I saw Just-In-Case at the dreaded Wednesday meeting. He talked a lot and I was reminded why I have put no effort into “running into him” other than that one time. He is very cute (and seems pretty nice) but I could probably not stand to hang out with him one on one. Why is it that a Facebook comment from a Canadian Libertarian who I will never meet makes me smile way more than politely engaging in small talk IN PERSON with Just-In-Case?

I have absolutely no plans for the weekend other than going to the gym and perhaps working on KSAs.

My habit of reading PF blogs is making me kind of obsessive about my own finances. I’ve been fairly aggressive with saving the past 6 months (even with my clothing expenditures) but no matter how much I save, I worry it is still not enough of a cushion to move to DC on. (Not that I’ll move until I have a job, but my expenses will increase DRAMATICALLY). Right now, I am focusing on a fund that is specifically for moving related expenses.  I am keeping it completely separate from my emergency fund, which is in a local savings account and I cannot take money out of it without physically walking into one of the locations. I figure that keeps it pretty safe, and even more well guarded when/if I move to DC.

And of course, I’m still debating the Roth IRA thing, and if I want to get REALLY neurotic I can say “well the time I am wasting considering an IRA is time that my contributions could be growing.” I did one of those retirement calculators on my 401(k) plan and it is all like IF THE MARKET PERFORMS BADLY YOU WILL NOT HAVE ENOUGH. So maybe I should just part with some of my hoarded savings and open a Roth IRA?

I should just ask my dad for advice. He is the most sensible person about these things.

Also, daylight savings time this weekend, so we lose an hour. First of all, fuck George Bush, because daylight savings time is EARLIER than it used to be (it is entirely possible that it did used to be at this time and then it got moved back for whatever reason, but I don’t feel like looking it up). Secondly, daylight savings is a GIANT scam. Finally, because we turn our clocks ahead now, and UK doesn’t for another two weeks (THANKS A LOT BUSH) it makes things very confusing at work, and really, logistically speaking it makes NO SENSE that the UK be just 4 hours ahead of us.

Insert requisite comments from my physics/philosophy friends about how time doesn’t really exist. And with that, it’s the weekend.

It took me two hours to get to work this morning due to the snow and people not knowing how to drive.

I think I have applied for every job in DC that I am possibly interested in, minus the government jobs, which just require an insane amount of time per application. Is it hypocritical for a libertarian to work for the federal governemnt? Possibly yes, but if I want to get to DC it may be in my self interest.

Speaking of libertarian idea(l)s, we were discussing the SOTU on The Libertarian Message Board last night. There was of course nothing surprising or new about Obama’s speech. He does not make me rageful in the ways that GWB did, but the alleged Savior of the left sure has been pretty useless. The Dems are such pussies. Anyway, my idea was I want someone to run for president on the campaign of Doing Nothing. No initiatives, no new government programs, no changes, NOTHING. Just keep the status quo and grind government action to a halt.

Of course, the logistics of the government “grinding to a halt” are a bit more complicated (but just a bit, I swear), but the theory behind stalemate is solid. People on both sides complain that lack of bi-partisanship makes it impossible to get anything done, but I’m fine with the two parties bickering their way into inaction. People on both sides also complain when their party isn’t in power in either Congress or the Presidency about the other party having an unchecked mandate. (The mandate, with which, the Dems have still been unable (unwilling) to put together a healthcare bill)

So I say we elect a bunch of underachievers with no ambition of achieving greatness. That’s where we also get in trouble. The idea that the government can give us all these wonderful things. Not only does it set you up for disappointment (which I think the Obama campaign did, for a lot of people) it makes you forget that the government shouldn’t be providing these things in the first place.  (A government big enough to give you anything, is big enough to take everything away.

I was up way too late last night, and then there was the commute from hell and I am supposed to actually be social tonight but I’m half hoping we have to postpone due to weather. Suburbia is killing my motivation.

Anyway, I’m just watching all the post-midterm elections stuff. Kevin is very happy and I am chastising/teasing him about it; as Jon Stewart ”Democrats are feeling something they haven’t felt in a while: hope…um…yeah good luck with that”

But I have to admit – the GOPist base might finally be fractured enough to screw them over. And that would be good.

CliffNotes version of the scenario: Hurricane hits. Oil distribution is severely effected. Prices rise rapidly, and are predicted to rise further. Bush comes out and speaks against “price-grouging at the gasoline pump,”

Now, Bush’s overall economic policy has proven to me that he knows nothing about Basic Economics, but this is really ridiculous. It’s such simple supply-and-demand economics, and the fact that he would attribute the price rise to greedy individuals trying to take advantage of the victims of the Hurricane reeks of Anti-Dog-Eat-Dog mentality.

