After staging a dramatic takeover of Congress on a wave of discontent with the war the Democrats have unveiled their plan for Iraq. Instead of a strong measure to win the war or a call to withdraw, the Democrats have offered a plan to restrict, but not halt, military action in Iraq until the next election. This resolution is impotent, dangerous and cowardly.

It is impotent because the law would freeze the number of US troops in Iraq without setting a real withdrawal deadline. This is worse than withdrawal or surge because unlike withdrawal it still keeps our soldiers being killed off in handfuls and it is worse than surge because it prevents the Army from bringing in reinforcements to stabilize and reduce casualties. Not only does the freeze put American lives on the line, but the restrictions meant to promote withdrawal are meaningless. Included in the bill is the proviso that troops may only continue training missions indefinitely, but all major operations are training operations already as any excursion alongside Iraqi units can be treated as such.

It is dangerous because it insures our prolonged, bloody defeat in the war. If we won’t withdraw there is no chance that we can cut our losses and redeploy our forces to other battlegrounds in the War on Terror. If we cannot bring reinforcements then the tactical situation will never improve and thousands more young Americans will die in the present quagmire.

And finally, it is cowardly because the Democrats have placed the deadline for the bill to March 2008, after the next Congress and President have been elected. Far from a brave act to end the war in their term, the Democrats have chosen to pass the baton to the next government, betting the lives of our soldiers on the next election, perhaps banking that enough blood will give them the seats they need.

For a moment after the 2006 elections I was happy, although I voted for Bush I hoped that a change in Congress would prod him away from the disastrous direction he has taken our foreign policy. I should have known better, the Democrats have instead proposed something worse than inaction, and the only hope I see now for the situation is electing better Republicans in 2008.

With a booming economy and stabilizing budget (deficit to GDP is dropping sharply) the party has a strong claim to power, all that is needed is a reform of leadership and foreign policy doctrine. After two years of pathetic inaction, the Republicans must be ready to take the helm, admit past mistakes of military adventurism and take America back its natural position of global leadership.

On Wednesday the Daily Cal ran a piece about Berkeley Blogging. I have a few comments to make, considering I have been doing just that for a year.

First I should mention I feel left out. The Daily Cal did not mention us at California Patriot. Even though last year we got an honorable mention in their Best of Berkeley (the best was the live journal community, but I don’t think they are a blog), we are not news enough. I would think a student run conservative blog that discussed Berkeley would be worth a note but I apparently. I would be curious to know how many links the Daily Cal gets to their site from here compared to the other mentioned blogs.

My ideas of blogging are similar to Beetle’s. What makes a blog unique is the coverage of things or informed analysis that you can’t find elsewhere. Anyone in the country can write about national politics and events, but a person who knows and talks to the movers and shakers in a field or carefully follows an obscure topic has something beyond the normal fare. Beetle has the best coverage of the ASUC in the world because he talks to some of the important people and has followed everything the ASUC has done for the past several years.

A Case Study: ASUC Mess Over the Summer

One interesting example of blogs’ usefulness was seen in the ASUC elections mess last summer. The only print paper that covered it regularly was the Daily Cal, and they only published twice a week, and even then some bad reporting or a desire to not assign blame obscured what was happening. The blogs filled this vacuum. Calstuff, Beetle Beat, JKoo, a few others, and me provided information as it happened and filled in the gaps. There were also people who were directly involved in the happenings writing online, like Ben Narodick and Andy Ratto along with experts in everything ASUC, like Beetle.

One of the other advantages of having these online updates and commentaries is dialogue. Any incorrect information or bias could immediately be challenged. A lot of the stuff online placed the Student Action party and some of its members in a negative light (I was one of them and still stand behind my conclusions). People engaged in discussion about this assignment of blame presenting arguments and countering them. There were so many anonymous supporters of Student Action they got the term SA-anon bots. There were cries of bias against SA, but at any time a Student Action supporters could have started a blog to counter what was said, (I even offered to publicize such a blog but was not indulged by anyone).

In short, the blogs and their interactive format were the best and most timely source of information. In this way and for these reasons among others, print newspapers are being overshadowed.

Another advantage of the online medium is the possibilities for links. So far in this post I have linked directly to half a dozen different articles or websites I have mentioned. You an instantly look at the sources I mention and not simply take my word on what they say.

There is also decal in progress this semester about blogging. If you get a chance check them out. The Catalytic Triad has even posed a few thoughts on blogging.

