Tedger.com

On the Ballot in California this year will be “Proposition 8″ which in the voter information guide¹ is described as follows.

ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments.

As I’m sure you know California became the second state to allow gays and lesbians to marry, Iowa was briefly the third. Californian (and national) social conservative groups went into an uproar over this and have decided to come to the defense of marriage. In order to overturn the California Supreme Court a constitutional amendment was proposed to define marriage in the California Constitution. To pass the measure requires only a simple majority.

Wait…. WHAT?! The United States Constitution is incredibly difficult to amend. It has to make it’s way through Congress by a super majority of two thrids of the Congress and then through three fourths of the state legislatures. In California you don’t even require a majority of the populace to weigh in. In theory three people could vote on Proposition 8, two of them for one against and the constitution would be amended². This isn’t tyranny of the majority here, it’s tyranny of the active minority!

There is a more fundamental issue at work here however. In my understanding of Constitutional Law (that’s US Constitution now) brings to mind Article XIV³ Section 1:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; ‘nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.’

According to our Constitution everyone, black, white, male, female, gay, straight is afforded equal protections under the law. You can’t discriminate via legislation or by state constitution. By denying gays and lesbians the ability to marry and enjoy the benefits that the states give to married couples you are discriminating based on a quality of the person. This isn’t a gay right to marriage, it’s a citizen’s right to equal treatment, and I have a great amount of difficulty understanding how people can’t see that.⁴

The current picture of the week was captured before the announcement of Senator Biden as the running mate for Barack Obama otherwise I would have likely commented on it then. I initially wasn’t sure what to think, frankly I was a little surprised that the Obama campaign went with the expected choice. Biden had been rumored and speculated on for days.

What does the selection of Biden mean for the ticket? Well first of all it means that the Obama campaign is concerned about the junior Senator’s foreign policy and experience credentials. Change is still the message of the Obama campaign though so how does picking an old Washington Hand change this? It doesn’t.

Obama’s change has always been about the control of special interests on American politics. It’s about the disenfranchisement of voters and the empowerment of those who feel powerless. It’s about a rolling back of the partisan bickering that has poisoned political discourse. It isn’t about being anti-experience or anti-Washington those are themes that others have tacked on, not Obama. In the primaries it was framed as change vs experience. This wasn’t because Obama was against those who were experienced, it was because he was a self proclaimed agent of change. Clinton however was a self proclaimed agent of experience.

How does Joe Biden fit into this rubric of change? Accepting political contributions from individuals has been a major cornerstone of the Obama campaign. According to OpenSecrets.org Biden has received 76% of his career campaign funding¹ from individual contributions but for 2006-2008 he recieved 96% of his contributions from individuals and 0% from PACs². Compare this to McCain with 80% individual contributions and 16% from PACs³ and you can see a sharp contrast and we’re not even talking about Obama-McCain, we’re talking Biden-McCain. Clearly Biden’s recent record individual contributions and taking PAC money is in line with the Obama camp.

How about empowering those who have been disenfranchised? This goes more to values and personalities than policy or platform but is worth noting. Biden is the lowest compensated member of the Senate. He’s the “poorest” Senator. If any Senator can relate to those who feel disconnected it’s probably Biden. The populist message has only recently become an element of Obama’s message of change but the influence of John Edwards is certainly there now.

Lastly, and I think most importantly, is Biden able to honestly champion Obama’s “post-partisan” message? I think he is. For the very reasons that he is being used to attack Obama by McCain:

Not only does Biden stand by what he says, and not try to twist the facts or weasel out of past actions by selective memory, he lauded his fellow Senator for the work that he’s done for our country. The “Change” of Obama isn’t about out with the old and in with the new. It’s about fixing what’s broken and keeping what isn’t. It’s about working with people and opening a dialog with them, especially if they don’t agree. Unfortunately I can’t find the exact line but Senator Obama said that he wanted to choose a running mate that would argue with him, debate matters with him and keep him on his toes.

So I think that even though Biden might not be the obvious candidate for change he can definitely fit into Obama’s change. Not to mention that he’s one hell of a fighter and I can’t wait to see the Obama campaign throw some punches by way of Biden allowing Obama to stay above the fray. They’ve needed a VP candidate for months.

This morning I decided that I should write my Senators. Why? Electronic voting. The picture that accompanies this post is an electronic voting machine. You probably saw one (maybe you used one) in the last election. After the mess that was the 2000 election Congress passed the HAVA¹. One requirement of HAVA was that all local governments must provide for individuals with special needs. Electronic voting machines were an easy route since not only could they support the blind they could also support non-english speakers. Since some local governments were buying new machines to comply with the act anyway whole precincts were replaced with these voting machines².

What’s the problem with this? Well besides the fact that the machine’s are easily hacked³; that the CEO of one voting machine company has personally endorsed and said he would “deliver” the election to Bush in 2004; the fact that the voting machine manufactures refuse to release the source code⁴; that there is no voter verified paper trail for most of these machines; or maybe that some of these voting machines can be opened with the same key that opens a minibar⁵? Well besides those small details they’re pretty great!

