populated areas, and this fact bothers them, then perhaps they should either 1) grow up or 2) move.
What did us poor, harmless Northeastern urbanites ever do to anyone?
Hard to say.
Go ahead, Tia. I don't think it's cheating.
This touches upon one of the general problems with classified activities in a democratic regime, but I don't believe that it is a problem unique to the limited disclosures of this program.
Except that there is no rational reason for this program (at the level at which information has been revealed -- I'm not talking about algorithms) to be classified. What is the secret we're keeping from bad actors? That we listen in to overseas communications? That we listen in to domestic communications? That we use datamining techniques to identify communications to listen to? The first two are elementary public facts, and the third is something that anyone who pays attention to this stuff would have surmised. The secret being kept here is that the Executive was doing this monitoring without court authorization, rather than with -- a fact which is terribly important from the point of view of any American who cares about civil liberties, but which doesn't have any national security importance at all.
I say 6! The Rockes will send the Appalachians back crying to their widdle mommies!
I'm just withholding the answer until I get some more responses.
Isn't this a trick question? Certain live programs will be delayed* for the west, taped programs are delayed* even more often, and lots of live sports, after years of being delayed, run at the same time as they run in the east coast.
Meaning they'll run at 8, if 8 eastern/7 central is the listed time.
78: This is logic, rather than knowledge, but I'm going to guess that a show advertised as '8/7 Central' will play at 9 in the Mountain time zone. I'm guessing that just like TV shows play simultaneously in the Eastern and Central Zones, so that the clock time for any show is an hour earlier Central than Eastern, that they probably play simultaneously in Mountain and Pacific, making them an hour later on the clock in Mountain time than in Pacific time. But I don't know, I'm guessing. So, point taken.
Being ignored breeds resentment.
See, I still don't get this. I can see resenting hostility, or even ignorance that causes damage, but being as mad as westerners seem to be just because we're not paying enough attention to them? Who am I that Joe Coloradan should care, or be pissed off at me, that I don't know all that much about Colorado?
In 90 the sentence beginning "Meaning" should have a * in front of it.
"years of being delayed" = used to be delayed for the west and you had to wait 2 to 3 hours while avoiding hearing about the result.
I see your point, eb, but I'm talking about regular primetime programming. To make it more concrete, at what time does The Simpsons (which airs at 8/7 Central on Sunday) air?
"If the fewer number of people who live in sparsely populated areas don't get as much national attention and weight as the many more people who live in densely populated areas, and this fact bothers them, then perhaps they should either 1) grow up or 2) move."
Who could imagine anyone being given this message possibly not welcoming it?
People love that sort of attitude. And it's so rare and difficult to provoke! Look how many days of discussion it took to get to this.
Denverites, Phoenicians, Las Vegans, etc., better get moving. You, too, Bill Richardson.
JE: "...they're also throwing their weight around because they have about five times more power in the Senate than their population would justify."
Darn that whole concept of federalism and "states." Back to the drawing board, it is.
Again, why would Democrats and independents in Western states possibly not welcome this message from Democrats elsewhere? It's a major mystery, indeed. Inexplicable. Irrational. Weird.
Look at the electoral map from the last Presidential election. Westerners don't hate us that much; not nearly as much as the South does.
Do people from Phoenix really call themselves "Phoenicians"?
Hey, murex dyes have to come from someplace.
Westerners don't hate us that much;
Depends on the 'us'. They're not as anti-Democrat, but they're still pretty unenthusiastic about Northeasterners.
Wild ass guess: 9:00.
Also, the only western state I know anything (in a pretty strong sense of anything, hence the italics) about the water policies of is Arizona, and I'm pretty sure they're state controlled there. The fact I know is that there is one state controlled water district which covers almost half the state, I don't know anything about the other water district(s) and hence could be wrong about even this limited guess.
The fact I know is that there is one state controlled water district which covers almost half the state,
So you've been doing the reading in Law of Democracy.
Ok, I looked it up. I'm glad Pacific Time has cities with clout. Which is why a book like Crabgrass Frontier can get away with being about suburbs on a "national" scale when it is effectively about just the Northeast with a bit of LA/Southern California thrown in: without the pull of LA, that book probably would have been mostly about New York (but still probably would have presented itself as about the whole US).
Interesting responses. I had the delusion that teofilo's question was, despite my previous comments, obvious. For now: mm.
LB: "Who am I that Joe Coloradan should care, or be pissed off at me, that I don't know all that much about Colorado?"
First of all, let me clarify that I wandered a bit in my response to you, LB, from addressing you, to speaking in general terms about Easterners, particularly BosWash corridor dwellers; I apologize that I wasn't clearer about that.
But to answer the question I quote, where is, excluding the tv and movie and other cultural aspects of the environs of Los Angeles, the cultural and political center of this country?
It's not about you, it's about that. Midwesterners and Southerners and Pacific Northwesterners don't universally feel completely treated as respected and paid-attention-to equals, either, at all times.
I'll note that I didn't have a particularly good grasp of this until I'd lived for a while in Seattle, myself. Might I ask where you've lived besides NYC and/or being in college (college towns are, essentially, pockets in Another Universe, to a large degree -- thus, for instance, "the People's Republic of Boulder," which stands out endlessly more in Colorado, politically and culturally, than, say, Berkeley does in California), just as a baseline?
Okay, I think I've gotten enough guesses.
The answer is 7. No one got it right.
101 written before I read 91, based on exact same reasoning.
102: Yeah, I really like the class, and plan to drone on about it endlessly. You can join in of course.
Might I ask where you've lived besides NYC and/or being in college
Noplace in the US -- I'm NY, Boston then Chicago for college, two years in Samoa, and then back to NY. Whatever is despised about the Northeastern Urbanite, that's me.
I should be more careful, incidentally, myself, and suggest others might also attend, to the distinctions between the Pacific Coast and the Rocky Mountain region. They're, overall, quite different politically and culturally.
You can cut Oregon and Washington State in half, politically and culturally, as they have little in common between the western and eastern halves, but almost everything in common between the Oregon and Washington parts of each half.
Eastern Washington and Oregon are, loosely speaking, arid plains and almost desert; the Western parts are lush forest and mountains, loosely speaking, and are what people think of when they think of the Pacific Northwest. (Similar to the western part of British Columbia, I might add.)