Oil distribution and production were disrupted. When the supply of a product is drastically reduced, it makes sense that the price would rise, as the demand, in real terms, remains the same. The price rise is what causes the demand to fall, simply; people will be less inclined to be frivolous with the product because it isn’t worth the price. This is what allows the market to eventually stabilize (I have the utmost respect for The Invisible Hand theory.) The problem is, that in the short term, the supply crush causes big price increases and that when combined with the fear mongering media, causes a spectacle, which causes the Federal Government to get even more paternalistic.

Hawaii has gone so far as to institute “price controls” in which they use legal measures to keep the prices below the level needed to effectively reduce demand, and compound the problem. I wouldn’t be surprised if other states – or hell, the federal-fucking-government – follows suite. This time of intervention is extremely dangerous when dealing with a limited resource such as fuel, because it causes the consumers to demand, at the government fixed price, more then the supplies can provide, which leads to shortages. I cite Soviet Russia as the prime example. “Oh, that’s an extreme case, you can’t compare the two.”; How do you think it began? Russia wasn’t collectivized in a day you know.
It starts with media frenzy and government paternalism and then the whole thing just breaks down in a rather inefficient mess.

Anyway.

No one should ever have been in a position to get sucked into this case, because it never should have been public.

Terri Schiavo’s case has been heard over and over in Florida state courts, and they have consistently found that Schiavo has the right to die, and her husband is the only person legally permitted to make that decision. But somehow, this private matter is a federal issue.

(Republicans are for states rights until you try to legalize marijuana. But no one is really a staunch federalist anymore, so you can’t blame one side over the other)

I’ve never seen Bush as much as a conservative. The Patriot Act, the Department of Homeland Security, and NCLB are the very opposite of limited government and less interference in a citizen’s personal life. This case, however, has the distinction of being the most ridiculous because it ultimately involves the case of one person (Schiavo) and ultimately only affects a small group of people (her husband, parents, and other immediate family who would already have been affected by this anyway) ((Supposedly. This case doesn’t seem like it will serve as a precedent for future legal matters because the legislation is so carefully tailored to fit the details surrounding Schiavo)).

Quite frankly, many of the details in this case don’t matter to me. They aren’t my business. And they are not, and never should have been, the business of the federal government.

Much of this has simply become political grandstanding and media frenzy. Schiavo’s parents are eager to paint her husband Michael as a greedy gold digger whose out for insurance money and already “sinfully” living with another woman. (Actually nearly everything I’ve read suggests Michael Schiavo has gone near broke providing basic care for Terri)

For the most part, I don’t think it’s valid or helpful to overanalyze Michael Schiavo’s possible “motivations” in this case. For every story that claims he’s denied her proper care, with which she could recover, there’s another five saying that he exhausted all medical options before accepting the conclusions the doctors had already come to – his wife was not going to recover. Her brain was essentially gone. Additionally, Schiavo was examined by court appointed doctors – neutral parties – who came to the same conclusion that previous doctors did. The law is not perfect. But when different courts repeatedly rule in his favor, I think that has to mean something for the validity of the law. (I’m sure, if anyone actually read this thing, I’d get lots of angry comments about courts upholding laws on slavery, discrimination, and the like).

There is no compelling evidence that supports any of the charges that have been made against Michael Schaivo. “Competing claims” seem to be an attempt by Schiavo’s parents to distract from the fact that COURTS HAVE CONSISTENTLY RULED IN MICHAEL SCHIAVO’S FAVOR.

Further, a claim is made that her parents would assume all costs for her care, should they gain custodial rights. This is merely a half truth – regular people can’t afford the degree of lifelong care Schiavo would require. Medicaid would be paying for it, and in turn, the taxpayers. As many ardent and not-so-ardent Bush-bashers have pointed out, this injects a degree of irony in to the case: as governor of Texas, Bush signed legislation that “forced cessation of treatment in futile cases in the instance of inability to pay. To be honest, I don’t know what should be done about healthcare in this country. But keeping alive a woman who has no hope of ever recovering seems to be a waste of resources on all levels.

Politicians on both sides are rallying around this issue, promoting some kind of twisted “culture of life,” and playing to the emotional, rather than legal side of the issue. No one wants to imagine their child in the state Schiavo is in. But even without explicit instructions (such as a living will), the law gives one’s spouse jurisdiction over these matters. Of course, as with anything, there is room for this power to be used in an abusive matter, but I still trust an individual’s decision, particularly an individual who actually KNEW the woman is question, over the federal government.

