A Little Something New

So for the last couple of weeks, I’ve mentioned a little project that I’ve been working on that took time away from blogging, and that it was related to possibly supporting and expanding the Houblog “empire.” Well, several days ago, I quietly premiered it without saying anything. (Mainly because I was feeling under the weather and not up to writing even a short post.) If you’ve been wondering, and even if you haven’t, that little green flashing box over to the right is definately it: The Houblog Store is now open for business!

Items for sale are a fairly eclectic mix, reflecting the subjects of this site: Houston, immigration, rail, and animé. I’ll be adding more things as I go along, but for now, I can only have one of each type. If you see something on one style of shirt that you’d like to see on another, drop me a line and I’ll see if I can accomodate you. If business is brisk, I’ll expand the line a lot more.

Evacuation Bottlenecks

KHOU points out that the construction on I-45 will make for serious bottlenecks during another evacuation, even if contraflow lanes are used.

Traffic bottlenecks at FM 1488, where construction begins. It is there where drivers fear traffic will come to a standstill should a hurricane evacuation be called.

“It’s probably going to happen like last time. It’s going to be backed up, ah, for days,� said Lt. Dennis DePaul with the Conroe Fire Department. That’s not good news for people heading north through 45, running from a storm.

“We don’t have wide shoulders to accommodate wide vehicles and so on. That does have an impact, so that means we have to heighten our awareness,� said Texas Department of Transportation’s Janelle Gbur.

I disagree with the importance they attach to this fact. It’s true that there’s no shoulders and lots of construction, but remember one thing: I-45 is always under construction. The real problem is that when it was constructed, it was largely created from the existing Hwy. 75. Unlike Hwy 90 and various coastal roads which parallel I-10, there simply is no other way to get from the northernost end of Houston (the end of the Hardy Toll Road) to Conroe itself. What little section of Hwy. 75 left in existance picks up at the southern end of town, runs through downtown Conroe and rejoins I-45 to the north.

Look at this map of Interstate 45 S & Fm 1488 Rd.

Judged strictly from the standpoint of evacuation, we would need to extend the toll road to Huntsville to do much good. The road net at that point would allow the traffic to spread out and take alternate routes. However, that would be incredibly expensive, and not justified based on everyday travel. Still, even 2-lane roads can carry a fair amount of traffic if utilized properly. The major problem, as I’ve said before, is that in the interests of an “orderly” evacuation, the bureaucrats running the show insist on channeling everyone from Galveston to Beaumont into five major corridors: Hwy 87, Hwy. 59, I-45, Hwy 290, I-10 West from Houston, I-10 East from Beaumont (assuming a strike between Victoria and Beaumont). This fails to take advantage of the many side roads available to bleed off excess traffic.

Parking Authority Gets Some Authority

The job’s never over until the paperwork’s done, and here’s the paperwork. No time to analyze it, but it’s the the text of the ordinance passed this week by the Council to transfer the everything to do with the parking over to the new “commission” and placing that commission under the Convention and Entertainment Facilities Department.

Background to that: CEFD is an “Enterprise Fund.” Translation: “revenue generating” as opposed to normal governmental budget funds, which are not. The largest enterprise funds are the utilties and airport; the convention center has been a distant third. (There is a fourth, but I can’t recall it offhand.)

In short, the city is tacitly acknowledging that this is considered revenue enhancement, not law enforcement.

Warning: this file is over 1.1 megs in size. It is in .pdf format, and you can get the reader here, if you need it.

Edit: forgot to link back; this is in answer to Anne’s question over on BlogHouston.

Tag Another One

Metro continues to work on reaching its bag limit for pedestrians and bicyclists:

A METRO bus hit a man riding a bicycle Thursday, KPRC Local 2 reported.

A METRO spokesperson said a mechanic was test-driving the bus on the Sam Houston Parkway near Imperial Valley just after midnight.

There’s no word on who was at fault, and I’m not going to guess. I’ve seen too many stupid bicyclists who don’t know what side of the road to drive on (and nearly run two down for approaching an intersection the wrong way) to tag Metro indiscriminately, but this doesn’t sound like an area with blind intersections either. Then again, it’s hard not to see something the size of a bus coming, and who rides a bike at midnight?

Are You Republican? Or a Jacksonian?