East is conservative Republican territory, loosely speaking; west is liberal Democratic territory, loosely speaking. East is pretty much like Idaho.
And Nebraska, Montana, Colorado, Nebraska, Arizona, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, all different yet again from the Pacific Coast regions. Lumping all this together as "the West" tends to obscure this, although I've been careless myself at some points above. I'm trying to correct a bit of that here.
105: Actually, after my incredible logical analysis, I remembered (but did not post! you have to take my word for it) that the announcements used to be of the form "9/8 Central and Mountain". So I should have known. But I still don't get it -- doesn't making the Mountain schedule the same, on the clock, as the Central schedule mean that it's not simultaneous with anyplace else? At which point, why didn't they just leave it as matching the coastal schedules?
Yeah, there's a whole lot of lumping going on. I'm coming to you tonight from Gallup, New Mexico. But I, too, have had my hair cut at the Reynolds club at University and 57th, and my partner here lived on 116th Street, if I recall correctly, when she was at Columbia. There's a whole lot of mixing in this country. Things are never as simple as they seem, and geographic generalizations are as misleading as most other generalizations
"Do people from Phoenix really call themselves "Phoenicians"?"
See, minus two points for not knowing. Who doesn't know what people in New York City, or Boston, or Washington, D.C., or Los Angeles, call themselves?
(People in San Franciso have some grounds for complaint, to be sure.)
"Westerners don't hate us that much; not nearly as much as the South does."
Indeed, the Rocky Mountain and southwestern states are largely quite ripe to give electoral votes to the Democrats in the next election if we play our cards right, and don't ignore the political needs and realities of this region. If we aren't perceived as pandering to Easterners and the views of people with no understanding of this region. (And don't confuse us with Californians or Pacific Northwesterners, not that they should be ignored, either.) (Subnote: keep in mind that there's a lot more to California than LA and SF and Orange County and Marin County, and more to Oregon and Washington than Seattle and Portland.)
Consider Bill Richardson as someone to be on the ticket, one way or another, perhaps; consider having the Convention somewhere in this neighborhood. Consider understanding the ripeness here, and not just focusing on the South and Midwest, and assuming these are Red States.
Thoughts to maybe think about.
I am proud to say that my ignorance of the answer reveals total alienation from society rather than ignorance of the mountain regions, because I've actually lived in Utah.
"Do people from Phoenix really call themselves "Phoenicians"?"
See, minus two points for not knowing. Who doesn't know what people in New York City, or Boston, or Washington, D.C., or Los Angeles, call themselves?
(People in San Franciso have some grounds for complaint, to be sure.)
"Westerners don't hate us that much; not nearly as much as the South does."
Indeed, the Rocky Mountain and southwestern states are largely quite ripe to give electoral votes to the Democrats in the next election if we play our cards right, and don't ignore the political needs and realities of this region. If we aren't perceived as pandering to Easterners and the views of people with no understanding of this region. (And don't confuse us with Californians or Pacific Northwesterners, not that they should be ignored, either.) (Subnote: keep in mind that there's a lot more to California than LA and SF and Orange County and Marin County, and more to Oregon and Washington than Seattle and Portland.)
Consider Bill Richardson as someone to be on the ticket, one way or another, perhaps; consider having the Convention somewhere in this neighborhood. Consider understanding the ripeness here, and not just focusing on the South and Midwest, and assuming these are Red States.
Thoughts to maybe think about.
And to beat the horse hard, consider not trashtalking Democratic politicians who don't have the luxury of voting the way someone representing Boston or NYC can without a worry in the world.
See, minus two points for not knowing.
Why don't I cherry-pick some fact from my locality and give you demerits for failing to know it. On second thought, no, I'll go eat a cookie instead.
I can say, with perfect confidence, that the Democrats should write off Utah's electoral votes for the foreseeable future. And that Utahns aren't particularly into not telling other people how to live their lives. But I do think that Democrats would do well to think about the west, esp. Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado, maybe even Montana from what I hear.
(Do people in LA really call themselves Angelenos?)
I don't think the resentment of rural Westerners toward others comes from being ignored. They aren't ignored. On their behalf the National Forests are mismanaged and run at a loss to create a artificial economy so people can remain employed in areas of high unemployment. On their behalf the Federally managed grasslands are leased out at subsidized rates and ruhtlessly overgrazed. On their behalf our wild animals on our land are killed, financed by our tax dolars
The resentment comes from the cognative dissonace of a lifestyle that is utterly at odds with their self-perceptions. Rural Westerners like to think of themselves as independent when, in fact, they have been parasites for nearly one hundred years. They bitch endlessly about unfair government regulation--but don't want to admit that what the government is regulating is their subsidized use of our resources. They cling to the myth that their state economies are based on family owned ranches, farms, or small logging operations when in fact the their economies are based on Federal tax dollars.
Conservatives aren't right about very many things but they are right about this: if you give people hand outs long enough they will come to view the handouts as an entitlement. The Westerners are pissed off because their "entitlements " come with strings and aren't sufficient to keep their businesses going in the changing global economy anyway.
Nevada. Nevada, Nevada, Nevada.
Can I trash talk Sen Bingaman, D-NM, for voting for cloture when he doesn't even have a serious opponent? Or Bill Richardson, for offensive pandering?
My favorite Mountain Time televison tidbit: Live network news is tape-delayed. They do a live broadcast in ET and CT and 7pm/6pm, and another live show in PT at 6pm. But MT? The first show tape-delayed, at 6pm local time. I think sporting events are the only things we get live. Ever.
--New Mexico native, now living in the dreaded Bos-Wash corridor. Who loves Bill Richardson.
I have no cookies! I must make do with other satisfactions.
If you were in NYC, how would you pronounce the word "Houston"?
On what Berkeley thoroughfare does the Berkeley BART station lie?
In Los Banos, CA, what elementary school shares its name with a famous American author, though it is not named for this author?
This has only made me hungrier for cookies.
Who doesn't know what people in New York City, or Boston, or Washington, D.C., or Los Angeles, call themselves?
I don't know what people from Boston or Washington, D.C. call themselves. I would venture to guess, "Bostonians" ("Bean-Eaters"?) and "Washingtonians".
