ojai news at The Ojai Post :: blog, newspaper, events in Ojai, California

Nice song.

Well, today's the day. Will Obama do the right thing and join a filabuster on the illegal FISA Bill? It's his first test, hopefully he'll pass.

Here's a link to what's happening in the Senate regarding the canceling of the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Beautiful. Sometimes it’s nice to quiet the mind of the noise of politics, bills, chores, work and just be. Watch a sunset. Get clarity. Don’t even try to match the colors.

So what's the peculiar orange color cast to the sky this morning?
Is there a fire somewhere?
The haziness makes it difficult to identify.

I haven't heard of any fires near us yet. It could be smoke from the fires in Northern California. The Sacramento valley and the northern San Joaquin Valley are entirely blanketed in smoke. I think that most of what we are seeing is from the Basin Complex and Indians Fires near Big Sur. It was visible yesterday in Santa Barbara.

Hi all - I've updated the Open Thread with a user-submitted photo of the smoke from the fires up north - scroll up and check it out.

The smoke you are all seeing is the burning of the Constitution.

In the last hours of business this afternoon the Senate voted to stop any filibuster on the FISA Bill. Here are the real Democrats in the Senate who voted to try and stop the destruction of the 4th Amendment: Biden (D-DE) - Boxer (D-CA) - Brown (D-OH) - Cantwell (D-WA) - Dodd (D-CT) - Durbin (D-IL) - Feingold (D-WI) - Harkin (D-IA) - Kerry (D-MA) - Lautenberg (D-NJ) - Leahy (D-VT) - Menendez (D-NJ) - Sanders (I-VT) - Schumer (D-NY) - Wyden (D-OR). I'm proud that Boxer was among them.

But where is our candidate? Turns out he didn't vote. Along with Clinton, Kennedy, Byrd and McCain. Byrd and Kennedy have health issues. Here is a link to Obama's excuse earlier today. I've been listening very closely to Senator Obama for many months now. Maybe even since his speech in Boston at the Democratic convention in Boston in 2004. Sadly, this is the first time a hint of insincerity has pervaded his performance.

I've already canceled my next installment of $200 dollars to his campaign because he's come out and said he want's to pay off Senator Clinton's debts. This after being the first candidate since the inception of the pubic financing of Presidential elections to opt out.

If he "opted out" of the potential to raise the enormous amounts of money (NOT, btw, from powerful lobbyists to whom he would be beholden - which is the crux of the issue of campaign finance reform, isn't it?? - but from citizens like you and me)...if he blew this chance to successfully fend off the Republican machine - he'd be considered by many a fool.

And the congressmen and women you named above, while to be applauded for remaining steadfast in their altruistic ideals, are NOT running for President of the United States. Welcome to a GENERAL election, where again I will say that Obama must appeal to more than just those who brought him this far. He is beating McCain on every SINGLE issue EXCEPT foreign policy. Perhaps this political move (and let's not forget, he's been a politician for as long as we've "known" him, and a politician who, for the public good, needs to win this race!)...perhaps this is a political (and strategic!) move aimed to quell those middle-American fears out there that he is "soft" on terrorism.

I for one am less worried about this bill itself than I am with those who are the ones in power to abuse it. And from what I've read, this bill is so poorly constructed, that there is AMPLE room for PRESIDENT Obama to go after these companies in the future. Obviously, this becomes a moot point if he loses - which, thank God, he has no intention of doing.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on the issue of immunity, but in my honest opinion, the proper time will come and, with patience and foresight, we all will see some light just a little way off in the future...

we all need to come together and beat the republicans - even if, for some, that means making some compromises

Well it's fire season, and that's when I usually start posting to the Ojai Post. None of the fires are at our backdoor, but I spotted this post on one of the firefighter sites and I thought some of you might be interested (and yep it's been an orange sunrise for the last 2 days up here in Upper Ojai also).....