Some of these problems can be resolved in a fairly simple manner, a voter verified paper trail. If the voting machine immediately prints exactly what it’s storing into it’s memory to paper so there is a paper receipt of the vote that the voter can verify and if needed can be used in a manual recount it doesn’t matter how the machine tallies the votes. Currently there is no law requiring voting machines to have such a paper trail, and almost none do. This is changing and there is currently a bill working it’s way through the Senate to change this (S. 3212). However, the bill makes an exception for voting machines purchased before January that were bought to comply to HAVA. This is completely unacceptable. If the exception stands these insecure voting machines will undoubtedly remain in use for years.

When I found out I decided that I needed to write to my Senators. Most of these machines in Iowa are only used to meet the requirements of HAVA in order to accommodate disabled voters. One Iowa Senator, Tom Harkin, has a long history of supporting disabled voters. The other Iowa Senator, Chuck Grassley, I really don’t know how he’ll stand on this. Either way, I thought that it was important enough that I let both of my Senators know my feelings on this issue. S. 3212 appears to be a good bill with many measures needed to fix the electronic voting mess and I hope it passes, even with this exception.

One last thing. There is a really easy way to avoid all of this. Use paper ballots. There are braile ballots and ballots printed in other languages. It’s not that hard, and doesn’t need any fancy, and expensive, toys to fix.

For those of you who wish to contact their senators I’ve included my letter as a sample. Most senators and representatives have online forms that are respected just as much as a paper letter. It doesn’t take much time. Just fill in the lines I’ve left for your information and google “contact ” generally the first hit will be the page you want.

Dear Senator ______, It has come to my attention that a highly necessary bill to improve the accountability of America’s electronic voting machines is making it’s way through the Senate (S. 3212). I support this change no matter the expense as very little is more important then the accountability and security of our elections.

However, there is an exception placed in this bill for voting machines purchased before January 1, 2009 to meet HAVA’s requirements. Such an exception would lead to Americans that use these machines because they must (the disabled and non-English speakers) to use these sub-par, unverifiable voting machines for years.

I understand an exception may be needed to allow local governments to meet the law for this coming election cycle however I think the exception should have a termination point. Give local governments a grace period, but don’t give them the chance to marginalize these voters forever. Thank you for your time.

---

I am so amazingly pumped. I get my kitty tomorrow! I’ve picked a name. I’m naming her “Dimmit” which is Amharic for “cat.” However I’m planning on calling her “Dimmie” most of the time because that sounds less like an expletive, and it’s cuter. Many photos will be taken an posted.

UPDATE: The Picture of the Week is now a picture of me and Dimmie. I’ve also uploaded pictures to flickr here. There have been additions to that flickr set since the potw for those of you who already saw those.

This post is a bit of a rant, you’ve been warned.

Today is the two hundred and twenty third anniversary of the adoption¹ of the Declaration of Independence. Two hundred and twenty three years ago the United States officially declared themselves separate and independent of the tyranny of the King of England. It’s a day to be remembered, and it is. People everywhere will be going to see fireworks and grilling and celebrating with friends and family. One thing as of late has bugged me about the celebration of Independence Day, the way people acknowledge the day. It has become more and more common to wish someone a “happy 4th” rather than a “happy Independence Day.” It’s a little silly, but this really really bugs me. If we have a holiday in remembrance of something, remember it and say it out loud. You don’t wish people a “Merry 25th” for Christmas, so why wish people a “happy 4th?”

On that note. Have a Happy Independence Day everyone. Celebrate your freedoms, remember those who have fought for it², and go see some fireworks.

While digging through Wikipedia for the previous post I did some reading in the article on Isaac Asimov. None of it was particularly new to me however I did find something very enlightening¹ in this section. Specifically:

For many years, Asimov called himself an atheist; however, he considered the term somewhat inadequate, as it described what he did not believe rather than what he did.

Now I don’t identify as an athiest but an agnostic. I think the people claiming to know that god doesn’t exist have just as little to stand on as those who do. However as this section states this describes very little of what I believe. Humanism² has always been something that I’ve felt described my beliefs well and is a movement that I wholeheartedly agree with. Which begs the question, why don’t I identify myself as a Humanist rather than an agnostic? There is no good answer for it and there is very good reason to identify as a Humanist, and so from here forward I will.

So partially to make progress on goal 4, and partially because I absolutely love Pixar I saw WALL•E¹ tonight. What can I say, it was fantastic. While watching the movie a thought came to mind, why we² make movies. Without giving too much away, WALL•E isn’t just a movie about a super incredibly cute robot. The film starts out in the barren landscape of a post-apocalyptic Earth. We find WALL•E working away at his primary mission, clean things up. Now WALL•E’s idea of cleaning things up is pretty similar to a child, or the typical college student, take your crap and make it into piles. Things really are really only a little better then when he started. Instead of junk scattered everywhere, there is junk everywhere in really really neat piles. It’s cute, but quite frankly for a movie partially targeted at children it is really dark.