I actually don't mind subsidizing Westerners. I mind the snobbishness of people who sneer at "outsiders" from a stand point of faux victimization while lining their pockets with my money and abusing my public land.
But I will keep those thoughts to myself during the upcoming election year.
SCMT, right, forgot to count Nevada as west. Though now we're talking about a desert-mountain split, aren't we? NV, NM, AZ, potentially more Dem-friendly than most of the mountainous states.
I don't know what people from Boston or Washington, D.C. call themselves.
Perhaps bostoniangirl has an opinion.
I think the reason people can't guess what people from Phoenix are called is that 'Phoenix' is morphologically unusual.
If you were in NYC, how would you pronounce the word "Houston"?
Ho, as in SoHo
The federal system is what it is, but when people get extra votes and then whine too, it's hard to feel much respect for them.
The West voted for Bush more solidly than the South did, since the West doesn't have a big black vote. By guess is that white Westerners and white Southerners voted similiarly.
I'm a registered Democrat but the party doesn't come to me for strategic advice and I'm not in any way a spokesman for the party. If there are people out there voting Republican because they feel sorry for themselves because they think that easterners are being mean to them, my own opinion is that they should go fuck themselves. Everyone else has the right to a different opinion, of course.
Anyone besides MHS have a guess? You cannot play if you have ever lived in NYC.
I think our chances are better in CO than AZ, governor aside. Basically, the SW should be ours. Ohio should also be ours. Florida - I really don't get how we don't always win it, and assume we can't win with Jeb there.
the West doesn't have a big black
Yes—go on!
vote.
Hmph.
"Also, the only western state I know anything (in a pretty strong sense of anything, hence the italics) about the water policies of is Arizona, and I'm pretty sure they're state controlled there."
Might look into where water from the Colorado River goes. Hint: not just Colorado.
"But I still don't get it -- doesn't making the Mountain schedule the same, on the clock, as the Central schedule mean that it's not simultaneous with anyplace else? At which point, why didn't they just leave it as matching the coastal schedules."
I'm not going to speak about any other state in the Rocky Mountain time zone; though I've been through each one, the closest I've ever come to living in any other was nearly two months in Phoenix (in an non-air-conditioned attic apartment in July and August; I very much do not recommend doing this).
But in Colorado, at least, essentially everything is done an hour earlier than on the East Coast and West Coast. Primetime on tv starts at 7, ends at 10. Letterman, Leno, and Nightline start at 10:35 p.m., not 11:30 or 11:35 a.m.
And the rest of life, for most, at schools, offices, businesses, follows. I couldn't tell you much about the 19th century practices, although the history of the standardization of time is rather fascinating, and there are some good books on the topic, none of which I've read, although I've read some good articles.
"At which point, why didn't they just leave it as matching the coastal schedules?"
Um, because dawn and sunset happen at different times than on either coast. What would your guess be as to approximately how many miles across the Rocky Mountain time zone is, and how far the western border is from the Pacific Ocean, and the eastern border from the Atlantic Ocean, without looking it up?
Teofilo: "The answer is 7. No one got it right."
And I find that fascinating. For all of my going on here, I never would have predicted remotely that degree of ignorance. I assumed at least half-to-three-quarters of respondents would get it right. Clearly I'm underestimating the very phenomenon I'm talking about.
I'm also trying to watch Boston Legal as I write all this, albeit not altogether successfully.
On their behalf the National Forests are mismanaged and run at a loss to create a artificial economy so people can remain employed in areas of high unemployment.
Yes and no. A lot of federal land mismanagement is to the benefit of the large lumber and energy companies, rather than much benefiting the locals.
NM went for Gore by 366 votes. For Bush over Kerry by 7,000 votes. The Kerry national coordinated campaign had zero presence outside the three largest urban areas in NM.
I never actually lived in NY. But I have visited.
"Cadillac Desert" is a great book about Western water policy.
The West voted for Bush more solidly than the South did, since the West doesn't have a big black vote. By guess is that white Westerners and white Southerners voted similiarly.
I think you're right as you extend north from Utah, but those guys have, what, an electoral vote between them? Moreover, we won't win the Deep South in my lifetime. I wouldn't say the same about the Red West.
What would your guess be as to approximately how many miles across the Rocky Mountain time zone is, and how far the western border is from the Pacific Ocean, and the eastern border from the Atlantic Ocean, without looking it up?
Another quiz! Okay this time I say the RM tz is 750 miles across, the Western border is 750 miles from the Pacific Ocean, and the eastern border is 1500 miles from the Atlantic Ocean.
You obviously didn't pay attention/i> when you visted, MHS, you red state elitist. But I don't mean to single you out; I'm ashamed of each and every one of you.
I assumed at least half-to-three-quarters of respondents would get it right. Clearly I'm underestimating the very phenomenon I'm talking about.
Of all the things that I think I should know about places I do not live, what time TV shows air there is pretty much the last. It has no impact on my life whatsoever.
Of course, as 113 shows, I don't know when TV shows air where I do live.
It may be a big deal that we didn't know that shows start at 7, but why is it a big deal that shows start at 7? Central time does this too. And for a short while one of the Bay Area affiliates tried that too, though they failed and went back to 8. But I was expecting to hear 6 (8 eastern), which would be a huge inconvenience if you didn't get back from work until after 6. 7 might not be what you want, but it's not that bad.
What, I should mispronounce it How-stn, as if I were some benighted New Yorker? Next you'll be telling me about Go-eethee street north of the loop.
I think that from Needles to Barstow, and across to the ocean at LA is only about 250 miles. Or maybe a bit less.
"Rural Westerners like to think of themselves as independent when, in fact, they have been parasites for nearly one hundred years. They bitch endlessly about unfair government regulation--but don't want to admit that what the government is regulating is their subsidized use of our resources. They cling to the myth that their state economies are based on family owned ranches, farms, or small logging operations when in fact the their economies are based on Federal tax dollars."
I bet if we Democrats explain it this way, we'll be sure to get their votes. (There's certainly some truth to this comment and the rest I don't quote; but the notion that most people in either the Rocky Mountains or Pacific Northwest live on ranches, farms, or on or near "small logging operations" is also wacky and ignorant.)