For those who don’t have the whole Ventana mapped in your heads this may be useful. I glued together the Forest Service recreation map for the Northern Los Padres NF and scaled it. It is about 1.2 MB so within reach of dial-up connections. Just enter the URL’s below into Google Earth – Add / Network Link and you should see the map and then the fires. Right click and open Properties to adjust the transparency to your preference.

http://westtrails.net/Ventana/USFS_ventana_rec_map.kml

http://activefiremaps.fs.fed.us/kml/conus.kmz

These are network links which means that the information will be updated each time you log in to Google Earth.

You now have the details of where the fires are in the Ventana. Be sure to Save My Places or you’ll have to start all over when you restart Google Earth.

It looks like the Basin fires are merging around Sykes but there are far fewer red spots than a couple of hours ago.

This political move you talk about, LTOR, is at least a two time loser. He's not appealing to anyone with this fallback from his promises. Least of all the independents that seem to so concern the Democratic political pundits who have lost the last two Presidential elections.

Obama was getting the over 50% majority who DO NOT vote in elections in this country to register and vote. That was/is his strength. Check your polls. Obama was gaining. Newsweek even had him with a 12 point lead on McCain in their latest issue. This after they had McCain with a 4 point lead two weeks ago! But now look at the very latest polls. The ones that have come out after it's become obvious that Obama is tacking to the center(read right). He's going down faster than Magic Mountain's new roller coaster.

Here's Why:

Republicans are not his target audience.

Conservative indys that vote are not really his target audience either, though he had been making serious gains in that area.

His target is the vast majority of the American electorate who have chosen to stay at home on election day for many many years now.

To make things simple, let's assume that the percentage of people who don't vote but who are eligible to vote is 60%. Let's further assume that of that 60%, as much as half don't vote because they are totally unaware and unable to follow any political discourse whatsoever. My travels around this country lead me to believe that the above assumption is elitist and incorrect, but we'll use it for the sake of argument. This leaves the other 30% of the American electorate who do not vote, more than half again of the current voting electorate!

Those are the people that Senator Obama was reaching. He was reaching them because he was speaking a language they could understand. Not that they are dim, far from it. They recognize that there is little need to vote because the game is rigged. They look outside every election season and think, "What's the use. There's no one in there for me." and they stay home.

Obama was getting them out! Contrary to the opinions of the elite punditocracy in this country, these people are neither stupid nor apathetic. They simply realize that there is often little difference in voting for one corporate candidate or the other.

Sure Obama is preferable to McCain.

Sure it makes a difference whether a Republican or a Democrat is in the White house.

BUT

Obama was running a campaign for real change, and that real change has nothing whatsoever to do with the tactical machinations you outlined above. Nothing. And the vast majority of Obama's target audience know that.

I'll leave the campaign finance thing for another time. It's actually immaterial to the argument over the Constitution and the FISA Bill anyway and I shouldn't have mentioned it.

I will leave you with this from George Carlin:

Vote

Now do you understand where I'm coming from? BTW, I'm no ageist George was 71.

SPK, I completely understand where you are coming from – I just feel differently about how we as Democrats are tactically going about trying to put Obama in the White House.

And, again, like Curious, I am one of those who adamantly feel that we need to close ranks and not give the other side an ounce of material to use or any psychological boost by coming apart at the seams (again!).

I also don’t find your argument valid about worrying about the previous “two-time loser” strategies. And using that theory as a justification to politically hamstring Obama now is dangerous. I just don’t think you can compare the last two elections with what is going on now. We were asleep in 2000 (and understandably so, as we had just come out of 8 years of relative peace, prosperity and an optimistic outlook about ourselves as a nation) and in 2004 – well, Kerry – as brilliant and capable as he was – was no Barak Obama. He lacked the unbelievable charisma, he was Swift Boated, Theresa Heinz Kerry was no Michelle Obama, his campaign was out…(I can’t with a straight face say outsmarted)…outdone by Karl Rove and his “morality and values” message AND we (Republicans and Democrats alike) hadn’t been as collectively dispirited, disgusted and thoroughly fed up with the Republican mess as we are now.