The prior article in this informal series was, in some ways, out of order, and it originally carried the same title that this one now does, as I changed directions on the fly, but didn’t catch the details. I discussed the general anger at both parties, but concentrated on the anger of the electorate with the Republican Party. In doing so, I referred time and again to a belief structure known as Jacksonianism. And while I’ve provided the links, not everyone wants to read a scholarly article of the length that Walter Russel Meade wrote. Nor does everyone have the time to read the nearly as lengthy (but thought provoking) writings of the first person to tell the two parties to take a flying leap. So, briefly, what makes a person a Jacksonian, then?

Well, never fear, because this article is here to summarize it for you.

Firstly, we’re warlike. I don’t mean that we’re war-mongers, or even like war. But we don’t shy away from smacking down someone (or spending 50 years standing guard) when it’s necessary.

An observer who thinks of American foreign policy only in terms of the commercial realism of the Hamiltonians, the crusading moralism of Wilsonian transcendentalists, and the supple pacifism of the principled but slippery Jeffersonians would be at a loss to account for American ruthlessness at war.

THOSE WHO prefer to believe that the present global hegemony of the United States emerged through a process of immaculate conception avert their eyes from many distressing moments in the American ascension. Yet students of American power cannot ignore one of the chief elements in American success. The United States over its history has consistently summoned the will and the means to compel its enemies to yield to its demands.

Secondly, while we like some federal programs, we really don’t like the government telling us what to do or how to raise our kids.

Suspicious of untrammeled federal power (Waco), skeptical about the prospects for domestic and foreign do-gooding (welfare at home, foreign aid abroad), opposed to federal taxes but obstinately fond of federal programs seen as primarily helping the middle class (Social Security and Medicare, mortgage interest subsidies), Jacksonians constitute a large political interest.

Lately, even that liking of Social Security has wavered, dragged down in part by the Medicare boondogle. A Jacksonian might feel guilty, having a relative on the “Plan D” prescription benefit, but knows in his or her heart that much of the problem is caused by one’s own failure to plan for retirement, since “social security will take care of it.” This is why some of the plans floated to end SS involve a graduated ending; reducing the benefits for people who are under 30 today until the whole program goes away. As Jacksonians don’t shy away from fights, it’s likely that pragmatic (as opposed to draconian) proposals along that line will resurface if a Jacksonian revolt takes place. These will, of course, be demonized by the existing parties.

Thirdly, Jacksonians see the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms, as the citadel of liberty. Every member of the NRA is, in some respects (if not many of those given here), a Jacksonian.

Fourthly, Jacksonians believe you can go to hell if you want to. It’s none of our business if you want to worship some other version of God, or Allah, or Budda, or even funky aliens. We believe in our own version, you worship yours, and we’ll both mind our own business. That works best. Now, we’ll draw the line if your religion involves sexual explotation, assault/murder, terrorism, or any other asocial activity that is a physical (or financial) threat to others, but by and large, we don’t give a damn if you want to do the nasty with your own sex or six of the opposite, or even change your own. It may seem creepy to some of us, but it’s your life. Gay marriage? Enh, marriage needs to be divorced from religion. Problem solved. Whomever you are and however you want to live your life, just don’t expect your hijinks to be held up as a positive example for our kids, ok? Or even respected, for that matter. (Yes, I’m talking to you Brittney. And you, Madonna. And… oh hell, half of the entertainment industry.) Your right to be an ass doesn’t preclude or prevent my right to criticize you. It’s this distinction that the press often always fails to note. But this sort of belief isn’t just domestic, it applies to foriegn policy as well.

Jacksonian chairs of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee are the despair of high-minded people everywhere, as they hold up adhesion to the Kyoto Protocol, starve the UN and the IMF, cut foreign aid, and ban the use of U.S. funds for population control programs abroad.

So why, if this resonates with you, and if you believe that you’re actually in the “silent majority,” do the Jacksonians not have a greater say in our government today? Simple. We haven’t had any well-known leaders in the media.

A principal explanation of why Jacksonian politics are so poorly understood is that Jacksonianism is less an intellectual or political movement than an expression of the social, cultural and religious values of a large portion of the American public. And it is doubly obscure because it happens to be rooted in one of the portions of the public least represented in the media and the professoriat.

But in the ’90’s, the “right” started being represented by talk radio, and now the internet is here. The only reason the right (including the Jacksonians) doesn’t have an influential bunch of lunatics like the DU’ers or Kossacks acting as a tail wagging the dog is that we’re a bunch of fiercely opinionated and independant people, who have yet to find their own rallying point. And one can be sure, if and when such a point appears, the media and professoriat will do their level best to discredit it/him/her. (Paging Juan Cole! Paging Juan Cole!) We can count on it.

