Sign the petition to support "Question Time"

If we're truly serious about providing an open dialogue for the public to watch and judge for themselves, then I urge you to sign the petition to support a regularly occuring "question time." Read more about it here.

Sanford (Gov - SC) reverses course, decides to support Race to the Top funds for his state

Sanford, you're a political-posturing asshat:

Gov. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.) is requesting his state's share of an education grant authorized as part of last year's stimulus -- a $787-billion pot of money Sanford in part once declined.

The Republican governor spent much of Thursday meeting with Education Secretary Arne Duncan in Washington, according to media reports, pitching his state's application for "Race to the Top" — a billion-dollar, highly competitive grant program designed to encourage schools to innovate.

{mosads}State officials believe South Carolina is a prime competitor for those education dollars, the first awards of which will be announced in March.

But Sanford's trip this week to lobby on his state's behalf is chiefly noteworthy because of the governor's stalwart opposition to other stimulus programs in the past.

Remember, folks: he was against it before he was for it.

Shocker: Tennessee legislature wastes its time (again)

Via The Tennessean:

A resolution to honor the late pop superstar Michael Jackson has passed the Tennessee House with only one vote to spare.

The resolution sponsored by Democratic Rep. G. A. Hardaway of Memphis passed Wednesday on a vote of 51-22. Measures need at least 50 votes to pass the 99-member chamber.

Another 24 lawmakers abstained.

Whether it's apologizing for things 150 years too late or honoring an intern's college graduation, you can always expect the Tennessee legislature to spend time on things that really matter.

Did I mention that in a republic, we get the government we deserve?

Things I have learned about Nashville and snow.

\

Photo originally from here

I moved to Nashville about two years ago, and I love living here. The culture is great, the attractions are great, and the people are great. My one complaint: the way this city handles snow.

On Friday we got about 4" of snow. We knew this snow storm was coming for at least 3 days before it started. Did Nashville put down any salt on the roads? No. Did they bother to plow the streets shortly after the snow fell? No. I went up and down 21st avenue/Hillsboro Pike last night (a full day after the snow started), and nothing had been done. The same for West End Ave. Charlotte Ave was clear, but that's about it. Any snow that had melted was due to tires constantly running over it. Worst of all, no effort had been made to clear the off and on-ramps of the interstate system.

Yeah, I know you don't get snow often, but that's part of the problem because people here do NOT know how to drive in the snow. The city needs to make more of an effort to get the streets CLEARED so that people don't keep getting in accidents. I must have seen about 10 different cars in different ditches across the city.

I swear, it's like the city assumes that people are just going to stay home. "No need to clear the roads, Mr. Mayor, let the sun take care of it!"

The GOP is obsessed with purity

It will come back to bite them in the ass, but NPR is reporting that the Republican National Committee has adopted a rule denying financial support to candidates who don't support the core beliefs of the party. Still no word on whether an RNC Un-Republican Activities Committee will be established.

It's less strict than a competing plan drawn up by some GOP activists. The so-called "purity test", named in honor of President Reagan, demanded Republican candidates support eight of 10 points on a variety of issues from abortion to immigration to get money and win Republican endorsements.

An about-face of GOP strategy towards Obama?

There has been a recent shift that has left me confused, and a bit suspicious. Maybe a couple of you have noticed it too.

During the past week and a half, I've noticed a shift in the rhetoric that Republicans are using towards the president. Whereas for the past year they have been carpet-bombing the president, they now seem to be struggling to restrain their criticism. They are also backing away from divisive tea party activists. Could they have finally realized that the American people don't want an opposition that just says "no" and a couple of standard lines about socialism? A couple of recent events make me think so.