I honestly think the fight for votes will be at the center. With regard to your claim that the most important votes are those 30% who came out because they liked his message and because he spoke their language, etc. I agree – they are very important. They brought him this far, absolutely! However:

a) You must realize that a certain portion of these people who came out in support of him are likely to end up being fair-weather supporters who will NOT turn out come November. During the primaries, Obama had the “it” “rock-star” factor and people from young kids just eligible to vote for the first who thought it was the “cool” and “hip” thing to do – to soccer moms who were simply mesmerized by what he was saying simply jumped on the Obama bandwagon. Are you not worried about this type of “voter”?

b) And the ones that are in it for the long haul - if they weren’t voters before, do you really think they are as knowledgeable (or care about) certain issues like the one we are discussing? Of course there is a danger of the “idea” of Obama flip-flopping spreading that might get them to “turn” and drop out (but for Heaven’s sake – even more reason not to have these claims coming from Democrats themselves!)

c) Add to this the possibility that some pundits are already hinting at – that those “further on the Left” are already starting to shows signs of dumping Obama, (and many of us said right from the beginning that he couldn’t possibly or pragmatically maintain 100% support from those who carried him this far) - even MORE reason to start targeting a whole other demographic.

Now, if he starts “tacking to the right’ on other “big ticket” issues (healthcare, social security, the economy, children's advocacy, etc) then you bet – we will have a problem. But on these “peripheral” issues, can’t we just (for now, at least) give him some breathing space and give him the benefit of the doubt.

And I never called you an aegist, boyfriend, just thought you made a few questionable, hurtful comments. But it's all good...

"A pragmatist's view on FISA" by a former criminal defense appellate attorney:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/26/62819/0991/926/542170

Tyler,

I read that this morning. My primary concern is the strategy of the Obama camp. LTOR dismisses my analysis, but I think has made it more difficult for him to win election in November. This bill, in and of itself, is not really the issue. The issue is the promise that Obama made and his previous statements about the Constitution. The author on Dkos says:

"The current bill will not fix the problem, no matter whether telecoms are given the affirmative defense of acting under color of law. The problem exists in the USA PATRIOT Act, not in FISA."

I wholeheartedly agree with her. But I must remind everyone that Barack Obama won the nomination by courting the progressives on one hand, and more importantly, by getting the people who have been turned off to the process to register and VOTE. They did so because they sensed the honesty and sincerity in the man. I'll remind you further that Obama voted to renew the USA PATRIOT Act before he started running in ernest for the Presidency.`

I never meant to sound dismissive, SPK - and hey, you are far more informed about current statistics and political polls than I am...

I do think we are all extremely passionate this time around and maybe even a little bit schizophrenic in our varying analyses. On the one hand, we are all saying there is no way he can NOT win. Just not feasible! And yet on the other, we are scared to death (!!!) and still arguing (and shifting blame?) about who it is who just might actually cost him the election. Not a healthy situation for our party. I for one would prefer to just continue to combine forces and pound on McCain, but I will respect your right to speak your mind, however much I disagree.

All good thoughts, I've really appreciated you and LTOR's discussion.

Thank you, Tyler. And I look forward to reading the article you provided when I get home.

Oh No He Di-int!!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25376291#25376650

Sorry, SPK, but I find this unbelievable. And besides playing the race card, did Nader just diss Obama for not making led and asbestos pivotal issues in his campaign? Led and asbestos?!?!

This guy was a huge hero to me in the 70's and 80's. I initiated steps to go to law school back in the day BECAUSE of this man and his consumer advocacy. Very, very sad!

Nader is saying what he always says. He's saying that Obama is no different than Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton or Al Gore. That's all he meant. As to the focus of so called "black problems" in the "ghetto", well Obama has discussed some of these issues, so Ralph is wrong there.

California is going to vote overwhelmingly for Obama, even after the Israelis bomb Iran with our support. If Obama reverses his tack to the right, I will vote for him for sure. I may even campaign for him as I was planning. I may even give him more money(after he pays off Clinton of course).