There is a new Patriot Radio show up. I just listened to the podcast by Alex Marlow and liked it. Alex talks about the art exhibit by Botero. He makes some good points. Listen to it yourself and then argue about it with Alex.

I found some interesting stuff in the DC on Tuesday. I don’t mean what the dinning halls were serving in honor of Black History Month, but articles in the Daily Cal.

First there is a group that is focused on stopping smoking in the LGBT community. From the front page:

The first of seven classes aimed at helping lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people quit smoking met Saturday as part of a program to counter the high percentage of smokers in that population.

The sponsoring group is Last Drag, an LGBT anti-smoking group. According to the article the city of Berkeley also provided funds for the classes. As for why the higher percentage of LGBT smokers:

Gordon said that while there are no conclusive studies as to why smoking rates are higher in the LGBT community—about 30 percent as compared to about 15 percent among adults statewide—social factors including discrimination could encourage substance abuse.

If this has been researched and the divided system is giving better results then support groups where sexual orientation is not on the questionnaire then they have made another step toward fighting addiction.

My primary concern is sexual orientation is being used to divide people. Instead of going to a quit smoking group a person can go to a straight stop smoking or a gay stop smoking meeting. We are all human, I would think a human stop smoking group would be best.

V-Day, Feminists, and Love all the same

I posted on the op-ed this is in response to earlier. Now there is commentary in the Daily Cal direct from Taylor Allbright herself. Remember for better or worse she is running for ASUC office in two months. The letter speaks for itself, but I have one comment.

Through education and fundraising, The Vagina Monologues hopes to encourage relationships of love and respect, the kind we celebrate on Valentine’s Day.

One thing the play could do is model good male/female relationships.

Beetle Aurora Drake also posted on this.

As for feminism and the Patriot’s view, I don’t know who could forget the treatment on page 21 of the PDF in the October 2005 issue with follow up here.

This is more from the anti-war protest/strike/sign holding fest already covered by Megan. I was hoping I would have some truly awesome video to post online by now, but that was a naïve hope. The video was a newscast that covered the protest from inside and interviewed a visitor to Cal, a physics GSI, a fourth year student, and even the editor of the Patriot.

Enjoy the pictures.

I would like to know if any of the people were skipping class to be there.

On facebook a few minutes ago, I ran across a clever satire of a group entitled “Illegals for Brownback.” Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I am both a strong supporter of Senator Brownback’s campaign for President and someone who is not exactly a “hard-liner” on illegal immigration. (I promised a while back in a comment thread I would explain this in a post some day, but I just haven’t gotten around to it.) So, granted, I’m not coming into this unbiased. I’m naturally going to be annoyed by a group that 1) disses my candidate for 2) a reason I don’t think he deserves to be dissed for. So, I’m not going to start a debate on illegal immigration here. I’m not going to ask you hardliners why it’s so bad that he supports what you would call “amnesty,” because I know exactly what you’ll say. That debate’s been done.

Here’s what I do want to know, though. The group does a cute job of pretending to be illegal immigrants grateful for some of the things more likely to give hardliners apoplexy; for example:

“Senator Brownback voted in favor of s. 2611 which would grant amnesty to most undocumented immigrants residing in the United States. It would also give us a chance to receive in-state college tuition rates. Furthermore, we would only have to pay a small fine and would even qualify for some benefits such as Earned Income Tax Credit.”

Okay, I understand the argument against those things. I’m sympathetic to some of those arguments myself. But then we get:

Senator Brownback recognizes the great contributions that Hispanic Americans make to our nation. He believes that, as a nation of immigrants, we should welcome those individuals who would like to come to this country legally and are willing to work hard for the American dream. Senator Brownback has also advocated small-business-friendly policies, which are making it possible for more and more Hispanic Americans and business owners to realize the American dream.

I mean…is this an attempt at smearing him? Judging by the way the group uses quotes of his, it would indeed appear to be, but…uh…am I just being an open-borders-sad-excuse-for-an-American here or is there nothing at all conceivably wrong with that statement???

I don’t think most hardliners are racists at all. In fact, while I am more on the open-borders side policy-wise, I think there are a lot more crazy people on my side. Most of the hardliners are very nice, decent people with whom I simply disagree, while a whole lot of open-borders people are multiculturalists who don’t give a darn for America’s unique identity. (Same problem with being an anti-Iraq War Republican - I may have agreed on policy with the anti-war crowd but my gosh most of them were idiots about it - but that’s a topic for another time.)