News came this week that Marsha Blackburn has backed out of the Tea Party convention being held here in Nashville. A few days before that, Michelle Bachmann backed out. Ostensibly, the reason was their uneasiness about the organizer's decision make a profit off the convention. With all due respect to these congresswomen, do you really think that they care about how the money is coming into this thing, or what the money is going to be used for? We've known about the exorbitant price of the tickets for weeks. We've known about the organizer's profit motive for a long time as well. Why suddenly back out now, when they have known about the money issues for a long time? Are they coming to realize that rallying with the fringe elements that support the tea parties could anger a large swath of independent voters? Rep. Blackburn's decision to back out is especially striking, given that she occupies one of the safest seats in Tennessee. In fact, she won in 2008 with 68% of the vote. Franklinites adore her, as do those who live in the exurbs around Memphis. Is she actually worried about how participating in the event will make her look to her constituents (many of whom are likely to attend)? I can only conclude that she knows something that the rest of us do not. She might have been encouraged to forgo the event because it would reflect poorly on the rest of the House GOP.

Besides backing out of fringe events, did you notice the show of decorum that the Republicans put on during Obama's address? According to reports, Republican leaders pleaded with their members to muffle overt criticism of the president. They tried their best, but couldn't keep themselves from laugh out loud at the president when it was politically convenient to do so. However, just knowing that a.) GOP leadership urged respect and b.) members actually attempted to do so, says a lot - especially when compared to last fall's "You Lie" moment and straight up booing of the president.

The impetus of this entire post, however, was what happened today. A couple of weeks ago, the House GOP invited the president to speak at their retreat. Obama accepted. Watching the footage, the Republicans go way out of their way to be deferential, and are prefacing their questions with, "with all due respect," fumbling over their words, and generally just trying to show that they aren't complete assholes. It was all, "thank you, Mr. President," "You have a beautiful family, Mr. President," etc. No doubt the purpose of the event was to show that the GOP had at least made some sort of effort to work with the president.

This apparent tactical switch cannot be analyzed without putting it within the context of the 2010 elections. Last year was a great opportunity for the GOP and astroturf group to really get their base riled up. They certainly did that. Now they are coming to realize that the elected officials exploiting the Tea Party movement aren't exactly what independent voters want to lead their government. Republicans want to project an image of a party that not only can say "no" to Obama, but also has ideas and solutions to actually govern in the case that they (god forbid) take back Congress. I guess they have been noticing the polling data that shows that while the public is pretty down on the Democrats, that isn't translating into love for Republicans. The memory of six years worth of united Republican government is too fresh in the minds of voters. They need to do something to show that they are actually trying to remedy America's maladies.

Yet though they've just recently adopted this slightly more cordial approach, the things that transpired at today's retreat may result in a tweaking of their strategy. If you've been paying attention, you'll notice that the event was televised (at the insistence of Obama). Obama also agreed to take questions from Republicans after he made a short speech. Republicans were hesitant to televise it, but probably expected that they would be able to make the president look like a buffoon since they had the home court advantage.

What actually happened was quite different. After speaking for about twenty minutes, Obama took questions from Republican congressmen for over an hour. He was remarkably candid. He spoke plainly. He calmly stated his disappointment with the tactics of their party. He refuted their talking points. The result? He was kicking so much GOP ass that Fox News decided to stop broadcasting the event.

Given the fact that the president laid the intellectual smack-down on the right, Republicans are likely to shy away from hosting more of these events in the future. They know their ideas are tired and have already been tried and failed. They know Obama is a masterful debater. Giving the president a public forum to criticize them is not a good PR strategy.

Essentially, the Republicans are left with a dilemma. They need to show America that they know how to work with the president to find solutions, but without making themselves vulnerable to (very) damaging criticism. They need to show America that they don't really embrace all the hooey of the tea party attendees, but at the same time they don't want their base to feel like they've been left hanging.

On top off all that - and I hope this is true: they just might find themselves up against a president who is finally more engaged and looking for a fight.

I could be fired for my bumper sticker

So says NPR:

Did you know you could be fired for not removing a political sticker from your car — or even having a beer after work? Lewis Maltby says it's more than possible — it's happened. His new book, Can They Do That? explores rights in the workplace.

As he tells NPR's Ari Shapiro, "Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment — but only where the government is concerned.

"What most Americans generally don't know is that the Constitution doesn't apply to private corporations at all."

Good thing I take the bus to work.