Where do Jacksonians come from? To reach the fifth point, this must be examined. Jacksonianism started as a culutral meme of the rural Scots-Irish, a hardy people forged from a millenia of war. From there, it spread all across the demographics of America. It even ensnares people of other nations who come here because this nation reflects their beliefs, not just their opportunity. Such people are American in heart and soul even before they set foot on our soil.

Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, among others, has said that the United States is unlike other nations because it is based on an idea rather than on a community of national experience.

Times have changed and the Scots-Irish were long ago outnumbered by other immigrants, but the belief hasn’t changed. Instead, it spread:

The new Jacksonianism is no longer rural and exclusively nativist. Frontier Jacksonianism may have taken the homesteading farmer and the log cabin as its emblems, but today’s Crabgrass Jacksonianism sees the homeowner on his modest suburban lawn as the hero of the American story.

To use a current controversy for a demonstration: It isn’t fear of immigration that drives Jacksonian opposition; it’s fear that the pace of immigration, the reason, and belief structures of illegal immigrants threaten the ability, already seriously endangered by the government and existing political parties, to hold on to that modest suburban lawn. Is it a vaild worry? In a word, yes. Because by entering illegally, the alien has challenged one of the core beliefs adopted from the Scots-Irish.

It’s one that hasn’t changed; one that’s key to the whole structure, and embodied in a word you don’t see much used anymore outside the military (a place Jacksonians are heavily overrepresented, unsurprisingly) and not at all in politics: Honor.

So, Fifthly: Jacksonians believe in honor and integrity. Your word is your bond and all that, so be careful about giving it on important things–like marriage. It includes things like following the rules, even if you don’t like them, not flauting them and then asking for special treatment. Honor is a life value to a Jacksonian, even if he or she professes not to understand the word in those terms.

The first principle of this code is self-reliance. That’s a polite way of saying those that won’t help themselves should be left to rot instead of sucking down our tax dollars, used by one or the other of the political parties to buy support. Give them adequate schools and a way out, but if they won’t take it, the hell with giving them my money to sit on their butts.

Real Americans, many Americans feel, are people who make their own way in the world. They may get a helping hand from friends and family, but they hold their places in the world through honest work. They don’t slide by on welfare, and they don’t rely on inherited wealth or connections. Those who won’t work and are therefore poor, or those who don’t need to work due to family money, are viewed with suspicion.

The second principle, Respect, builds on the first.

We give respect to those who earn it, either through ability, deed, or sometimes simply age (with wisdom). And according respect means according dignity; an insulted and disrespected Jacksonian is often a dangerous Jacksonian, and an enemy for life. (Extreme Jacksonians have been known to stuff and mount their grudges, passing them down to future generations. “War of Northern Aggression,” indeed.)
(Note: Meade treats Respect as a sub-point of self-reliance; I raise it to an independant point in this article, as I believe it should be. Other points have been similarly moved, to relflect their importance in the debate.)

Behind that comes the third principle: equality.

Among those members of the folk community who do pull their weight, there is an absolute equality of dignity and right. No one has a right to tell the self-reliant Jacksonian what to say, do or think. Any infringement on equality will be met with defiance and resistance. Male or female, the Jacksonian is, and insists on remaining, independent of church, state, social hierarchy, political parties and labor unions.
(Emphasis added–you need to read the “Unions Due” category for why, if you’re new here.)

The fourth principal of honor is individualism.

The Jacksonian does not just have the right to self-fulfillment–he or she has a duty to seek it. In Jacksonian America, everyone must find his or her way: each individual must choose a faith, or no faith, and code of conduct based on conscience and reason. The Jacksonian feels perfectly free to strike off in an entirely new religious direction.

Which brings us back to the fourth belief above, does it not? Meade thinks there are serious limits to the extent of such free-thinking, but I disagree, based on the traction “civil unions” and even gay marriage has gotten within supposedly conservative bastions. It’s not moderation of political and moral fiber; it’s gaining the recognition, if not support of the Jacksonians through appeal to their belief that everyone should live as they wish, within proper limits.

Although women should be more discreet, both sexes can sow wild oats before marriage. After it, to enjoy the esteem of their community a couple must be seen to put their children’s welfare ahead of personal gratification.