The Federal judge required by the new legislation signed this past weekend sees it fit to permit Michael Schaivo the right to allow Terri to die, as all the other judges who previously heard the case. Likely, her parents will appeal the decision and continue this spectacle further.

Nearly everyone involved in this case are first-rate hypocrites. And I want a living will as soon as possible that states that if I ever wind up like Terri, to pull the plug. Perhaps if nothing else, this case will inspire others to do the same.

YWS:: I picked up and opened a Time magazine and saw the table of contents

YWS:: talking about how ‘Bush’ was planning a space program for Mars in order to boost the technological age, restore purpose to NASA, etc

YWS:  SPACE: America should embark on a mission to Mars
Two decades after the first moon landing, President Bush has a chance to launch an ambitious, long-term program that will give NASA a goal and restore the nation’s technological prowess.

YWS: I saw another article about Isreal/palestine ESSAY: If the Palestinians win, so will Isreal.
The dangerous notion that the intifadeh must be defeated rather than calmed transcendes Isreal’s current political crisis. True statesmen would seek victory for everyone.

YWS:  Then I flipped to the front of the magazine

YWS: it was from 1989!

Me: thats really horrible

YWS: hilarity

Me: this proves that bush is not like FDR, nor mckinley. bush is like bush

YWS: along with another ’89 one about the Supreme Court setting the stage for a corrosive political fight by upholding a restrictive abortion law

YWS: who the hell compared Bush to FDR?

Me: a lot of people. cuz he’s a wartime president whose massively expanding the government

To add to that, um, stirring comparison…Kuzma compared Bush to FDR, because Bush ‘used his instincts, not facts, to guide his foreign policy.’ This was before September 11, but I think it still speaks volumes.

Had a relatively good conversation with someone about the primaries today regarding “Anybody but Bush, Any Democrat but Dean.” Oh sure, I’ll vote for Dean if he’s the nominee, but really people

What the liberals don’t seem to understand is that the centrist vote is desperately needed. The centrist/swing vote is one of the only sectors that matters in this election. Dems will vote for Dems, Republicans will vote for Republicans, especially in this election. The Dems desperatly, desperately need a candidate who can get the swing votes. These ‘swing votes’ aren’t people who are ‘afraid’ of liberals or Dean’s radicalism or whatever. They just aren’t that liberal.

It will be terrible if Bush wins. Those supreme court justices are getting old…It means a lot of things, but the thing I am personally most worried about (and yes, I know there are certainly more pressing issues, etc) is abortion. I am vehemently pro-choice and can’t stand the thought of that right taken away, blahblahblah pro-choice cakes. That’s another reason I support Kerry over Dean. He’s been far more outspoken regarding woman’s right to choose then Dean. Not that I think Dean would ever try to take away abortion rights, he just won’t do anything to a) protect them b) get rid of some of the ridiculous regulations.

.
I have a lot more to say, but I am too brain-numbed right now. GO 351 is going to kick my ass. I need to spend some quality time with my 10 lb Shakespeare tome. Looks like I’ve got a hot date for the weekend!

In other news, the third eye blind song is STILL in my head. I get songs in my head and they stay there forever.

New plan: Quit government major. Become evil doer and build weather machine to make Upstate NY less of a tundra. Whose with me?? If I’m an evil doer I need a following of conspirators who help me out and follow my orders!

I think I also need a life..

It’s just not shocking anymore, because he’s Dubya, and that’s what he says, and it isn’t anything new. The Democratic response was equally predictable. Both Daschele and Pelosi were very creepy in the manner in which they delievered their responses — I think they popped 1000 valium before they went out. I’m glad Pelosi is minority leader, because she proves that women can now be just as incompetent as men, and still be in politics. That’s a step forward or smtg.

The State of the Union is rather anti-climatic, because they have to tell us for days before what the president is going to speak about. And then its the same as any speech he would give anyway, same rhetoric, etc.

Except this year his ‘plan’ was for job training instead of electric cars. Woo.

