Auto Bailout Humor

Mikaela says:
You've probably already seen this in your junk mail folder. It's making the rounds. Still pretty funny! The fine print is particularly good. Click on it to get a bigger image.

"You probably thought it was smart to buy a foreign import of superior quality, with better mileage and resale value. Maybe you even thought that years of market share loss might prod us into rethinking our process and redesigning our products with better quality in mind. But you forgot one thing: We spend a shitload of money on lobbyists. So now you’re out $25 billion, plus the cost of your Subaru. Maybe next time you’ll buy American like a real man. Either way, we’re cool."

SunCal on the loose

I got a second mailer from SunCal Corporation promoting TIDDs this week, and it seems that just about everyone I know in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County did as well. This direct-mail promotional effort must have cost SunCal a bundle.

The mailers are promoting the use of tax increment development districts as a source of jobs. “Tidds create jobs,” the mailers say.

Actually, TIDDs don’t create jobs. They simply allow developers to draw down future tax revenue generated from the places they develop to pay off bond proceeds that were used to build their infrastructure. Technically speaking.

Tax increment financing is actually a simple concept. Imagine a circle drawn around a given geographic area. A TIDD is created and at that time the current tax base is measured. What’s promised to the developer is a percentage, or increment, of the increase in taxes over that tax base in the future. The premise is that the development — and the upfront infrastructure the TIDD funds — is going to spur desirable growth in that area.

SunCal’s 55,000 acres adjacent to Albuquerque’s West Side are largely undeveloped, so the company would get a huge chunk of the taxes generated there for about 25 years. It’s got a handful of TIDDs covering about 4,000 acres of that 55,000-acre spread right now — and are just waiting for legislative approval to sell bonds supported by that promise of future tax revenue. For just those 4,000 acres, that sum would be about $629 million.

Hence the promotional pieces. SunCal will be at the Roundhouse in force when the Legislature convenes in January, and it is attempting to neutralize the public.

SunCal is a massive real estate company that builds planned communities and housing developments throughout the West. The company bought 55,000 acres of undeveloped land on Albuquerque’s western fringe in 2006. On its Web site, you can see the huge expanse of green grassland the firm is hoping to build on.

There is a potential problem for SunCal, though. Between last year’s session — when the Legislature failed to approve the TIDD bonds — and now, at least 20 SunCal projects in other Western states have declared bankruptcy. To my knowledge, they’re all companies that were financed by Lehman Brothers, the financial company that went belly-up last summer.

SunCal representatives have claimed that the New Mexico project is solid — that it didn’t get financing from Lehman. As we previously pointed out, however, Lehman Brother’s had a 20-percent stake in D.E. Shaw, which is the principal investor in the New Mexico SunCal subsidiary — also known as Westland.

Given the current state of the financial sector — not to mention that the country seems to be teetering on the brink of cascading bankruptcies across the board — this is not very reassuring.

The TIDD statute, as far as I can tell, doesn’t address what happens if the company that gets the TIDD goes belly-up. TIDD proponents say there is no liability on the part of government to the bond holders if the company doesn’t complete the project and therefore does not have the tax revenue funds to pay off the bond holders.

But would government really let that happen? Or would another developer buy the property dirt cheap, put in crappy, sprawling housing developments and then use the tax revenue from the area to pay off those bonds that were meant for “good” infrastructure — not to mention “jobs”?

Interested taxpayers want to know.

Cross-posted on NMI.

The Art of Newspapers

Mikaela says:
Such a fun time reading the newspapers today -- with just a twinge of guilt for doing it so happily online, as the Tribune files for Ch. 11 because it can't figure out how to make money with the changing habits of people like me...

First there was the charming editorial in the Washington Post exploring the fairytale idea of Caroline Kennedy replacing Hillary in the Senate ... complete with matching uneasiness about political dynasties that I heartily share. I loved this piece's ping-pong logic that echoed my own misgivings about the subject.

Then a plea for social connection via physical urban and suburban pattern from David Brooks! Really! No more bowling alone, people! It's time to put Obama's $ where your hearts are: community activity centers! A very well-written and sensible piece, if rather pessimistic about the chances of it actually happening.