And there are some limits, especially for children. Jacksonian parents have the unquestioned right to set those limits for children, and woe betide anyone else who sticks their nose in to tell a them how to to it.

Corporal punishment is customary and common; Jacksonians find objections to this time-honored and (they feel) effective method of discipline outlandish and absurd.

And from there, we can move back to immigration and show why opposition to the current state of affairs (let alone any form of reward for flauting the law) runs counter to Jacksonian belief. Amnesty would be akin to rewarding a child with ice cream for throwing a temper tantrum because he was served broccoli.

Financially, Jacksonians are a mixed bag. If a set of wide parameters can be drawn around their belief structure, it the sixth belief would be in an open, loose financial policy personally, and a tight fiscal policy governmentally. In short, Jacksonians prefer that they have access to easy credit with low interest rates, allowing them to spend for luxuries far beyond the absolutely necessary, but that their government should excercise fiscal restraint, not borrowing money, nor wasting it on frivolous non-necessities. Most especially, not wasting it on supporting a permanent underclass–or “pork class” for that matter. Such funds were taken from the Jacksonian, and thus are entrusted to the government to be used as seen fit by the people from whom the funds were removed by force of law. Many Jacksonians would be happy if the government spent on nothing but national defense and enforcement of necessary laws — and what they deem necessary is usually somewhat less than what we have.

Lacking a home to call their own, and suspicious of government spending and governmental power, Jacksonian traditions get expressed in many ways and from both parties: Flat Tax; check boxes to direct funds to specific programs; cutting U.N. subsidies; and suggestions to abolish Cabinet-level offices like Energy, Education, and even Homeland Security. All of these spring from the Jacksonian thought mode.

To date, the party that has expressed a platform closest to their beliefs has been the Libertarian Party, but is has been fatally handicapped by its idealistic stands on foriegn policy and society in general. Jacksonians recognize that in today’s smaller world, simply withdrawing to our own borders is tantamount to national suicide. And worse, some limited government is a bargain with the devil, but it’s better than no government at all. “Communism requires that all men be angels for it to work; Libertarianism assumes that they are,” is how one person put it. Whether that was an original by the author who wrote me, or if he was quoting someone else, I am not sure.

So what does the future hold? Will the Jacksonian tradition find it’s own identity and political party, or will it continue to make a deal with the two devils we know? I don’t know the answer to that question, but I do know that continuing the path we Jacksonians have followed thus far will only result in more of the same. The Contract with America lies in ruins, and the constitution is tattered.

It’s time for Jacksonians to recognize themselves for whom and what they are. Only then can we advance our agenda, and it appears that a third party is a necessity for doing so, as the Republican party thinks it can continue to ignore the will of the masses, and the Democratic party has simply jumped off the deep end.

2007: Year of the Jacksonian Revolt?

(Edit: Oops! Originally posted with the wrong title, drawn from the next article in this series.)

I have, since reading Meade’s magazine article distilling Divine Providence, in which he discusses the Jacksonian tradition, wanted a political party based on the principles espoused by that tradition, and none other. Up until a month ago, I settled for backing the Republican party as the closest alternative. I was hardly alone in that: Meade points out that the Jacksonian principles make up a major portion of the Republican Party:

Solidly Democratic through the Truman administration . . . Jacksonian America shifted toward the Republican Party under Richard Nixon–the most important political change in American life since the Second World War.

It is my contention that the alligence of this Jacksonian block has been lost by the actions of the Republican party in supporting pork, failing to prosecute the war’s home front seriously, and failing to oppose illegal immigration, despite the clear and strong message sent by the voters. For many years, the term applied to such “strays from the fold” has been RINO. It has also been applied by the religious wing of the party to those insufficiently responsive to their beliefs, but this usage is not as common; nothing gets a politician tagged RINO quicker than supporting big spending and big government. But RINO is a deceptive term: these people are part and parcel of what the Republican Party is today. We somehow remain blind to that fact, even as we acknowledge (and lament) that their presence prevents the Party from being what we want. Therefore, a more accurate depiction would have been “NJR” or Non-Jacksonian Republican.

This is a crucial distinction, and one the mainstream media has not seen, or perhaps it refuses to. In the view of our oh-so-centerist media (just ask them, they’ll tell you!), “conservatives” mean Jesus freaks and NASCAR rednecks. The followers of the Jacksonian tradition have ground their teeth and tolerated the slurs, having no clearly defined identity, no tag, no label to describe itself. Arguably, the Jacksonians weren’t even aware of themselves as a group until after Meade’s groundbreaking article was published. But now they are beginning to be–and a critical mass may be reached soon, for Meade firmly predicts that the fate of the Republican party will rest with the decisions made by Jacksonian believers:

The future of Jacksonian political allegiance will be one of the keys to the politics of the twenty-first century.

