Hello fellow members of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy! My name is Tommy Owens. I’m from San Francisco. A sophomore this August, I am an intended Political Science-History double major. My hobbies are shred guitar (Malmsteen, Satriani, Vai, Lynch, Van Halen etc..), learning German, the Cal Greek system (Go Greek!), history, and, of course, politics.

I am a Conservative Republican, and have been for a few years now. I believe I became one in the days following 9/11, when I saw some very liberal members of my family and some of my moonbat high-school teachers blame the attacks not directly on Americans, but on U.S. foreign policy. They attempted to put themselves in the terrorist shoes (cough cough….Richard Reid) and justify not the attacks themselves, but the motivation for the attacks.

I had none of this. I joined the San Francisco Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign around May or June 2004. I voted for Dubya with pride, and despite all the bad news and scandals, I’m still glad I did. I joined Berkeley College Republicans within the first couple weeks that I arrived at Cal. I began to write for the Cal Patriot a few months afterwards; I currently serve as a Deputy Opinion Editor.

I’d like to acknowledge all the Bloggers and Cal Patriot Writers and thank them for allowing me to contribute. I look forward to blogging soon. My first will be posted in the next couple of days.

The primary election is in less than a week. I, for one, will not be voting. It could be because I’ll be too busy with work to make time for the polls. Or it could be because I’m too lazy to vote early or vote through the mail. The preceeding reasons are more or less true, but the real reason is that I just don’t care anymore.

I’ve voted in every election since I turned 18 (the Recall being my first). Not only did I vote, but I had fun voting. I always knew that my picks would be going down hard, but that didn’t bother me. So why stop now?

I just don’t feel like it’ll make a difference if I vote or not. The reason for primaries is for people to guide the direction that a party will be going. But, for the Republican primary at least, the winners are predetermined by default or because of negligible competition, or a race is between two people that are basically the same (on the issues). I’d personally like to see libertarians challenging conservatives in the primaries, but it seems like the libertarians have given up. If nothing will change, why bother with primaries at all?

So this is the way it’s going to be. I’ll probably vote in fall, if only to support Tom McClintock in his close race. But I’m not even so sure about that. First you skip the primaries. Then you skip the midterm elections. Finally, you don’t even bother for the Presidential elections. I think that’s how it goes. Whatever.

See title.

What? It’s summer.

So I went to go see X-Men: The Last Stand with my buddies at the Metreon on Friday. The showing we wanted was sold out so we had 5 hours to kill before we could get in. It was a chance to explore SF, at least. Anyway, the wait was worth it…

Easily the best X-Men movie and definitely among the top superhero movies ever made.

No major spoilers in this post, but here are my favorite scenes:

1. Everything from the Golden Gate sequence onward (look closely and you can see the Campanile)
2. “I’m the Juggernaut…”
3. Incident at Jean’s house

Of course, most interesting were the political and philosophical overtones. The series is a thinly veiled allegory about discrimination and intolerance (towards homosexuality especially). So-called “mutants” are shunned by their family and friends for being, through no fault of their own, different. The government, at best, denies them the full set of rights afforded to “normal” humans or, at worst, represses them through cruel and inhumane tactics.

The major development in the 3rd film is the creation of a “cure” for mutation. Any mutant exposed to it will lose his or her special powers and become a regular human. Though it is offered on a volunteer basis, the mutants are divided between those who would do anything for the chance at a “normal” life and those who would do anything to protect the mutant “identity.” It is no small irony that all of this takes place in San Francisco, of all places.

Things escalate and battle lines are drawn. What had been a completely voluntary cure becomes less so. At this point, we recognize the twin bigotries of social conservatism and identity politics. On the right, we have the populist masses and the government who are driven by fear of that which is different. On the left, we have members of minority groups who place their group identity above all else, and who are driven by fear of the loss of that identity. Any mutant desiring the cure is a traitor. Any mutant deviating from the group’s stance is a threat. Therefore the cure, and its supporters, must be eliminated.

The X-Men offer a third way, the only way not driven by bigotry: Individual choice, not decisions forcibly made by society or an identity group. One of the X-Men decides that she would rather be normal than a mutant. Instead of denying that choice or deeming her a traitor, she is told to think about what is best, personally, for herself. Individuals who mean no harm to anyone deserve the right to control their lives. This is the heart of libertarianism.