So, my hardliner friends, please tell me that this group is totally unrepresentative of you guys. Please.

Today, Sproul Plaza was abuzz with young people expressing themselves! The World Can’t Wait folks were out, Sproul steps had a microphone with the usual message being broadcast, and the Dems had a “dramatic reading” of the Patriot. While I do not have photos (Chris? James?) the protest was uncharacteristically small. Perhaps they were all in the city, where the action is. Channel 5 (I believe) was out, interviewing the activists.

The dramatic reading of the Patriot was held by the Cal Dems, and had a substantial participation from some of our friends from SJP. They read some articles from our most recent issue in “hillbilly” voices, accompanied by similar music. Most of the conduct was de rigueur for Cal, although I was asked how it felt to be a “laughingstock”. For most of us tablers and actives in the conservative organizations on campus, being in the spotlight–or crosshairs–isn’t new, although I don’t expect our counterparts to know that. As a friend of mine said, “they are taking us more seriously than we are taking ourselves”.

And that is my commentary on the events of today. If anyone who was there for longer than I was could comment further, that would be excellent! Oh, and for some upcoming conservative activism, the Berkeley CR’s are hosting speaker Nonie Darwish on the 22nd, next Thursday in 2040 VLSB at 7pm. She’s the author of Now They Call me Infidel, a member of the group Arabs for Israel, and daughter of Lt General Mustafa Havez. As always, members of the opposition are welcome to attend.

While the calendar lists today as St. Valentine’s Day which is a celebration of love, things are a little different at Cal. With names from V-day to National Condom Day what I saw on Sproul would be described best as Sex Day.

Starting as early as 9, at least half a dozen people were passing out condoms and lubricant as part of safer sex kits. Students with shirts proclaiming themselves as sexperts stood ready to answer questions about sex. There were tables with information about contraceptives and tips for making your sexual experience better. I saw a person dressed as a condom and even a woman as a KY lubricant tube.

The message I got today was focused on everything but what the heart means.

The ASUC was even marrying people on Sproul with certificates and candy rings. With some people getting married multiple times, this encourages a casual attitude toward marriage. With divorce rates as they are, more thought and respect for marriage and its commitment are needed not less.

To get everyone in the mood the Daily Cal ran a special sex issue yesterday. It boasted a Dorma Sutra section with seven suggested places to get it on. There were even a few illustrations to aid the imagination, however I could not find them online.

There were a few student groups doing more noble things. The Berkeley Students for Life were selling roses and many other groups were selling flowers and candy to raise money for charity.

There was a noteworthy letter in the Daily Cal yesterday. The author talked about radical feminists and the change of the holiday over time:

But V-Day isn’t just about ending violence against women. It’s something else. V-Day is a day to celebrate “Vagina Warriors.” V-Day is a day to “be” your vagina. And it has usurped Valentine’s Day—a day that was originally intended to celebrate love and relationships-which college campuses need today more than ever.

In this hyper-sexual atmosphere we need love more then ever. It is not about getting in someone’s pants, it is finding someone who you can connect with and share your feelings with. It is about finding that special someone who you can share your life with and rejoice in the uniqueness that is you.

Maybe I am an old-fashioned romantic, but I am not the only one.

The latest happenings with the ASUC have been very well covered and analyzed by Beetle. My only contribution is a picture of the flower he gave to GA President Josh Daniels. Here it is symbolically being offered to the pelican outside of the GA building, Anthony Hall.

If only everyone could get along this well.

I think is encapsulated in this Drudge headline!

Another comment on the subject is found at UrbanDictionary: the definition of the “Gore Effect”

The February Issue of the Patriot is now fully uploaded and ready for viewing. While the print version is the best, the rain has slowed distribution on Sproul.

Inside you can see:
Our friend Beetle exposes some of the tactics used by the ASUC to raise our fees.

The Editorial covers heritage months and their drawbacks. In the same spirit we have articles by Andrew R. Quinio and Greg Ge regarding affirmative-action and how it is racism against the Asian population at Cal.

I wrote about the website niggaspace.com and the double standard it is part of. Robert Nathaniel Eberhart covers the paintings of Botero regarding Abu Ghraib that are being exhibited on campus. Derek Yee gives an update on the People’s Park situation.

Megan Sego looks back at the French riots and Rohit Joy talks about global warming.