It is my belief that the discontented “conservative” voters in the U.S. today are primarily Jacksonian in their outlook, and they are ready to lay down their allegience to the Republican Party. The “silent majority” has been disenfranchised by the persistant lean (if not outright run) away from its principals by both parties, and the Jacksonians badly want a party reflective of their belief structure. Peggy Noonan says in today’s Opinion Journal:

The problem is not that the two parties are polarized. In many ways they’re closer than ever. The problem is that the parties in Washington, and the people on the ground in America, are polarized. There is an increasing and profound distance between the rulers of both parties and the people–between the elites and the grunts, between those in power and those who put them there.

But how? The dominant political parties have “rigged the game” to make it extremely hard for others to enter it. In doing so, they have undone the work of Andrew Jackson:

-Andrew Jackson laid the foundation of American politics for most of the nineteenth century, and his influence is still felt today. With the ever ready help of the brilliant Martin Van Buren, he took American politics from the era of silk stockings into the smoke-filled room. Every political party since his presidency has drawn on the symbolism, the institutions and the instruments of power that Jackson pioneered.

More than that, he brought the American people into the political arena. Restricted state franchises with high property qualifications meant that in 1820 many American states had higher property qualifications for voters than did boroughs for the British House of Commons. With Jackson’s presidency, universal male suffrage became the basis of American politics and political values.

And from there, we went on to universal citizen suffrage, which is where we should be. But how important is that vote, when someone else controls who you can vote for? Oh, there has to be a selection process, to screen out the whackos and field strong candidates– but with only two choices, group-think has set in with a vengence. County-wide, less than 100 people make the real decision on what choices we have on primary day. That’s out of a population of what, four million? At the state level, it’s even worse, proportionally speaking.

Addendum: From The Twilight of the Two Party System, a position paper of The Jacksonian Party:

The work of the Two Party System since the 1930’s has been that to divide the commonality of We the People and repudiate the Constitution in that doing. And the fruit of those long decades of giving unto the Federal Government more and more responsibilities and allowing the Legislative and Executive branches to codify their parties into perpetual power and their persons in High Office in Congress as Royalty that may not hindered by the mere Law that applies to We the People is a bitter one. We the People now stand as a People divided by ethnicity, national origin, skin color, living circumstance, sexual outlook, religious viewpoint, and fiscal wealth. Each party has pushed hard for these divisions so as to ensure that We the People will view each other with suspicion and not be able to come together to form ‘a more perfect Union’ and ensure ‘Justice’ that can be applied equally to All of the People.

Continuing:

Just look at all the footwork being done by Strayhorn and Friedman to run for governor of Texas as independants. The very fact that they are in the race is indicative of people’s alienation from the major parties: Strayhorn actually has a shot, a long one, but a shot at winning nonetheless. Beyond even that, however, is the fact that both she and author Kinky Friedman may outpoll Chris Bell, the Democratic Party candidate. He isn’t a particularly strong offering to start with, but to be relegated to fourth place is an embarassment for any so called major party, and a measure of how angry the electorate is. If enough of that anger turns against Perry’s “tax solution,” then Strayhorn’s chances will improve remarkably, and we may be treated to the spectacle of an independant governor in a state, indeed a region, with no tradition of independant politics.

It is Ms. Noonan’s contention, and that of the Texas Rainmaker (who also quotes the above) that not only has the come for a third party to form; it will form, and this time it’s got leverage that even Perot’s money couldn’t buy fourteen years ago: The internet.

Perot showed that even with a dissatisfied electorate and a lot of money, one cannot build a political party on the leadership of a single person (especially if he’s a flake.). A broad-based coalition of angry voters must emerge around local leaders to create a new national party. The only way to build it is from the ground up. And the only way to do that is to reach enough people who are willing to set aside their apathy and feelings of helplessness in the face of the two-party system, and pitch in to build that party. The internet is the method to make that possible. Again, quoting Rainmaker:

…with the grassroots effort of the Internet, I think the tide could be changing. Now anyone with a computer and Internet access can reach millions of potential voters and get something close to “equal timeâ€?… especially as citizens continue to shun the traditional media outlets.