If he continues with the Bob Shrum school of tacking to the center(Read Right) and if the polls are saying Obama will win in my state, I'll vote for Ralph...again.

I'm sorry that Obama supported(but didn't actually vote on it) this new fisa legelation. He certainly flip-flopped on this one. His explanation for his support was lame and you could see him squirm within.

But he still has my vote.

I don't know what everyone is worried about. Obama secured the nomination, and he has big plans to get this country back on track.

Now what happens is straightforward: He needs to tack right to bring in all the big donors. He gets them by promising all sorts of big business, war-friendly, Republican policies. The money is single issue stuff, so its no big deal. He'll quietly, behind closed doors, promise the oil guys to open up ANWR and offshore drilling (ka-ching!); the nuclear guys get nuclear power (ka-ching!); Halliburton gets some more contracts (ka-ching!); Bush and Cheney and cronies get immunity (big ka-ching!); bomb Iran in the first 100 days (huge KA-CHING!); and a few more things like that. Obama's going to be practical and make some compromises so he can win the election. But there's no need for us to worry - he can deliver on all those big money promises in the first 100 days, or first year, or first two or three years, or first term and first half of the next. No matter. Then he'll be totally free after that to get on to the agenda we've all elected him to do. Change!

So come on people, let's stop whining!

I'm voting Republican -- here's why you should, too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0xxU

Anon #21,

Nice satire. That's what we're all afraid of. It will be interesting to see what Obama's fund raising figures for June look like. I'm betting they'll be slightly lower then they'd like, but they won't tout that. I'm also betting the funds started good in the beginning of the month but started to drop as Obama began tacking to the right. Not a smart tactical move, contrary to the Democratic conventional wisdom that has lost the last two elections by essentially doing the same thing. We'll know Monday.

Love it, #22. Not THAT is great satire!!

Here's another ad by MoveOn.org

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOccP_9GOOI&feature=related

Found this little article in the LA Times Friday, June 27, buried on page 22. So insignificant it cannot be found on their website. I'm writing it out here for your perusal. Any comments?

"Senate OKs unrestricted war funding"

"The Senate approved unrestricted funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, allowing continuation of the current military policy through President bush's term and beyond.

In exchange, Bush agreed to create a more generous higher-education benefit for veterans and their families and to extend unemployment benefits for an additional 13 weeks. The $275.5-billion emergency spending bill also includes $2.7 billion in flood relief for the Midwest.

The bill, which had been the subject of a two-month tussle, won overwhelming support in Congress. It passed 92 to 6 in the Senate and 416 to 12 in the House, which acted last week. Bush is expected to sign it."

Where were Barack and Hillary on that vote?

What is Obama doing? This kind of apologizing for nothing garbage is exactly how to lose the election:
--------------------------
From Yahoo News:

HARRISBURG, Pa. - Democrat Barack Obama rejected a retired general's suggestion that Republican John McCain's military experience didn't necessarily qualify him to be president, as GOP surrogates lined up to label the remarks indecent and disrespectful.

A day after retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, now an Obama supporter, discussed McCain's experience as a Navy pilot and prisoner of war in Vietnam on a Sunday talk show, his remarks set off the pattern that has become familiar from innumerable earlier flaps over surrogate remarks during the presidential election year: The candidates, Obama and McCain, took the high road while the bare-knuckled language was left to their surrogates.

At a news conference here Monday, McCain himself said of Clark's comment, "That kind of thing is unnecessary" and distracts from real pocketbook issues voters care about.

About the same time, Obama told an audience in Independence, Mo., that McCain had "endured physical torment in service to our country" and "no one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters on both sides."

The latest dustup began on CBS's "Face the Nation." Clark, the former supreme commander of NATO under Bill Clinton, said McCain's military service was not the same as executive experience.

"In the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk," Clark said "It's a matter of gauging your opponents, and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in the armed forces, as a prisoner of war.