<GWB>

FOCUS FOCUS! War on terror! War on terror! Saddam was captured! Captured! I did it Daddy, I got the bad man! War on terror! Iraq! Weapons of mass destruction! Destruction, of mass kind! FOCUS FOCUS WEAPONS OF MASS DESCRUCTION. Rebuild Rebuild, Billions, FOCUS FOCUS WAR ON TERROR, PROTECTION FROM TERRORISM WAR ON TERROR, protection from WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, IRAQ, iraq, Saddam is Captured, ALERT ALERT Al-Queeda, FOCUS SAFETY WAR ON TERROR, 9/11, 9/11, terrorists, scary, bad Muslims, keep them away! Focus, FOCUS WAR ON TERROR, terror, destruction…MARS

Kerry won, and although he has no personality, he might be the most qualified of any of the Dems to be president. Plus he’s a Vietnam vet, so they can’t go after him for a military record. A lot of libs don’t like that he voted for the war, but he’s certainly a much better option then Bush. Anyone but Bush…Edwards was second, and although he’s a little too into God for me (he’s Southern) at least he has charisma. A Kerry/Edwards ticket could be pretty powerful against the Bush Dynasty.

Dean was a distance third, and I’m pleasantly surprised. Dean is just unelectable. In addition, I don’t like him. I don’t know why I don’t like him, but I don’t. I mentioned to Brent that it was irrational for me to dislike him for being ‘phony’ because all politicians are phony, but Dean’s brand of phoniness really bugs me! He’s also kind of scary with his anger. He made this really crazy concession speech about how ‘I have only begun to fight’ and he just looked like he was rabid.

Dean’s not really running on anything besides contradicting Bush with the whole Iraq situation. Which someone needs to say, obviously, but he’s made himself into a sound byte candidate. So we went to war, and you didn’t like it. So what.

Most of the candidates have realized that in the minds of voters, that’s in the past. Foreign policy is still a key issue, and they need to have a viable platform. Dean just spouts rhetoric on the subject. That’s certainly not saying that any of the other candidates have any less rhetorical, but at least they’re saying something other than “the war is bad. Bush is bad. I wouldn’t have gone to Iraq.” Because yes Dr. Dean, we already know that, now how about telling us what you are planning on doing?

Dean’s supporters keep saying that people are ‘afraid’ of nominating someone so far left. The thing is, Dean isn’t as far left as he’s pretending to be, if you actually look at his past record. He’s not any more ‘liberal’ in American political terms than Kerry or Edwards. He’s just good at using the right catchphrases right now. And while that’s attracted a certain type of voter, its simply not realistic, and he hasn’t really done anything but complain. Someone like Kerry, Edwards, and Clark CAN get the centrist vote, which, whether lefties like it or not, is going to essential in this election. It has nothing to do with fear, or control, or any of those things Dean keeps spouting. It IS about electability, because its about getting rid of George Bush, and if the Dems could show a united front instead of bitching and nitpicking at each other, then maybe that would be possible.

I still like Clark, but I think the other military guy (Kerry) will beat him out in NH. If Edwards does decently in NH its also going to be a huge boost to the campaign because a lot of the Super Tuesday primaries are in the South. This is actually an exciting primary for once, unlike 2000. Stupid Al Gore. Stupid, stupid Al Gore and the wasted nomination.

In other news, the state of the union is tonight, which is the ultimate in rhetoric. I always get angry about it. Stupid Bush. I really, really, really hope he loses in November.

As Kevin says, Cheney is playing Himler what with his desire for a Final Solution for the Iraqi people.

And Bush said:

“the war in iraq is going well… i don’t care what you s… i don’t care what you read”

Which he wasn’t, obviously. Why would Howard Dean come and speak here, in Davis auditorium tha tonly seats about 100 people?

Anyway, on the GWB front, it’s not so much him I hate, it’s the people who fall for his nonsense. This is six months from the fall of the regime in Iraq, and his bs declaration of “major combat over.”  What is of course infuriating is that the same people that jumped on Bill C for lying about a blow job have yet to jump on Bush of course)

If Bill C. had tried to go to war the was Bush did, he would have no domestic support, whereas people rally around Bush with “our president, right or wrong?”

Brent: it is, he’s like a crafty ape

Me: well he was talking about how we’ve lost whatever credibility we might have had, because we should have started doing something about regaining stablity in the region as soon as bush declared major combat over, but bush keeps changing the direction of the mission

and he wants to do things so it works out around election time, which is impossible

Brent: those crazy bush planners… what won’t they do!

Me: you can’t bring democracy to a country thats ethnically and religiously fragmented, and has never had democracy and has no gov’t structure in 8 months, which is what they want to do

Brent: what they’ll end up with is a weak democracy that falls apart quickly

Me: well look at afghanistan. We set up government there quickly, it was real successful

Brent: well no one cares about that

Me: exactly “Thats not the issue”