The question is not if… but when?

Obviously, it is impossible to make a showing in the 2006 elections now — and our masters in Washington know that, even as they continue to “pork it up” and allow illegals to flood across our border. They pay us lip service even as they continue business as usual. But Houston has a unique opportunity to make a statement on national issues within the local scope in 2007. Yesterday, two issues about which the electorate has been increasingly polarized, were passed by the City Council at Mayor White’s request. The lesser of the two would be the red light camera system. The idea itself, the questionable value, and equally questionable bid procedure was enough to make it a contentious issue, but one that probably would be “forgotten” in the same way that the Kingwood annexation and (Un-)Safe Tow have been forgotten: the anger is still there, but it’s muted and part of the background mutter now.

Not so with the day labor center. It is too wrapped up in the issue of immigration, which will keep it fresh in everyone’s minds; further, since the funding has to be voted on yearly, it will come up again next year during the campaign.

Add all this to the latent unhappiness over expensive arenas, unsafe rail, Metro’s arrogance, and Mayor White’s use of quasi-governmental authorities to “lock in” his agenda for the future … and the opportunity exists for a group to coelesce in opposition to all this. One that can draw on a wide base of anger to bypass the traditional party apparatchiks that control who we get to vote for, and thereby what kind of government we get.

Will Houston become the base from which a new political party springs? A Jacksonian party, built around the principals of that oh-so-overlooked president?

One can could only hope. Now, perhaps, one can do something….

Bring Us Your Illegals (Who Run Red Lights)

Note: due to an editing error, a comment of mine appeared to have been a part of KHOU’s article. The quote has been corrected. I apologize for the error to KHOU and anyone who may have been confused.

Well, it took some fighting, but White finally got his way on the red lights and the illegal alien work center. The day labor center turned into a fight though, and it looked like it might not pass.

“The responsibility is on the employers as to whether they’re hiring somebody that’s illegal or not,� said Houston City Councilmember Sue Lovell. “I would like the city to help employers not break the law.�

Boy, SEIU isn’t going to be happy about that return on their investment.

So councilmembers on White’s side pushed an amendment that could have delayed a vote. “It’s clear what’s being done here,� said Houston City Councilmember Addie Wiseman. “And there is political posturing behind this,� Councilmember Pam Holm said.

Heh. No kidding. “political posturing” is a neat name for “noticing the voters in your district are against this.”

In fact, so many amendments went on the table that even the mayor got mixed up. “It turns out to be a little more complicated than I thought,� said Mayor Bill White.

“We have all kind of debates going on,� said Councilmember M.J. Khan. In the end, M.J. Khan, a Republican immigrant, became the swing vote.

That’s RINO immigrant, thank you. About what we expect. Oh, wait, why am I worried about it?

“Let’s just vote on it and stop with the political games,� said Wiseman. And the day labor site won a renewed a contract.

Houston to White and council: It’s not a game, or if it is, a lot more people than usual are keeping score… I suspect some of you are going to discover that come 2007.

Yeah, Slow Posting

And I don’t expect it to change much for the rest of this week. Feeling under the weather. I’ve had energy to drop a few comments here and there on other blogs (and one post for tomorrow) but that’s about it.

Definately a few things to gripe about over the last week. The press’ Fifth Column’s horrible behavior over the Memorial Day holiday, the Council saddling us with red-light cameras and an illegal alien employement center. Oddly, only KHOU considers it worthy of it’s own article.

So much to complain about, so little energy to work with.

Happy Holiday! (and Sneak Preview)

I’ll be going out of town this weekend for a 2-person anime bash with Dr. Heinous, so there won’t be a lot of posting going on. In betwen episodes of mass panties, though, I’ll be hard at work on the laptop putting the final touches on that special project I’ve mentioned a few times.

Just to hold you though the holidays, here’s a sneak preview.

Everyone have a safe and happy holiday! (And if not, avoid traveling on the same roads as me, ok?)

Enron? Dimestore. Get Ready for Fannie Mae

For two years now, a bigger scandal than Enron has been bubbling away quietly, almost ignored by the mainstream media. It certainly has not made the media the way Enron and Worldcom did. Why? Well, maybe because the culprits aren’t evil capitalists; they’re “good socialists” : i.e.: they work for an organization set up by the government and backed by taxpayer funds. Which is why we’ll have to bail out Fannie Mae to the tune of $11 BILLION if it fails. AHI has a good rundown on the events so far.