I had to laugh when I got to the end, though. It was another one of those "can you believe the synchronicity of the world?" kind of moments. I watched Peter Seller's Being There this weekend, which I'd never seen. It was slow if charming, or maybe the other way around.

It features a rather vacuous but good gardener who is taken for a political and economic genius when he happens to be in the right place at the right time and stays true to who he is and what he knows (hat tip, Marjorie!). Here's the pivotal, and timely, scene:

President "Bobby": Mr. Gardner, do you agree with Ben, or do you think that we can stimulate growth through temporary incentives?
[Long pause]
Chance the Gardener: As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden.
President "Bobby": In the garden.
Chance the Gardener: Yes. In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.
President "Bobby": Spring and summer.
Chance the Gardener: Yes.
President "Bobby": Then fall and winter.
Chance the Gardener: Yes.
Benjamin Rand: I think what our insightful young friend is saying is that we welcome the inevitable seasons of nature, but we're upset by the seasons of our economy.
Chance the Gardener: Yes! There will be growth in the spring!
Benjamin Rand: Hmm!
Chance the Gardener: Hmm!
President "Bobby": Hm. Well, Mr. Gardner, I must admit that is one of the most refreshing and optimistic statements I've heard in a very, very long time.
[Benjamin Rand applauds]
President "Bobby": I admire your good, solid sense. That's precisely what we lack on Capitol Hill.

And here's David Brooks, ending his own charming version of common sensical plain-speak:

Social change has a natural rhythm. The season of prosperity gives way to the season of economic scarcity, and out of the winter of recession, new growth has room to emerge. A stimulus package may be necessary, but unless designed with care, its main effect will be to prop up the drying husks of the fall.

Too good. Sometimes, life is just too good. Life imitates art, indeed.

Savoring Saying Goodbye to Bush

Mikaela says:
Gotta give props to the Onion for nailing the humor here in this satirical goodbye letter from Bush to us. I just wish they'd gone even farther to mention what he actually DID accomplish to mess everything up almost irrevocably (we hope for the best...).

I'm Really Gonna Miss Systematically Destroying This Place

Oh, America. Eight years went by so fast, didn't they? I feel like I hardly got to know you and methodically undermine everything you once stood for. But I guess all good things must come to an end, and even though you know I would love to stick around for another year or four—maybe privatize Social Security or get us into Iran—I'm afraid it's time to go. But before I leave, let me say, from the bottom of my heart: I can't think of another country I would've rather led to the brink of collapse.
...
The worst part about leaving is knowing I can never screw up anything this big again. Don't get me wrong, I'm only 62. I could still bankrupt an oil company, or become the next MLB commissioner and ruin baseball. But I'll never get the opportunity to fuck up on this massive of a scale again. Even if you put me back in charge for another term, I could only take the U.S. from a rapidly declining world power to not a world power at all. I don't mean to gloat, but I think it's safe to say that no one can ever unseat the American empire like I unseated the American empire.

The real Bush lines that are really getting me these days are his attempts to re-write yet again the origins of the Iraq War. In his recent interview with Charlie Gibson, Bush said a few things that just cannot be true based on what we know (or used to know before all the administration's efforts to swap out what we know with what they want us to believe):

Gibson: "What were you most unprepared for?"

Bush: "Well, I think I was unprepared for war. In other words, I didn't campaign and say, 'Please vote for me, I'll be able to handle an attack.' In other words, I didn't anticipate war. Presidents -- one of the things about the modern presidency is that the unexpected will happen."

No one talks about this anymore, but doesn't anyone remember the Project for a New American Century? It was the global manifest destiny version of Karl Rove's intention to plant the Republican flag on a generation of politics for a lasting majority. Remember this?

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."
Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century,
The Project for the New American Century
September 2000

This report was prepared for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush, and Scotter Libby -- all part of the PNAC, the group that said explicitly that America could exploit a new "Pearl Harbor" to catapult our efforts to be a dominating power for this new century.