JE: "The federal system is what it is, but when people get extra votes and then whine too, it's hard to feel much respect for them."
Again, a winning campaign slogan and rhetoric. We couldn't go wrong with this material!
Add to it repeatedly, endlessly, explaining to people that they elected the Wrong Democrats and that said representatives Just Aren't Good Enough to satisfy Democrats elsewhere, and we should have a Republican Congress and President for another fifty years. Grover Norquist and Karl Rove couldn't be happier with that kind of Democratic thinking. Where is it you live, again, John?
WD: "Also, the only western state I know anything (in a pretty strong sense of anything, hence the italics) about the water policies of is Arizona, and I'm pretty sure they're state controlled there."
Anyone ever hear of the Colorado River Compact, by the way? Any idea how many counties it covers? (Cheating to click before answering!)
138: I remember that, because it meant that I could watch Picket Fences and the X-Files on Friday nights. It was heaven. Then there was the time both shows, on the same night, aired episodes concerning the implantation of cows with human babies. That was crazy...or was it a conspiracy?
Anyone ever hear of the Colorado River Compact, by the way?
That's misleading. It's a federal matter because it's governed by a treaty between the US and Mexico.
"Ho, as in SoHo."
I've never heard anyone who grew up in NYC not pronounce it "How-stan," myself. I've never heard anyone pronounce it "Ho-stan."
Tourists, of course, go for "you-stan," like the Texas city.
I thought you-stan was a train station in London
we won't win the Deep South in my lifetime
You don't have to win the Deep South; you only have to win North Carolina and Virginia. This is completely doable. Democratic governors in both states.
I could watch Picket Fences and the X-Files on Friday nights. It was heaven. Then there was the time both shows, on the same night, aired episodes concerning the implantation of cows with human babies.
It's a good thing you don't like Sufjan Stevens, Tia. Otherwise, you know… There can be only one.
The Colorado river is a multi-state and international River. The Northwest rivers, especially because of fisheries touch on multi-state and international issues. Lake Tahoe covers two states. Cross border air pollution is also a wide-ranging issue, not only from urban areas but from extractive industries. Garbage/waste can get shipped across state lines. Nuclear materials in Nevada. Etc.: there are a lot of issues in the west that cross a bunch of jurisdictions and bring in the national government. I hope you're not going to ask us about all of them, Gary.
I have to say, I really don't understand water management policy sometimes. We've had 0.03 inches of rain in the last 100 days, and the city responds by implementing phase 1 of the drought contingency plan: suggest that we set our sprinklers so water doesn't run off the property! This strikes me as not awfully effective. (Admittedly, I don't want to water the lawn anyway.)
Amendment to 142: the discharge at the mexican border is controlled by treaty. To meet the treaty obligation, the compact involves CA, NV, AZ, and, I think, CO, and NM. I know NM gets some Colorado river water. Or water that would otherwise flow into the Colorado rive. There's a tunnel.
SB, dude, do you remember cow-implantation incident? I've been talking about it for years and no one ever remembers. And they shrug and I'm like, "You do not understand--they were on different networks! And they both concerned cow implantation with human fetuses on the same night!" And then they look at me like I'm crazy.
"...why is it a big deal that shows start at 7? Central time does this too...."
I wouldn't use the words "big deal," but at risk of repeating myself: the sun rises and sets an hour earlier here (with some variation across extremely wide states, obviously) than it does in the Central Time Zone (which obviously also has some variation from eastern to western border).
Our tv schedules may be more or less the same, but we're seeing them with an hour's earlier amount of darkness and sun, so to speak. I wouldn't call it a "big deal," but it's a difference.
141: I never watched Picket Fences, but I watched the X-Files regularly for a while and don't remember that episode. What season was it?
Gary, I'm not a strategist. I'm not the Democratic Party. I'm speaking personally.
I'm completely tired of whiny, bullying Republican shits. Basically people have telling me for 20+ years that if I kiss their asses just right, they'll graciously consent not to screw everything up. People have been telling me about these wonderful, caring strategies to make those people feel loved, and it hasn't worked so far, and maybe the game is over.
Bush looks weak now, but as soon as he attacks Iran and accuses us all of treason, all those wonderful Westerners will be eating out of his hand again.
SB, dude, do you remember cow-implantation incident?
I do. I think they wanted to have the characters cross over, too, but the networks wouldn't let them.
Do you remember "the squiggly"?
I can't remember. I'll try googling. The cow implantation was more central to Picket Fences, and was more of a red herring in the X-Files ep.
151: Gary, I think the point is that the shows air in the Central Time Zone at 7 Central, and in the Mountain Time Zone at 7 Mountain. So modulo variation across extremely wide states (we've got some of those here in the Central Time Zone too) both time zones should be seeing the shows with about the same amount of darkness and sun left.
141: Wasn't it just a crossover episode?
157: It wasn't so advertised, and they're on different networks, so they had no reason to cross-promote.
Oh wait, I hadn't seen 154. No, what was the squiggly?
I've never heard anyone who grew up in NYC not pronounce it "How-stan," myself. I've never heard anyone pronounce it "Ho-stan."
That was a joke, son, a joke. Sorry.
I'm completely tired of whiny, bullying Republican shits.
I'm equally tired of whiny, bullying Democratic shits. NM should have delivered our 5 electoral votes for Kerry. That we didn't I think says a lot about the priorities of Bill Richardson and the Democratic Party of New Mexico. And none of it good.
[When I taught my American Literature class on Transcendentalism, I shoved in a chapter of Edward Abbey's Desert Solitaire at the end, even though my students were tired and didn't want to think any more.]
"It's a federal matter because it's governed by a treaty between the US and Mexico."
You can click on the link, now.
"I hope you're not going to ask us about all of them, Gary."
Nope. And I'm no expert in regional issues. But the Compact is likely the most important regional issue, and has been for 7 states -- which negotiate with each other -- for 75 years. That this is so is not something you're apt to find much awareness of in the east, outside of people with a professional interest, or who happen to be quite well-read, or attentive to the politics of this region.
Mexico is not a signatory. The federal government didn't impose it, although it is also an Act of Congress, and was signed by President Hoover. But describing it as primarily an issue of the federal government is more wrong than right; it's primarily an issue among the 7 states that negotiated it amongst themselves.