We will soon enter a world where we have unlocked the secrets of the mind and body. The old question of nature vs. nurture will become less important in a world of genetic engineering and smart drugs. The problem is, our current society is more likely to respect biological determinism over individual choice. Both represent progress from intolerance, but respect for individual choice is necessary for true tolerance. Whether someone was born a certain way or chose to be a certain way should make no difference. Defending the former is easy, but defending the latter requires transcending pity or pride. In doing so, we rightfully place respect for the individual over respect for a group.

X-Men reminds us of the plight of the outsider. In reality, we are all outsiders, at times, in our own ways. I’m just as different from you as you are from the next person. We need to do the obvious thing and recognize that we are all individuals. Instead of giving this group and that group rights, the only rights we need are our rights as individuals. Mutant or human; gay or straight; black or white; male or female; Christian or Muslim; geek or jock; smoker or non-smoker; Coke-drinker or Pepsi-drinker; whatever.

Who knew we could learn so much from a movie about dudes with claws and chicks who can walk through walls?

The San Francisco Chronicle is endorsing Pete McCloskey over incumbent Richard Pombo in the upcoming Republican primary:

Pete McCloskey defines the term “straight shooter.” He has never seen the world through a partisan prism when it comes to delineating right from wrong…

“My hope would be to broaden the Republican Party to where it includes moderates again,” McCloskey said during a recent meeting with our editorial board.

It’s an uphill fight in the conservative-leaning 11th Congressional District. But Pete McCloskey has the credentials to make the case — and to shake up the status quo in Washington. He gets our endorsement in the June 6 Republican primary.

Volokh points out that the LA Times is also endorsing McCloskey (interesting, as it’s a Bay Area seat), calling him “the best thing that could happen for the district, the state, the nation and possibly the Republican Party.” Volokh also offers this choice quote:

McCloskey said at the time [2000], “I don’t know whether you are right or wrong about the Holocaust,” and referred to the “so-called Holocaust.”

Straight shooting…

UPDATE: CalStuff and Jeremy Koo both liveblogged the election results. Check them out.

Let’s give it up for Ben and Igor who both put up a good fight against the goliath. It was close. And congrats to Victoria Mitchell who will be representing BCR on the senate.

/////

The ASUC election results will finally be released today. You can find out in person 7 pm in 166 Barrows. Or if that’s not your thing, you can just wait for the news to hit the web.

Feel free to discuss whatever you want relating to the election on this post.

In the mean time, in preparation for a Student Action sweep (oh dear), Student Action chair and Troy High Class of ‘02 graduate Suken Vakil shares some kind words for his constituents:

About a week ago, the courts struck down the use of a high school exit exam in California. Supporters of the exam argued that high school graduates need a certain level of proficiency in basic subjects, while opponents argued that the exam discriminates against low income and immigrant students. The ruling is currently being appealed.

In today’s Chronicle, Anne Dilenschneider of Half Moon Bay gives us the following letter:

I work as a counselor in a community rehabilitation and residential treatment program for people who are working through acute psychiatric crises.

Last week, in a group I lead there on current events, we discussed the pros and cons of the high-school exit exam. After some discussion, the 16 residents came up with the questions they would like to see on a high school “exit exam”:

1) Can you change a tire?

2) Can you change your oil?

No and no. I’ll let the pros handle that.

3) Can you balance your checkbook?

4) Can you use public transit?

I suppose, if I must, on both counts. I honestly never used the bus or other public transportation until I started college.

5) Are you willing to ask for help — and do you know how to access social services?

Not really. Note how the question isn’t “Do you know how to get a job?”

And — this one was their first suggestion, and my personal favorite –

6) Are you a compassionate person?

Now that’s a bit subjective. I thought I was graduating high school, not competing to be Miss America.

So I guess I fail Ms. Dilenschneider’s exit exam. Woe is me. At least I know Calculus.

The latest Berkeley story to get picked up nationwide (hat tip to Berkeley LJ):

Andrew Martinez, who gained fame while a UC Berkeley student by refusing to wear clothes and walking through the East Bay city naked, died this week in a maximum security cell at the Santa Clara County jail.