There is a photo essay from the Walk for Life in San Francisco. There must be something notable about it, this is the first of the sixteen pieces I have written that deserved a mention on the cover. See pages 22-23 of the PDF.

Not to copy James, but his post is a great segue into something I found, also from the Harvard Crimson’s online version. Apparently a recently spate of campus robberies has brought some of the Ivy’s sheltered students face to face with “the real world“.

Herz-Rohipe’s article talked about two armed robberies that happened on Harvard’s campus recently. One of the victims, when confronted with the robbers, said “I don’t have time for this”. The author addressed what he thought the cause of this was, the fact that we have been brought up to think a certain way since kindergarten “not to hit and to use [our] words”. He continues “We made it to Harvard, in part, because we internalized this lesson particularly well—we use our words a lot, and we are confident that others will do the same”.

Violence, crime, poverty, and other “undesirable” elements of society are thus intelectualized. Most of us at Berkeley or any other school of liberal arts can fluently discuss solutions for homelessness, hunger, war, and disease. But how much actual experiece do we have? I’m sure some of us have done a stint in the peace corps or somesuch, but how do we react when something “real” is staring us in the face?

Now, some argue that the universities are at fault here, but� I don’t wholly agree. To a degree, a university ought to have a degree of shelteredness to it, so that everyone can feel safe expressing themselves. “Shelteredness” I guess also depends on the demographics of the school, in which case I would hypothesize that Cal is much less sheltered than Harvard. However, the real way to create capable adults is to teach children to be capable, and that’s the family’s job. I’m not saying you have to be a boy scout, but a supportive family is going inspire more outgoing and open-minded children.

Think about the transition from high school to college. It was probably harder for some depending on the kind of life they came from than others. And why else would we call life after college “the real world” if it didn’t shelter us?

Harvard is appointing a new President, and all indicators indicate that it will be a professor named Drew Gilpin Faust. She’ll be the first female President of Harvard, ever, which is pretty cool.

She’ll be the permanent replacement for Larry Summers, who stepped down last year after pressure from his colleagues. He’d done a lot of things that really rubbed them the wrong way, such as suggesting that academia might be the tiniest bit anti-Israel and that underpopulated nations were also underpolluted, but his biggest transgression was that he had the gall to suggest that men and women might have brains that work differently, thus perhaps explaining why more men than women seem to like subjects like math and science.

Seems only fitting that, after this Harvard would appoint a woman as President. So, what kind of a professor is she? Math? Chemistry? Materials Science and Engineering?

Oh, oops. History.

So this is old news by now, but Rudy Giuliani announced his intended candidacy for President this week and was on Fox news on Tuesday I believe. I happened to turn it on and listened to some of what he had to say. I feel like he presented himself very articulately and well, especially on some of the more contentious issues for social conservatives, like gay rights, gun control, and abortion.

The two fairly clear sides are those who feel a more moderate candidate will split the Republican ticket, paving the way for whoever the Dems nominate, and the others who� believe he (or another such McCainesque moderate) is the ticket to defeating Hillary. So far, some polls show Giuliani ahead of McCain, 34% to McCains 22%, followed by 15% percent for Gingrich, actually. This RealClearPolitics poll showed only a 5% lead over McCain, with the third pick being Romney at around 6%.

However, we all know that polls are polls, and whoever gets out of the Republican gate will still have to race the Democrat’s horse, although it likely won’t be a dark one. I looked (albeit perfunctorily) through some Google searches for some Clinton/Obama/Edwards poll numbers (or anyone else) but the internet wouldn’t give up it’s secrets to me easily. That and I’m lazy. However, something interesting I did find on Mr. Obama. It’s no secret that he’s got Muslim heritage, and that he attended an “Islamic School” when he was younger, nor is it secret that he has had brushes with drugs. You would think both would be equally concerning to voters right? This article highlights that the Muslim issue apparently interests internet searchers more. Of millions of Obama searches on the internet in the last four weeks, the top five searches had a mention of the Muslim connection, while none of the top 20 hits concerned the drug issue. Call it a concern based on the current war, ‘islamophobia’, or whatever you want, but it’s on American’s minds. It’s just one article though, don’t get all jumpy.

This should be an interesting race due to the speeded-up primaries and lack of any incumbents. New blood should be interesting though. So what does everyone think? Who will get the Dems/Repubs nominations? Will we vote for an African-American, a woman, or a religious minority? Should Hillary stop wearing the pants?