Okay, now I'm going to go watch the 3rd neo-Battlestar Galactica 2.0 DVD. Ta.
I've been behind the thread all night, why change now?
The story behind the story behind the cow implantation.
Mexico is not a signatory to the compact. That is true.
But there is a 1945 treaty between the US and Mexico specifying how much water must remain in the Colorado when it crosses the international border. See
http://www.engineering.usu.edu/uwrl/atlas/ch7/ch7colrivercompact.html
Under the supremacy clause that sure as hell makes it a federal matter. The states are bound by that limit. You can't talk about the compact without considering the treaty.
what was the squiggly?
Instead of giving you a straight answer, which would dishonor the show's memory, I will offer you this link.
"I'm speaking personally."
Not gone yet, apparently. But, John, you are extremely representative of the views of a huge section of Democratic activists, I would argue, by my observation. Interestingly, but utterly unsurprisingly, my friend Thomas Nephew (whose Newsrack blog is excellent, and you should all read it) used almost identical language to me a week or so ago about how anyone who supported any Democratic Senator who didn't vote for the futile filibuster "should go fuck themselves."
This is an extremely widespread POV amongst left/liberal activists; I'm sure this isn't news to you, and I don't have to dig up a jillion comments from left bloggers or blog commenters to cite in support.
And, weirdly, telling Democrats from other states with different political environments from your own that their local political concerns are irrelevant, of no concern, should be of no concern to the national Democratic Party, and that they should all go fuck themselves (or that they're traitors or Not Real Democrats -- not language you've used here, I'm speaking generally) is not going to win votes in said regions. Not many, anyway. (And if people want to storm off and support the Green candidate, or Nader -- again, speaking of some, not you -- that's another form of helping elect Republican Congressional control.) This is an old, old, political debate, of course, which was particularly relevant in 2000 (addressing Nader supporters, not you, John: gosh, that whole "no difference between the two parties" and "no difference between Bush and Gore" notion worked out really well, didn't it? Look how much stronger the Greens and third parties are now, too!), and I'm not deaf nor blind in regard to the need to adhere to principles nor to elect left candidates where they can be elected, nor blind nor deaf to the need at some times to go down in defeat on principle, but I would only urge some humility in passing judgement on people in a political environment one doesn't possess all that much knowledge of.
Which is why I, for one, don't have all that much to say about the politics of other Rocky Mountain states. Naturally, you're entitled to take a different view, of course, and neither am I saying none of us have a right to an opinion about the politics of other states than those we live in, or to speak said opinions. I merely suggest a degree of caution and humility might be wise. That's all.
"Bush looks weak now, but as soon as he attacks Iran and accuses us all of treason, all those wonderful Westerners will be eating out of his hand again."
This is, incidentally, wildly untrue of Colorado Democrats. I'm pretty doubtful it's very accurate about other Rocky Mountain state Democrats, for the most part, either. But I'd be pleasantly surprised if you could name many members of the Colorado Democratic Congressional delegation without checking, or name the most popular Democrat in Colorado without checking, though I might, of course, be wrong, given your degree of activism and attention and passion.
I merely suggest a degree of caution and humility might be wise. That's all.
Killjoy. That takes all the fun out of it.
I'm not at all sure you're right in saying that the quisling attitude of some Democrats is a reflection of their local concerns.
One of my senators, Jeff Bingaman, Democrat, voted in favor of the bankruptcy bill. I'm reasonably sure that there wasn't a big outcry among grass roots democrats here in favor of putting the screws to debt ridden consumers. I can only infer that he was reacting to money, and pressure, at the national level. Or big money local interests. And that I surely hold agin him.
Gary, nobody knows all 535 of the bastards.
I'm more or less retired from political blogging. I didn't think I was accomplishing much personally, I ceased to enjoy it, and I really don't think the Democrats will succeed in responding effectively to the next trick Bush pulls out of his sleeve, which I assume will be Iran plus taunting.
So now I can vent without guilt as I watch the shit hit the fan.
Matt: "...modulo variation across extremely wide states (we've got some of those here in the Central Time Zone too)"
Kinda thought I had that covered when I wrote "...than it does in the Central Time Zone (which obviously also has some variation from eastern to western border)."
"...both time zones should be seeing the shows with about the same amount of darkness and sun left."
[scratches head]
Okay, look here. For Cleveland, Ohio, Central Time Zone, here are the times:
The following information is provided for Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Ohio (longitude W81.7, latitude N41.5):
Tuesday
7 February 2006 Eastern Standard Time
SUN
Begin civil twilight 7:03 a.m.
Sunrise 7:32 a.m.
Sun transit 12:41 p.m.
Sunset 5:50 p.m.
End civil twilight 6:19 p.m. For Boulder, Colorado, this:
The following information is provided for Boulder, Boulder County, Colorado (longitude W105.3, latitude N40.0):
Tuesday
7 February 2006 Mountain Standard Time
SUN
Begin civil twilight 6:35 a.m.
Sunrise 7:03 a.m.
Sun transit 12:15 p.m.
Sunset 5:27 p.m.
End civil twilight 5:56 p.m. Does this help? It's not necessarily an hour's difference, but it's not "the same," either.
Picket Fences was a pretty good show, incidentally. At least they didn't pretend they had a storyline with a point and goal that, in fact, they didn't have a clue about. (Although Gillian Anderson remains a goddess to me; yes, I'm one of them; but mostly I liked the non-"mythos" X-Files episodes, and mostly thought the "mythos" ones were incoherent crap and watched the show, until the last couple of seasons, despite them, not at all because of them; and because the dialogue was generally witty and well-written in the better non-mythos episodes.)
Picket Fences was interesting because it didn't particularly try to go where other shows went, and didn't pay much attention to whether it was a drama or comedy. Excellent cast, as well, but also generally excellent writing, more than not. It was relatively freeform, which was pretty damn unusual for a network hour-long show in its day.
"But there is a 1945 treaty between the US and Mexico specifying how much water must remain in the Colorado when it crosses the international border."
Yes, I'm quite aware. I'm no expert, but I know the basics.
"Under the supremacy clause that sure as hell makes it a federal matter."