From Wikipedia's entry of signatories on documents or statements from this group, these are the names I recognize as close to the resulting Bush Administration (also has table with a lot more names that also explains their roles - love Wikipedia!):

• Elliott Abrams^[18]
• Richard L. Armitage^[19]
• John R. Bolton^[19][6]
• John Ellis "Jeb" Bush^[18]
• Richard B. Cheney^[18]
• I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby^[18]
• Richard Perle^{[19][6][15][51]}
• Donald Rumsfeld^[18]
• Paul Wolfowitz^[18]

You don't think Bush knew they picked him as a presidential candidate (and Cheney as running mate) precisely with this ultimate goal? And they picked him and supported him because he wouldn't ever be prepared, which means they could manipulate him exactly the way the wanted to. It's such pretzel logic to say now that he didn't know this was coming. They went into the White House gunning for exactly this opportunity!

Gibson: "You've always said there's no do-overs as President. If you had one?"

Bush: "I don't know -- the biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq. A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein. It wasn't just people in my administration; a lot of members in Congress, prior to my arrival in Washington D.C., during the debate on Iraq, a lot of leaders of nations around the world were all looking at the same intelligence. And, you know, that's not a do-over, but I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess."

Except that the intelligence was different. See below.

Gibson: "If the intelligence had been right, would there have been an Iraq war?"

Bush: "Yes, because Saddam Hussein was unwilling to let the inspectors go in to determine whether or not the U.N. resolutions were being upheld. In other words, if he had had weapons of mass destruction, would there have been a war? Absolutely."

Except that Saddam actually DID let inspectors go in, but when they didn't find anything, Bush claimed falsely that it was because Saddam was hiding things and not cooperating. Click and scroll down for "Inspectors Redux."

Gibson: "No, if you had known he didn't."

Bush: "Oh, I see what you're saying. You know, that's an interesting question. That is a do-over that I can't do. It's hard for me to speculate."

But Bush DID know. It just wasn't what he wanted to know. Very inconvienient to his plans to invade regardless.

I understand that every President, and for that matter, every person, wants to believe and promote the best version of events to shed good light on their actions. But letting Bush get away with this wanton revisionist history in clear refutation of facts drives me nuts! We're so lazy and forgetful as a people about events that have changed the world for the worse possibly forever. Can't we try to keep the facts straight and not treat bald-face lies with straight-faced acceptance?

Adding a Fourth Year

Mikaela says:
It is a time of thanksgiving at m-pyre, but also one of birthdays. This year we celebrate our fourth year together on this blog, and we anticipate another birth in the spring: the addition of another m-pyre girl -- my first kid.

This blog continues to do what it was born for: to keep three Ms in conversation, even as their lives have moved apart -- Maggie's taking her to a new city, Mikaela's moving her out of Marjorie's house and a block away from Forrester Street, Marjorie's bringing her a new car and a slew of new jobs to add to her pile.

Of all the places I call home, m-pyre remains here waiting for my political mind, my critique, my interest, my worries, and lots of time my anger. It's had to wait more this year than any before, as my priorities have actively reshuffled themselves to make room for a new lifemate, new house, and now new baby. But among all those changes, the constancy of m-pyre, the comfort of opening the page to see the intelligence and activeness of my fellow Ms, has kept a lifeline open to my "higher brain." The breadcrumbs are there to guide my way back from maternity land. This next year may be a kinder, gentler post kind of year for me. We'll see what engages my attention once there's a new girl to think about, watch out for, and eventually discuss this crazy world with.

In the spirit of sharing our womenly wisdom, my fellow m-pyricists have agreed to impart their advice to the newest little M, making her way into the world. Afterward, we've got a little "How well do you know us, and how well do we know each other?" quiz for you. Share your guesses in the comments, and we'll follow up with answers next week. And finally, we've got requests for posts we'd like to see here on m-pyre in the coming year.