However, it’s based around all the things that did make it into the media, however obscure the reporting was. What it doesn’t address is this: What is the Fannie Mae’s Foundation’s connection with radical organizations like La Raza, MALDEF, the Lawyer’s Committe on Nuclear Policy, Human Right’s Watch? Well according to this, they help fund them. (Link takes 2-5 minutes to load).

Someone want to explain what a quasi-public entity, whose board is appointed by the president and whose solvency is guaranteed by taxpayer funds, is doing engaging in this sort of nonsense?

Sure Fooled Us, Dubya

And all this time he had us thinking he was so smart he was just looking dumb to make folks misunderestimate him. I began to wonder about his sanity as far back as the Miers nomination. Now… nope, lets face it, he was just plain stupid. Well, he’s just pissed off another (ex-) supporter.

Unless we start seeing a sharp reversal in conduct, I’m done with George W. Bush. This isn’t about politics — it is about the proper stewardship of the laws and the Constitution.

I keep telling people: the Republicans are no longer the answer. Sadly, Ross Perot wasn’t either, being more of a flake than anything else. (Aside: One thing I still want to hear him explain: If NAFTA was going to cause a great big sucking sound as all our jobs went south, why the hell are the Mexicans still coming north?)

So we’re just going to have to form our own party. Jacksonian, anyone?

Let’s All Sing Together…

…Monty Python’s “The Penis Song.”

Isn’t it awfully nice to have a penis?
Isn’t it frightfully good to have a dong?
It’s swell to have a stiffy.
It’s divine to own a dick,
From the tiniest little tadger
To the world’s biggest prick.
So, three cheers for your Willy or John Thomas.
Hooray for your one-eyed trouser snake,
Your piece of pork, your wife’s best friend,
Your Percy, or your cock.
You can wrap it up in ribbons.
You can slip it in your sock,
But don’t take it out in public,
Or they will stick you in the dock,
And you won’t come back.

It’s only a matter of time now. Prepare to be spammed by ads for penis replacement surgery….

Original story here. Now all we need to do is figure out how to clone eyeballs to deal with that pesky blindness problem…..

Piling it Higher and Deeper

I’ve got mucho work-o today, so no time to do a real post. Lots of news today: East End Polecat had City Employee running errands for her private consulting busineess (yes, the very same business I’ve pointed out as being highly questionable in the first place).

The House and Senate take a break from claiming they are above the law to argue about differing immigration bills. Go, House! Lose the amnesty provision; we did it 20 years ago and it didn’t work.

And in a piece of good news, both the day labor and red-light camera contracts were blocked for another week. If you shout loud enough, they will listen; we’ve just been letting the other side do all the shouting for too long. Keep the pressure on folks!

Update: Enron verdict is in. While Skilling skated out on a few of the charges, the two of them were found guilty on enough stuff to put them in the country club prison for at least two or three years. The Chronicle has had to go to a “high traffic edition” (no pictures) to cope.

Multi-Nodal Houston

Tony Gattis, over at Houston Strategies, uses his wife’s commute as the perfect example of what’s wrong with expensive rail in Houston, (not to mention, Metro’s bus schedules): It doesn’t come from where we need to start, or end where we need it to go. Neither do the buses, for that matter.

My wife recently took a job with SAIC/NASA in Clear Lake working on the new Crew Exploration Vehicle, and was not fond of the commute from Meyerland/Bellaire. Not just the 1.5 hour round-trip time and stress, but $9+/day in gas, plus much higher car depreciation expenses (60m/day). Metro buses could work, but require a substantial time-draining transfer downtown that almost double the commute time – and the final leg from the Bay Area Park&Ride to JSC is problematic. Any type of potentially planned commuter rail system would be even worse. But she found the perfectly scheduled 15-seat express vanpool from the West Loop Park&Ride (SW corner of 610) to her exact building at JSC, with a couple quick stops for other NASA contractors along the way from I45 to the campus – all for about $3/workday (less than half of Metro’s cost). How’s that for a great bargain? It just reinforces that the future of effective commuter transit in multi-nodal Houston is not heavy commuter rail, but a comprehensive managed express (MaX) lane network used by a wide range of very fast, point-to-point bus, van, and carpool options.
(Empahsis added.)

Here is his discussion of a such a MaX system.

Remember, control the parking, and you control people’s ability to own cars. Then control the rail, and you control where they live and work…