A jail officer found the 33-year-old Cupertino man lying on his bunk bed around 11:19 p.m. Wednesday, after some other inmates reported hearing unusual sounds coming from the man’s single-occupancy cell.

According to jail officials, Martinez had recent contact with mental health professionals and apparently committed suicide by pulling a plastic bag tight over his head and securing it with a bed sheet…

Martinez had been in custody since Jan. 10 when he was arrested and subsequently charged with two counts of felony battery and one count of felony assault with a deadly weapon…

Martinez gained famed in the early 1990s by attending class at the University of California at Berkeley in the buff. In the fall of 1992, he organized a “Nude-In” on UC Berkeley’s Sproul Plaza. He was expelled from Berkeley and arrested after the city adopted a law outlawing public nudity in 1992.

A Daily Cal article from 2000 recounts some of the history behind the “Naked Guy.” And here’s a fan site with some pictures, if you dare.

In other naked Berkeley news, some students streaked through the library again.

The list keeps growing:

Former Vice President Al Gore became the latest Democrat to pull out of a speech at the University of California, Berkeley to avoid crossing a picket line for university janitors, landscapers and cafeteria workers.

Gore was scheduled to deliver a talk next Tuesday on global warming but canceled to honor a picket threatened by members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees over wages and pension contributions.

Gore’s decision comes on the same day San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom canceled his speech scheduled for this weekend…

The list includes Democratic Party Chair Howard Dean, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, and U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio.

One of the bloggers on Res Ipsa pointed out this funny quote from one of the student organizers of Dean’s speech:

“In the future, I would suggest students bring in a Republican,” she said, “because you can’t trust Democrats.”

Maybe, but why do we even have politicians giving commencement speeches anyway? Surely there are other people out there who are just as interesting, or even moreso. Who would be your dream graduation speaker?

Patriot Editor in Chief Melanie Smith pens an open letter to Fabian Nuñez:

Dear Assemblyman Nuñez,

On Wednesday, May 10, 2006, you committed one of the primary acts a politician should never commit, particularly if it is within his power to avoid doing so: you broke a promise. You had agreed to a speaking engagement with the University of California, Berkeley, in which you were to address hundreds of graduating seniors at the University’s Commencement Convocation. But, choosing instead to placate the protestors outside of the Greek Theater (who were capitalizing on and trying to ruin a joyous occasion for the Class of 2006 and their families), you refused to cross a picket line, thereby depriving those assembled of the Convocation’s main speech…

Check this Daily Cal article for more info on the Democratic graduation speaker no-shows.

I don’t know about you, but it feels like I voted just yesterday. Time flies… Another election is coming up in less than a month. Among other things, we will have to decide whether we want to tax the rich in order to provide universal preschool (Prop 82). The two sides are already going at it. In today’s San Francisco Chronicle:

California preschool providers are split over a ballot proposal for universal free preschool statewide, while 93 percent of parents in Los Angeles and the Bay Area report satisfaction with the preschools their kids attend, according to two new surveys to be released today.

The 1,800 parents surveyed in San Francisco, San Jose, the Oakland-Berkeley area and Los Angeles by Savvy Source for Parents, a new for-profit preschool information Web site, gave their children’s preschools high marks in several areas. About 93 percent reported overall satisfaction, and a similar proportion praised the quality of their preschools’ teaching, health policies, facilities and handling of separation from family.

The pro side is touting their research on the positive aspects of preschool:

A study last year of Oklahoma’s universal preschool system by Georgetown University researchers found that participants enter elementary school six to eight months ahead of other children in a variety of early writing and reading skills. A study by Rutgers University researchers, also in 2005, of preschools in five states found that preschool attendance generally improved children’s reading readiness — and that all children benefited regardless of income or ethnicity.

However, other researchers are finding more negative results:

Two states have implemented universal preschool in the last ten years, Oklahoma and Georgia. The latest National Assessment of Educational Progress test scores show that while fourth-grade reading scores have trended modestly upward nationwide, the scores of students in Georgia and Oklahoma are falling.

New findings by researchers at Stanford University and University of California, Berkeley show that preschool can hinder social development and encourage poor social behavior, such as bullying and aggression, and children who attend preschool often demonstrate a lack of motivation to participate in classroom activity. There is no widely available information on the long-term impact of preschool on these behaviors.

I’m obviously not going to vote for Prop. 82, but it’s interesting to see the gap between polls and research.