Maggie says:
My first piece of advice to you, little one, is to soak in all the hugs from your mom that you can, because those are some great hugs. Hugs are an underappreciated art form, and your mama is an artiste. Speaking of your mama (and the gals that she surrounds herself with), know just how lucky you are to be born in a moment where anything is possible for girls like you. More than ever before, you can be anything and everything you want to be – your own Supergirl. As you’re figuring out exactly what kind of Supergirl you want to be, the three of us are going to be making noise about things that you deserve, like the same pay as Superboy and the right to make your own decisions and pave your own way. Paving your own way is important, and with a mom like yours, you’ll learn all about the values that can make our world a better place. But just as important, and something your mom knows better than anyone, are all the things that can make our world a more beautiful place, a more expressive place, and a more connected place. Watch her do those things, and take notes. Because expressing yourself with values? That sounds like a Supergirl to me. Also, little one, and this is important: when your mom gets worried, you should always give her the biggest grin that you can. She’s a softie when it comes to big smiles (and they’re good for getting out of trouble, too… shhhhhh....). One more thing, Supergirl, since I already know how smart and strong you’re going to be: laugh as loud and as hard as you can, as often as possible. It’s the secret to happiness, and no one will deserve more happiness than you.

Marjorie says:
It shouldn’t surprise folks that what on first glance seems like a relatively straightforward task—giving “advice” to the newest m-girl—quickly gets made difficult by me. For every encouragement there’s a caveat; for every admonishment an exception. And what advice does one give to a new person regarding life, when it's such a singular experience? But perhaps I can transcend my habits for this new person, because after all she is quite special. So here is my advice, as close to simple noun-verb constructions as I could get them: Balance everything. Do right by yourself, while making room for others. Take a position and act on it. Read a lot. Do your homework. Don’t take no for an answer. And don’t hesitate to ask the question in the first place. Indulge your curiosity. Listen to your intuition. Enjoy your life. Be kind and cultivate empathy. Leave the spaces you enter in a better condition than you found them. Have respect for yourself. Learn what that actually is. Brush your teeth and sit up straight, but embrace your inner tomboy also. Something tells me you’re going to be a blondie—pray that you inherit your father’s hair. Love your mother and your father. Listen to them even when you're sixteen--they're pretty smart.

After four years: Ms Matrix Minutiae

The Ms ask:

1. Can you guess which M is described in each category?
2. For bonus points and eternal credit for EQ, can you guess which M volunteered the description?
3. Place your bets in the comments; answers posted next week! (Sample answer sheet provided below.)

Note: Every row is in a different order - no one is all "A," "B," or "C"... I know, I know, we're tough like that. Can anyone fill out the entire board?

(click for full-size!)

4th Birthday: M Requests...

The Ms ask:
What's in store for the next year on m-pyre? Here's what each of us are hoping to learn from each other in new posts throughout the year:

Mikaela would like to see posts from Maggie on:

• What the latest economic crisis will do to affordable housing in our cities... and what we should do about it
• Pairing up (pardon the pun) her favorite celebrities with her favorite shoes... Who looks like which shoes and why?

Mikaela wants to see Marjorie post about:

• The new political landscape for the Mormon church... and the subtleties of how that may play out for its members
  
• A play-by-play of movie-watching with her family... who thinks what and when?

Maggie thinks Mikaela should take a stab at:

• How to reconcile the loads of pale pink baby clothes she's bound to receive with modern notions of girlhood and motherhood. I will need guidance!
• Can a brilliant mind watch dumb tv without hearing that inner "you're too smart for this" monologue? If not, how to shut it off? If so, what's the filter like? Discuss!
  

Maggie wants Marjorie to detail:

• The future of labor in the landscape of a Democratic Washington and a decidedly new economy, where nothing is what it was.
• The imaginary dinner party she would host with special guests Emma Goldman, Gram Parsons, Jane Austen, and Lyndon B. Johnson, and just what they would discuss.
  

Marjorie wants to hear from Maggie about:

• The urban planning landscape of Dallas, from her vantage point in a private sector planning practice. How does the city stack up when it comes to transit, is there a community-based planning world in the big D, what are the power nodes? Please, do tell.
  
• A reflection about the life transitions of a mobile, young professional in the United States--juggling the freedom to pursue career moves with the pull of a highly rooted family.
  

Marjorie wants Mikaela to tell us:

• How faith and politics intersect on the left, and where are the commonalities between her faith based community and those evangelical groups we hear so much about on the right.
  
• Is it possible for a mile-a-minute, high achieving woman to "have it all"? Regarding this perennial question, I'd like to hear about the challenges, through the lens of Mikaela.
  

What about our readers? Do you have requests for us? What would you like to read here in the next year?

Move over Missouri...