"He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee and he has traveled all over the world, but he hasn't held executive responsibility," Clark said. "That large squadron in the Navy that he commanded — that wasn't a wartime squadron."

CBS moderator Bob Schieffer cited Clark's earlier remarks and noted that Obama hadn't had those experiences either nor had he ridden in a fighter plane and been shot down. "Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president," Clark replied.
-------------------------
Hello? Obama is going to lose if he cannot quickly figure out that he should not be apologizing for stuff like this. He should be forcefully stating that Clark was exactly right, and expand on the theme.

Essentially, the question was: Isn't McCain better qualified to be President?

The answer is, no. But instead, Obama says "no one should devalue" McCain's "service".

That's right. Next time a reporter asks, isn't McCain the only one qualified to be President? Obama and supporters should just stop and say, "aw, shucks, you're right. You got me there. Of course he is. After all, Obama has never even been shot down from a fighter plane. What were we thinking?"

Obama might as well just withdraw from nomination now if he can't get this right. There is still time for Hillary, who despite all her faults would not be apologizing because some other person suggested that McCain might not in fact be the best person to be President.

"Fellow citizens, I heard that a supporter of mine suggested that John McCain might not be the best candidate for President. I want to apologize for that statement. I disavow it completely. Its just not true. And its not the kind of campaign I want to run."

Jeesh.

Mensa list 2008
Washington Post's Mensa Invitational once again asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by adding, subtracting, or changing one letter, and supply a new definition. Here are this year's winners. Read them carefully. Each is an artificial word with only one letter altered to form a real word.
17. Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you realize it was your money to start with.
16. Reintarnation: Coming back to life as a hillbilly.
15. Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near future.
14. Cashtration (n.): The act of buying a house, which renders the subject financially impotent for an indefinite period.
13. Giraffiti: Vandalism spray-painted very, very high.
12. Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic with and the person who doesn't get it.
11. Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.
10. Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
9. Osteopornosis: A degenerate disease. (This one got extra credit.)
8. Karmageddon: It's like, when everybody is sending off all these really bad vibes, right? And then, like, the Earth explodes and it's, like, a serious bummer.
7. Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting through the day consuming only things that are good for you.
6. Glibido: All talk and no action.
5. Dopeler effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
4. Arachnoleptic fit (n.): The frantic dance performed just after you've accidentally walked through a spider web.
3. Beelzebug (n.): Satan in the form of a mosquito, that gets into your bedroom at three in the morning and cannot be cast out.
2. Caterpallor (n.): The color you turn after finding half a worm in the fruit you're eating.
#1 pick: Ignoranus: A person who's both stupid and an a**hole.

Sigh. Here it comes: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jqqqF79sCN4HSE6uVrPQVBQpYZVwD91L8H081

Yeah. I saw that too phalarope. Not good. It's not looking good. If he votes Yes on the FISA Bill, I'm out. Sad.

I guess nobody warned him not to fall asleep next to one of those pods.

Yeah, it's kind of scary. Maybe Bill Hicks was right after all:

I have this feeling man, 'cause you know, it's just a handful of people who run everything, you know, that's true, it's provable, it's not, I'm not a fucking conspiracy nut, it's provable. A handful, a very small elite, run and own these corporations, which include the mainstream media. I have this feeling that whoever is elected president, like Clinton was, no matter what you promise on the campaign trail – blah, blah, blah – when you win, you go into this smokey room with the twelve industrialist capitalist scum-fucks who got you in there.

And you're in this smoky room, and this little screen comes down... and a big guy with a cigar goes "Roll the film" and it's a shot of the Kennedy assassination from an angle you've never seen before that looks suspiciously off the grassy knoll. And then the screen goes up and the lights come up, and they go to the new president: "Any questions?" "Uh just what my agenda is?" "First we bomb Baghdad". "You got it".

That's pretty much how I always thought it worked. The people who actually run things don't let you get too close to the Presidency unless you're playing on their team and playing for keeps.