When following politics, I’m sometimes fascinated by the pure political aspects of an issue moreso than the issue itself. Take immigration for instance. Not a big concern of mine, but I find the way it’s playing out to be very interesting.

On the pro-immigration side, you have ideological libertarians, pro-business conservatives, and leftists.

On the immigration restriction side, you have social conservatives, paleoconservatives, and leftists.

I saw this interesting article today about how the leftist contender for the Mexican Presidency is bashing immigration:

Illegal immigration to the United States is “Mexico’s disgrace,” caused by the government’s failure to create enough jobs, the country’s leftist presidential candidate said on Tuesday…

“It is not the solution. It is not an alternative but it is a disgrace for us Mexicans because of the irresponsible rulers of this country,” the leftist said.

Of course, the guy is clearly coherent and noncontradictory:

Lopez Obrador, the former mayor of Mexico City, opposes the free market policies of Fox and his predecessors.

He vows to boost employment and cut poverty by slashing government spending, launching large infrastructure projects and introducing welfare programs for Mexico’s poorest.

It will be interesting to see how all the sides of the issue react. Is it progression or regression from the 20th century that America may now prefer a Chavez, or even a Castro, to stem the advance of the free market in developing countries?

Combine this with the attempted (but ultimately foiled by our government) conservative-led drug policy reform in Mexico, and we are indeed living in times where everything is upside down and all around. Fun to watch, but where is it taking us?

This article on yahoo.com caught my eye. It’s about Besho, an Afghani rapper.

It caught my attention for a few reasons:
1) It’s just another example of globalization and the spread of American culture. We don’t need a whole discussion about that. It’s been discussed, and I have nothing to add to what other’s have said.
2) It’s a shining example of the difference between Afghanistan now and Afghanistan under the lash of the Taliban. (I already know what the negative response to this point will be, that the US is killing innocent civilians left and right. My counter argument is this: the Taliban also killed people, except they did� in the name of religion, on purpose, whereas the US is accidentally killing innocent civilians while trying to fight the Taliban so that rappers like Besho can rap. I’m also not in the mood to get into an argument about the war, it’s another topic that’s been beaten to death and I have nothing new to add to it.)
3) Besho to me is like the anti-Kanye West. Both are rappers, and both preach peace. Yet one agrees with the war in Afghanistan and one does not. The one who supports the new Afghani government is the one who lives in Afghanistan. What’s that tell you?

Whether or not you agree with the war in Afghanistan, it’s neverthelss an interesting article, and I don’t think supporting a man’s newly found sense of artistic expression and message of peace is a partisan issue.

This just in from Inside Bay Area:

Two gay male figure skaters who sued Berkeley Iceland for discrimination have dropped their lawsuit in exchange for a variety of gay-friendly concessions at the skating rink.

Alan Lessik and John Manzon-Santos - who say they are skating partners, but not involved romantically - filed the suit against the ice rink’s parent company, East Bay Iceland, and general manager Monte Tiedemann because they claim the manager twice in a year told them not to hold hands while practicing their skating routines.

According to 365Gay.com:

[The] skating rink will require its employees to undergo diversity training and prominently display placards stating its commitment to equal rights…

The agreement also requires the company to make donations to both NCLR and the Federation of Gay Games. In addition East Bay Iceland will issue a public apology and confirm their commitment to equal treatment of all patrons. Berkeley Iceland will host a Gay/Straight Skate Night on a monthly basis, as well as sign the “Tip of the Iceberg” anti-discrimination pledge. The Berkeley rink will offer weekly “pairs preferred” freestyle skating sessions, and Manzon-Santos and Lessik willl receive free admission to the sessions for one year.

I personally don’t have any problem with gays. I think the Republicans are wrong to exploit the issue, but let’s save that discussion for another time.

As much as I would like to see gays and other minorities treated equally, I don’t want the government legislating morality. A private business owner should have the right to refuse service to anyone on whatever basis, no matter how appaling it may be. This lawsuit was a waste of time and money and the award in the settlement almost borders on extortion, in my opinion. I’m sure the whole thing could have been settled without a lawsuit. Protests or boycotts maybe, but the law shouldn’t have been involved.

Besides… Gay Figure Skaters? Talk about offending your best customers…