Mikaela says:
Got to thinking about Missouri's status as bellwether state - picking the president in all but one presidential election since 1952 (exception: Adlai Stevenson). Since Missouri went for McCain by the slimmest of margins (49.4 vs. 49.3%), they've lost exclusive title to their predictive hat.

And guess who was right behind their record, with 2 slips since Presidential voting started in the state? That's right - good ole NM.

As one reporter put it about losing Missouri's not-so-much-vaunted position:

"Well, whatever. There wasn't a lot of glory in being the bellwether, except that reporters and news crews from places like Washington, London and Germany came to interview us in election season."

You know what? We'll take it! We need the tourist, even if they are news crews! Get ready, Missouri. We'll go head-to-head in 2012 and see who goes home with the bellwether title.

Image: "Bellwether States and Counties - 1960 through 1996"

Today's Chuckle: Why Did Bush Cross the Low Road?

Mikaela reposts from Dan Froomkin:

In May, White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten issued a memo announcing that, as far as last-minute regulations were concerned, the Bush Administration would take the high road.

Agency heads were instructed to "resist the historical tendency of administrations to increase regulatory activity in their final months." Bolten set a June 1 deadline for proposing new regulations, and ordered that none be issued after November 1, except in "extraordinary circumstances."

But Bolten's deadlines came and went without anyone paying much notice, and the real deadline is now upon us. Rules published by tomorrow go into effect before President-elect Obama takes office, making them much more difficult to reverse.

As a result, the low road is bumper-to-bumper today.

Wonkery of the Week

Maggie says:
This week, we layer the 2008 electoral map on top of an 1860 map of cotton production in the U.S. South. Notice how strongly the counties that voted for Obama correlate with 1860 cotton production.

Source: From Pickin' Cotton to Pickin' Presidents

What does this tell us?

First, we see that by and large, the folks who produced that cotton - by force, as we know - still maintain a presence in the area once known as the "Black Belt," both for its soil and for its forced labor. That density patterns of African-Americans in the South still reflect the same geographical pattern of 150 years ago is interesting, but probably no surprise to any of us. Today, the cotton counties are still largely rural, with small towns sprinkled throughout, and have a strong enough African-American presence to turn blue in a sea of red.

The layering of the cottom map with the electoral map provides, for me, an opportunity to reflect on race and change in our country. Like many of you, I see the election of Barack Obama as a reckoning a sorts, a statement of hope, a turning of a new leaf. In the context of last week's wonkery, this map is a powerful testament to me of a new way forward for the South. That the nation's choice for president is the same choice that Southern blacks made is progress in and of itself. By throwing out our old notions of Southern politics, it's possible to interpret that the South has spoken again, only this time, with different voices doing the speaking. This other population of the South - those victims of hate and structural oppression in the name of color - have not only spoken, they have been heard. 150 years later, who exactly is 'backward?'

To me, this map looks like a wave of blue hope. What do you see?

Democrats should be ashamed of themselves.

Maggie says:
That is all. Too angry + busy to deal right now.

Packin' up...

Maggie cheers:
...AND MOVIN' OUT!

M. Wuerker for Politico.

What more can you say?

Mikaela says:
He's a man of history. A man of destiny. Maybe global manifest destiny. Not in a good way. In the good ole fashioned decimating way...

Folks are wondering now how much we'll ever know about the constitutional, legal, and world relations havoc wreaked by our current (and outgoing, thank god) President.

• Will Bush pardon Libby to protect Cheney's secret legacy?
• Will he issue a blanket pardon for all involved in the illegal torture he okayed with an Executive memo, as he's considering?
• Will Obama take the path of "fact-finding" in order to discover atrocities and right them, as his advisors recommend, or will there be bipartisan "commissions" aimed at prosecution, sure to blow all the goodwill and harmony we feel in America right now, or ... [shuddering here ...] will he do what most Presidents do, and sweep everything under the rug, signaling once and for all that laws do not pertain to those at the top?

And then there's this little tidbit. CBS's Mark Knolls has released his latest tally of days Bush has vacationed in Crawford, at Camp David, or in Kennebunkport.

Grand Total = 987 days off
Total days in office = 2920 days
Percent on vacation = 33.8 percent

Holy crap.