Notice the modifier "primarily" here: "But describing it as primarily an issue of the federal government is more wrong than right; it's primarily an issue among the 7 states that negotiated it amongst themselves."
"I'm not at all sure you're right in saying that the quisling attitude of some Democrats is a reflection of their local concerns."
Michael, I said no such thing. I didn't describe all attitudes of all Democrats, or anything remotely like that. I'm writing blog comments, not essays, even if they are sometimes slightly long comments. If I'm trying to describe All Aspects of something, rest assured I'll say so, though, please.
JE: "I really don't think the Democrats will succeed in responding effectively to the next trick Bush pulls out of his sleeve, which I assume will be Iran plus taunting."
I'm cautiously hopeful that we're going to make gains in both the House and Senate. It's far too early to say for sure, of course. But right now, I'm quite hopeful. I even allow myself to dream of taking back at least one body of Congress, although the odds, due to gerrymandering (the most under-rated political problem in the nation, I swear), are quite against that. Still, for now, I can dream. Probably not realistic until at least 2008, though. But keep hope alive.
And eyes on the prize. Also, a stitch in time saves ships, and don't run with scissors; you might put a Democratic Senate vote out.
"One of my senators, Jeff Bingaman, Democrat, voted in favor of the bankruptcy bill."
Oh, and I'm all in favor of beating up any Senator who voted for that bill, Michael. I couldn't agree more that there was no public pressure -- quite the reverse, if anything -- for that, and that there's no excuse whatever for a yea vote. That bill was crap, just like the Medicare D bill was.
Gary, Ohio isn't on the Central Time Zone. It's Eastern. (I lived most of my life in Pittsburgh, about 50 miles east.) The Central Time Zone, at that latitude, starts somewhere in Indiana -- it's confusing, because most of Indiana doesn't do Daylight Savings Time, except for the parts that are closest to Chicago, which switch back and forth between Central Daylight and Central Standard.
I'm not even sure what we're supposed to be arguing about, but here are the data for two cities in the Central Time Zone (the last two I've lived in):
The following information is provided for Milwaukee, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin (longitude W88.0, latitude N43.0):
Tuesday
7 February 2006 Central Standard Time
SUN
Begin civil twilight 6:30 a.m.
Sunrise 7:00 a.m.
Sun transit 12:06 p.m.
Sunset 5:12 p.m.
End civil twilight 5:42 p.m.
The following information is provided for Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas (longitude W101.9, latitude N33.6):
Tuesday
7 February 2006 Central Standard Time
SUN
Begin civil twilight 7:13 a.m.
Sunrise 7:39 a.m.
Sun transit 1:02 p.m.
Sunset 6:25 p.m.
End civil twilight 6:50 p.m.
So, given that shows that aired at 8pm Eastern aired at 7pm Central in Milwaukee and Lubbock, and at 7pm Mountain in Boulder, the person in Milwaukee would see the show 1 hr 18 min after the end of civil twilight, the person in Lubbock would see it 10 min after the end of civil twilight, and the person in Boulder would see it 41 min after the end of civil twilight. Whereas the person in Cleveland, who sees it at 8pm Eastern time, would see it 1 hr 41 min after the end of civil twilight and someone in New York would see it 2 hr 11 min after the end of civil twilight.
The point being, the timing of the show relative to sunset is in roughly the same range for both Central and Mountain time zones, whereas in the Eastern time zone the shows are on later relative to sunset. Mountain time zone isn't unique. It doesn't have an extra hour relative to Central. As you said, it's not a big deal.
I should say I really don't think any of this is a big deal either way; I don't know when the local TV shows are, or anything like that. There are lots of details about life in different parts of the country that people from elsewhere probably don't know. I know that partly because of driving between Milwaukee and Pittsburgh a few times (and partly because of this suck.com series on the Indy 500 -- that's libertarian coastal condescension, please note).
For anyone who wants more quiz, what other state doesn't do daylight saving time, mostly?
Cheating OK, especially because I see that Indiana went Daylight Savings on me last April, the bastards, effective this coming year. Messed up a perfectly good factoid.
Except that there is no rational reason for this program (at the level at which information has been revealed -- I'm not talking about algorithms) to be classified. [...] The secret being kept here is that the Executive was doing this monitoring without court authorization
You might be right. I hope not. I think the facts that the New York Times delayed publication for a year, and even then did not report certain information, says that there's more to this than a desire to escape warrant reqs though. In any event, w/ respect to the checks/balances issue, whether the info. is properly or improperly classified, the problem of whether to protect whistleblowers who reveal it from prosecution remains. It's a difficult issue, and I'm not really sure where I stand on it.
So far as the "resentment of the West" issue...
Again, why would Democrats and independents in Western states possibly not welcome this message from Democrats elsewhere? It's a major mystery, indeed. Inexplicable. Irrational. Weird.
Gary, when you write a comment in which you claim Westerners resent "Easterners" because Easterners fail to understand the intricacies of water rights and networks publish show-times with an Eastern bias... you have to expect some "give me a break" responses. There are more typically NYer expressions that could have been used though.
The only places I've ever really found resentment of New York all happen to be in upstate New York---a term which is in itself somewhat dismissive. I've lived in various places across this country, and frankly most people WELCOME the difference between their homes and what they believe NYC to be.
But hey... we could always try sensitivity training for New Yorkers...
I don't think Gary was claiming that westerners were correct (or incorrect, for that matter) to be irritated by Eastern elites; LB asked a question and he answered it (quite well, in my opinion). My quiz was just a simple illustration of his point, and nothing more -- TV show times are arbitrary and there's no great cultural significance to them. Most people know very little about the minutiae of daily life in other parts of the country; there's no problem with that, but in the case of the West it does feed into people's perception of being misunderstood (again, whether or not this is accurate in any sense). One big issue which hasn't really been addressed here, which I think has a lot to do with East/West antagonism, is migration: the populations of western states are growing rapidly, and most of the newcomers are from the East (and California). That's bound to cause some tension, and the differences in culture and attitudes (real or perceived) between migrants and locals only intensify it.
And now to bed, as I'm not actually in the West right now and it's very late.
For anyone who wants more quiz, what other state doesn't do daylight saving time, mostly?