WALL•E however is science fiction at it’s finest and by the end of the movie thing’s aren’t all better with everything fixed, but they’re better. However this had me thinking about why I love science fiction, something I’ve always known. Science fiction is frequently about hope. This hasn’t always been the case however but thanks to the brilliant mind of Isaac Asimov and his rejection of the Frankenstein complex this is what science fiction has become.³ Star Trek is a perfect example of modern science fiction that takes this and runs with it. Above all other thins Star Trek was a rejection of the typical dystopian science fiction and an example of what can be.

Star Trek was made in the 60’s a time of social and political upheaval. Amongst many other things the airing of the original Star Trek coincided with the height of American involvement in Vietnam, the African-American Civil Rights Movement, some of the most heated moments of the Cold War, and the assassination of American leaders, Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy. For many Star Trek gave people hope that everything would turn out all right. This was no coincidence as Asimov was a friend and adviser to Gene Roddenberry the creator and produce of Star Trek.

But back to WALL•E. WALL•E represents the same things that Star Trek did, in a time not so dissimilar. People are searching for hope as much now as ever. If you were asked to define Barack Obama’s campaign for president in one word hope would be high on the list of responses.⁴ WALL•E doesn’t go as far as Star Trek and suggest that everything is going to work out perfectly but it does suggest that we can overcome. Hope has been in short supply lately and WALL•E does it’s very best to add some to the mix. Fortunately WALL•E’s very best the work of Pixar and their very worst is better then what some can ever hope for. Amongst other things, hope is why we make movies.

Ian and I took a trip out to see his Aunt in Marshaltown today.  This trip had two objectives.  He wanted to see his sister off, and I wanted to look at kittens.  His Aunt’s cats both just had litters and some of the little ones need homes (the remainder will live on the farm).

Last weekend Mom said that she would probably be ok with keeping a kitten for a few weeks until I move into my new apartment so I figured going out and looking at them was ok.  They’re still a tiny bit young for adoption but that didn’t stop me from sizing them up.  The two you see me holding were pretty quickly the prime contenders.  The one is a long haired all grey kitten.  He was very affectionate and far more interested in people then any of his siblings/cousins/whatever.  The little orange one (with cute little white socks!) was probably the most mellow.  She wasn’t trotting up to me as quickly but she certainly didn’t jump out of my arms when I started petting her either.  They also didn’t present any other clear flaws such as: scratching things, scratching people, hissing, running away, and/or alien infestation.

In the end I decided the only possible methods to choose between them were a) call my Mother (her only insight was that a longer haired cat would leave more hair) and b) make them duke it out.  The end result of option b is pictured here.  Neither were fond of the idea however Bo (the little grey one) retreated far sooner and was declared the loser.

My only problem now is that the name I had picked out (Agathon) really doesn’t work so well and the female equivelant (Agatha) really isn’t sitting too well with me anymore either.  I’m now working on a name, suggestions are welcome.

So I went to see the new Indy movie last week (I went twice actually). I liked it. It wasn’t as good as Raiders of the Lost Ark or The Last Crusade but I think it was better than Temple of Doom. It stuck to the Indy feel fairly well and the blend of fantasy and reality held true to classic Indiana Jones.

My biggest problem with the movie is summed up pretty well by the image at the right (which I posted on the tumbleblog).  There were several moments where all I could do was groan and think to myself “Damn it George.”  I imagine there were probably several conversations somewhat like this:

George Lucas: Steve, Steve, Steve!  I’ve got an idea!  We’ll have Shia swing though vines like a monkey! WITH MONKEYS!

Steven Spielberg: George… we had this discussion already. CG animals don’t make things better.  We gave you the gophers.

GL: STEVE! Common!  We cut half of the gophers–

SS: I KNOW… Geoge… they were terrible, I left them in because you’re my friend.  Why would the monkeys be in the trees with Shia anyway?

GL: Because the monkeys will attack the Commies!

SS: …. Why?

GL: Because they’re the bad guys!

SS: I know… but why would they attack the communists? George, no, no monkeys, no Shia in the trees.  It’ll be just like Jar-Jar all over again

GL: Common Steve! Jar Jar was great! Kids loved him! The problem with Jar Jar was that there wans’t enough of him! WE NEEDED MORE JAR-JAR!  MOAR JAR-JAR!

SS: ….

Yeah… that’s pretty much exactly how I imagine it.  George Lucas, as much as I love his old films, needs to just have a happy retirement.  Away from my movies.

Along with all the sweeping changes to the layout here I’ve changed the comment system to Disqus, the comment system I’ve been using on my Tumbleblog for a while now.  All posts without comments have switched over (including all future posts) to Disqus automatically .  Anything with a comment in the old system will stay in the old system in order to keep the old comments intact.

I’ve also changed the RSS feeds.  Now all of Tedger.com feeds are integrated into two feeds, one for posts, one for comments.  The Comment feed is integrated simply by having all comments go through Disqus (Comments made in the old Wordpress system wont be on this feed).  The posts feed was integrated using Yahoo! Pipes and Feedburner as described here.  If you read Tedger.com via RSS update your feeds!