Friday, April 23, 2004

Special Elections in case of Disaster? No thanks.. The older I get, the less I like direct democracy. Consider the bill passed yesterday by the US House that provides for special elections within 45 days in case the Congress is decimated by some catastrophe. James Sensenbrenner (R, WI,) never a friend of individual rights, and a backer of the bill says it's important to "preserve democracy." Suppose a terrorist group kills 100 or more members of Congress in some horrific attack. What sort of Congress would we get when the electorate reacts? It'd make the PATRIOT Act look quaint. I'm writing my Congresswoman and asking her to support one of the proposed amendments that would provide for appointing replacements by state governors. Hell, I'd also support eliminating direct election of Senators. It'd make people pay attention to local races. Again, I suggest you read The Future of Democracy which has hammered the point home that without rights, Democracy is just a mob empowered. The attempts by reactionaries in the Congress to overrule the courts are recent examples of this sort of mob rule. [More Like This WebLog] I haven't followed this closely, but Bill makes a good case. Anything done in haste will probably be done wrong 4:29:27 PM     Comment []

Former Cardinals Safety Killed in Afghanistan. Tillman spent four years with the Cardinals, but decided to join the service in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks. [San Jose, CA - Topix.net] I am wondering how I am supposed to feel about this story. On one hand I am inspired by the conviction to give up $millions to protect our country. On the other, I am wondering why our best and brightest are dying. Is the war on terrorism working? Are we winning? Our soldiers are dying and we are taking off our shoes before we board an airplane. Are we any safer? I don't know. 4:14:07 PM     Comment []

Leigh Weimers. There's wincing in the halls of government in Dallas. And smiles in San Jose. The Dallas Morning News commissioned the consulting firm of Booz Allen Hamilton to do a statistical ... [San Jose, CA - Topix.net] Interesting that this came out just after I spent four days in downtown Dallas. Generally I was impressed with Dallas' downtown. It is bigger than San Jose's downtown, the building architecture is much more interesting, and there are a lot more local restaurants. The national chains are also there. There are many more hotels, big and small. We stayed at a great bed and breakfast (Amelia's Place) about 3 blocks from the convention center. Downtown shopping opportunities seemed to be about the same (meaning not much), though Dallas does have a Neiman Marcus. It sounds like Dallas follows the adage "It's a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there". In contrast, San Jose follows "It's a nice place to live, but I wouldn't want to visit there". 10:23:17 AM     Comment []