Sitting here, 21 miles from the western border of NM, I'm trying to remember. There's that big space between Gallup and Needles, CA. What's it called? Phoenicia? That doesn't sound right.
I still have serious objections to any analysis that uses categories such as 'the west' or 'the east'. I can't even conceptualize NYC as a single group. My mother's sisters lived in Queens, near the F train, 82d street stop. The last sister, before her death, moved out to near the Main Street, Flushing stop. The difference between those two stops was roughly the distance between El Salvador and Korea. The distance the other way, to Times Square, is comparable. Of course, the distance from Times Square, ca 1970, to Times Square, 2000 (last time I was there) is immeasurable. How can one meaningfully talk of 'New Yorkers"?
New Mexico is similar. Even within Albuquerque there's a diversity. I stuffed envelopes for a city council candidate, who'd lived here for two or three decades. One of her old friends came out to help, from Little Italy, Manhattan. Or NoLIta, as she said it was now called. We discussed whether Lower Little Italy (LoLIta) would soon be a named area. We were supervised by the campaign manager, who is Acoma.
Sitting here in Gallup, same thing. There's a surprisingly large arab community here. And a major batch of people who work for the IHS/PHS, who come from everywhere. Yes, there are a lot of Navajos and Zuni is just down the road. And if you assume the one you're talking to is rural and isolated, you're going to be horribly embarrassed when you realize they've got an advanced degree from some big school back east.
This is another side of the migration that Teofilo so correctly identifies. People move. All the time. Everywhere. Demographics change. Generalizations which may have been true, or close enough to true, 20 or 40 years ago are likely to be seriously misleading today.
Quick drop-by. (Goddamnit, still haven't gotten to the DVD; this is absolutely typical of me; compulsive reading and ADD and "I'm just about to do that next, in just a minute, I swear!")
"Gary, Ohio isn't on the Central Time Zone. It's Eastern."
Oops, he explained. I knew I should have checked a map, and not rushed.
Andrew: "The secret being kept here is that the Executive was doing this monitoring without court authorization
You might be right. I hope not."
Not even the Administration remotely has ever claimed they're doing the Program with court authorization, FISA or otherwise. I don't want to be rude, and neither am I going to take time to cite, so all I say is that you desperately need to read just a little about this subject, and buy a clue. (Yes, the last clause is a bit rude; shoot me.)
"The only places I've ever really found resentment of New York all happen to be in upstate New York"
This is also, I'm sorry, incredibly ignorant.
Michael: "How can one meaningfully talk of 'New Yorkers"?"
I've lived near the Main Street stop, briefly, too, Michael.
As for this query, hundreds of millions of Americans manage it. To be sure, something I only discovered at the beginning of the Eighties, which astonished me, was that there were New Yorkers so parochial and ignorant of the reputation New Yorkers have -- rightly or wrongly and mostly wrongly -- amongst much of the rest of the nation that they, the New Yorkers, were completely and utterly ignorant of said reputation and the frequent resentment of many from elsewhere in the country towards New York City.
All I can say to that is that is to suggest you try traveling around the country a bit, or taking an online survey of random people around the nation, or looking up some polling data, on national attitudes towards New Yorkers, and see what results you obtain.
Yeah, people lump "New Yorkers" together, despite the differences. And this has been going on since the beginnings of the 18th century, you'll find, if you look hard enough.
Also, we talk fast. And people say we're rude (which is more calumny than not, but that fact doesn't mean the perception isn't widespread). And so on and so on and so on.
Diversity is irrelevant to perception. The accuracy or innaccuracy of generalizations is also irrelevant. People use generalizations, and have perceptions, and it turns out they aren't always rational or factually based.
Somehow, they exist, and can be widespread, regardless. Maybe I'm missing something here, out of haste. Okay, attempting a final try for "night-night" here.
I would have guessed that a show saying 8/7 Central would show at 8pm MT, because that's how it generally works in Canada. If a TV show shows at 8pm in Toronto, it will show at 8pm MT in Edmonton.
This seems to make a lot of sense to me, but I'm guessing it's the huge population difference that changes the broadcast schedules for the MT/Pacific zones in the U.S.
IF people lump me, I'll lump them, with maybe a little extra. Tit for tat.
Nothing's at stake with my uninfluential opinion.
Me: "At which point, why didn't they just leave it as matching the coastal schedules?"
Gary: Um, because dawn and sunset happen at different times than on either coast. What would your guess be as to approximately how many miles across the Rocky Mountain time zone is, and how far the western border is from the Pacific Ocean, and the eastern border from the Atlantic Ocean, without looking it up?
So this horse is terribly, terribly injured, and was a small and unimportant horse to begin with, but you missed the point of my question. In the Eastern and Pacific time zones, I believe TV shows are on the same clock schedule -- a show that is televised at 8 EST is televised at 8 PST: three hours later, but roughly the same relationship to sunset. In the CST, that same show is televised simultaneously with the showing in the EST, which makes it an hour earlier on a CST clock. My understanding is that this is done so that a TV station located on the border between the EST and the CST could broadcast to both zones at the correct time for each.
Showing TV in the Mountain time on the same clock schedule as CST leaves it simultaneous with no other zone -- it's an hour later than CST, and two hours earlier than PST. You can't have a border TV station that correctly serves two zones, if one of them is Mountain. At that point, I wonder why they didn't make the MST clock schedule the same as that on the coasts -- schedule shows two hours after they're shown in EST, and one hour before PST, leaving CST as the only zone with an unusual clock schedule.
Not even the Administration remotely has ever claimed they're doing the Program with court authorization, FISA or otherwise. I don't want to be rude, and neither am I going to take time to cite, so all I say is that you desperately need to read just a little about this subject, and buy a clue. (Yes, the last clause is a bit rude; shoot me.)
No Gary. LB suggested that the ONLY secret being kept, i.e. the ONLY reason the program was ever classified in the first place, was the fact that it was done without warrant. I said that I hoped she was wrong, and that there is good reason to suspect there were at least some other factors involved in the decision to classify the program. You don't need to cite anything. You just need to read.
So far as the reputation of New York or NYers nationwide... oy vey. Just about every region of this country has its own peculiar stereotype, and other regions love to play with them. That doesn't mean that said stereotypes are of any importance to people. I've lived and traveled throughout this country, and I've yet to find "resentment of New York" to be a significant factor in any social interaction or political position. The one exception is upstate New York, and even there I didn't find it to be of much importance.
I tend to agree more with those who say that the real divide in America is urban/rural, not regional.
On that I agree, Arnold. However, it requires that you put the threshold of rurality at about 30-50,000 people, which is a bit irregular I think.
Some sort of weighted index combining rurality, whiteness, Southernness, non-coastalness, and non-adjacency to higher education would probably get us where we wanted to be. Maine, for example, is pretty rural but not terribly conservative. Northern Mississipi / Alabama and southern Tennessee would probably be the champs.
"Showing TV in the Mountain time on the same clock schedule as CST leaves it simultaneous with no other zone -- it's an hour later than CST, and two hours earlier than PST."
That's correct. I don't know the history of this. I just found it like that when I got here, officer, I swear.
"At that point, I wonder why they didn't make the MST clock schedule the same as that on the coasts -- schedule shows two hours after they're shown in EST, and one hour before PST, leaving CST as the only zone with an unusual clock schedule."
Because we're two hours earlier than the East, not later. And the Pacific Zone is three hours earlier than East, one hour earlier than us.
Because we're actually two hours behind EST, that would mean showing, say, the network news (which is on the half-hour on every station in my broadcast area; I have no idea what the schedule is like in some other part of Colorado, which isn't a small state) two hours before they start at 6:30 p.m. or 7 p.m. on a NYC station, and then the equivalent time here would mean that we'd be seeing them two hours further after sunset than the east would, but more to the point, would require an entirely separate, two hours earlier-to-be-made, news broadcast. Or, in other words, three separate broadcasts, or altnernatively, the East Coast only gets taped news. That would be expensive.
Similarly, they'd have to broadcast a separate version of the morning "Good Morning America/Today/CBS This Morning" at 5 a.m. EST to get to us at 7 a.m. our time.
And, getting back to my original point, it's no skin off network news for the middle of the country to get news on an hour's delay. Why would that really matter to anyone in the East?
But, somehow, the idea of the East getting the news only on an hour's tape delay? Funny, but I'm willing to bet that was never, ever, ever, ever even seriously considered by NY HQ for the networks. What do you think?
And it's a double standard that would never occur to hardly anyone in the east. We're just supposed to take it for granted that we're second-class, and second-class in the RMTZ to the point of not being even ever mentioned in the multiple-times-every-evening bumper promos. We just aren't even worth mentioning. We don't exist.
It's a small thing in the scheme of things, but it's absolutely representative and typical of the Eastern approach to the Rocky Mountain states.
Andrew: "No Gary. LB suggested that the ONLY secret being kept, i.e. the ONLY reason the program was ever classified in the first place, was the fact that it was done without warrant. I said that I hoped she was wrong, and that there is good reason to suspect there were at least some other factors involved in the decision to classify the program."
If that's what you were saying, I have no argument with that.
When I click to post this, it will be at 12:27 p.m., my time.
"Showing TV in the Mountain time on the same clock schedule as CST leaves it simultaneous with no other zone -- it's an hour later than CST, and two hours earlier than PST."Whoops, that was damnfool careless of me. It's incorrect, of course, as I just got through saying. We're an hour earlier than CST, and an hour later than PST, and two hours earlier than EST. (And now a Hawaiian can pipe up and really start bitching, including about how tourists talk about "going back to the US" from Hawaii.)That's correct.
Okay, except that on the tv schedule, damnit, we're seeing tv programs at the same clock time as Central.
Look, I wound up going to bed at 4:45 a.m., my time, after stuffing down two Ambien and a bunch of melatonin, and then getting up at 7:15 a.m. I shouldn't be posting. What's my name? What blog is this? What's a "keyboard"? What are "numbers," anyway?
I'm trying to shut up now, or you can just shoot me and put me out of my intravenous-coffee-line-directly-into-brain-'o-mud. Please.
Similarly, they'd have to broadcast a separate version of the morning "Good Morning America/Today/CBS This Morning" at 5 a.m. EST to get to us at 7 a.m. our time.
I'm pretty sure 9am on the east coast is 7am MT. You're two hours earlier, but that just makes the coast two hours later (in a miracle of tautologies). If they filmed it at 5am it would be 3am in Colorado.
*speculates that the reason the West doesn't get live news is because we've all forgotten where it is.)
(And now a Hawaiian can pipe up and really start bitching, including about how tourists talk about "going back to the US" from Hawaii.)
How about we just bitch about mainlanders' use of "Hawaiian" as a geographic term (to mean "resident of Hawaii") rather than an ethnic term (to mean "Native Hawaiian," usually under a one-drop rule) as it's used here?
We also skip the daylight savings time thing, but that's because of latitude, not attitude.
So if a show leaves NY at 5pm ET traveling west at the speed of light, at what time will a dead horse finally decompose in a comments thread?
We must remember to blame the industrial-congressional complex for oppressing the poor with horolonormativity. And Illinois. Gotta blame Illinois.
Solar time was costing the railroads money. Scheduling was a nightmare when each little town defined its own noon in terms of when the sun chanced to be at its zenith. So the railroads got together with their friends in congress and imposed standard time. Now folks across the country could no longer tell time by the sun, they had to go out and buy a new fangled timepiece.
This demand for clocks and watches drove a whole industrial sector. Companies sprang up to produce product to meet this demand. Particularly in Illinois, home to the Illinois Watch Co (Springfield), the National Watch Co (Elgin), Rockford Watch Co (Rockford) and the Western Clock Co (later Westclox, La Salle - Peru). Big mail order operations such as Sears, based in Chicago, made a lot of money retailing these products. So Illinois supported horolonormativity.
Thus, if you're unhappy with when Good Morning America is broadcast, blame Congress and the big corporations. And blame the USPS, which tends to deliver my Sunday NYT on Thursday.
196: There is a good, worthwhile thread on this very subject over at Making Light.
darling, how would I know what time some idiotic television show comes on somewhere in america? I don't watch TV.
[pushes horn-rimmed glasses up nose, shoots cuffs, ducks to avoid hail of invective ]