Let's take a look at that again.


Days Off / Total Days? That looks like this. Talk about American Pie!

1. Man do I wish my job had that much paid time off.
2. If only he could have spent MORE time out of the White House, dragging Cheney with him, maybe some of the worst disasters under his "watch" would never have happened!

Not only has he broken the record of the previous vacationing-est president, Reagan, but it coincides with his record for lowest rating President ever in the polls. Way to make history, Bush! Glad you're history, you clever little cowboy!

(click here to view)

Nick Anderson
Houston Chronicle
Nov 13, 2008

EditorialCartoonists.com

Wonkery of the Week

Maggie says:
I'm going to try and keep up with a little something I'm going to call "Wonkery of the Week" here on m-pyre. (By the way, I like alliteration, so even if I don't make it every week, I'm keeping the name. And sure, 'wonkery' may not be in the dictionary, but I'm going to consider it a parting tribute to W. Gotta get them in while we still can!)

Wonkery of the Week is going to feature the pieces I find myself nerding out to with the most excitement each week. Enter last night, finishing a pile of work I brought home, and finally being able to dig into this article and its corresponding maps and charts under the covers at midnight. So worth the wait!

Nerdiness out of my system, let's take a look:

NYT: For South, a Waning Hold on National Politics

In the last week of the election, we heard various analysts warn the Republicans that their party was increasingly becoming a white, regional, "Southernized" party only. This article makes those claims impossible to refute, as it details how the South effectively Red-voted themselves out of relevancy last week by supporting McCain in such high numbers, making race the only explanation.

By voting so emphatically for Senator John McCain over Mr. Obama — supporting him in some areas in even greater numbers than they did President Bush — voters from Texas to South Carolina and Kentucky may have marginalized their region for some time to come, political experts say.

The region’s absence from Mr. Obama’s winning formula means it “is becoming distinctly less important,” said Wayne Parent, a political scientist at Louisiana State University. “The South has moved from being the center of the political universe to being an outside player in presidential politics.”

The significance here is that the South ceded their claim to being the center of national politics and colored the much-lauded "Southern Strategy" irrelevant. A Democrat proved he could win without having a Southern accent, and the mid-Atlantic South (Virginia and North Carolina) went with him. In the Deep South, black turnout was higher than in previous years, but not high enough to match the overwhelming support of McCain by Deep South white voters - nearly 9 in 10 whites in Alabama, for example. According to the NYT analysis, "Southern counties that voted more heavily Republican this year than in 2004 tended to be poorer, less educated and whiter." Check the charts in the article for all the numbers; they're truly worth taking a look at.

What, then, for the future of the Republican Party? They are scrambling, no doubt. Their brand is maxed out. The Republican Governor's Conference is taking place right now, and you can be sure they're discussing how to revive their brand after last week's repudiation (see Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal emerging as free of the Bush/Iraq taint and embodying the only Republican biography that comes close to matching our president-elect). As the party scrambles to save face, how will they de-regionalize their message? How do they maintain relevancy, and what does the Deep South do in response?

The rest of the electoral map (Midwest! Mountain West!) breathes easier this week, basking in the glow of its newfound attention. I, for one, am thrilled about that.

Go wonk out yourself to the article, electoral maps, and charts!

Parallels on race in the White House

My inbox is flooded with discussion about a Washington Post piece from last week, originally sent to me by my friend Saleem. In separate discussions resulting from that piece, it's clear that none of us can stop exclaiming - or tearing up - over how poignant it is. See for yourself:

A Butler Well Served by this Election

For those of you in Albuquerque, I hope you were able to attend Electoral Dysfunctions: The Vortex Theatre's Political Playfest while it was running. Longtime friend Gene Grant wrote a piece titled "Enter on the Execution" that won the event's top prize. Without revealing too much, I'll offer that the play is set in a restroom, just before Barack Obama will give the oath of office. Inside, he meets a bathroom attendant who, as a black man who's worked for decades in the White House, has an interesting perspective on just what Obama is about to take on, and just what it means.

In "A Butler Well Served...," the butler in question is Mr. Eugene Allen, 88, an African-American who served the White House for thirty years. His stories and perspective are remarkable, and like Gene's hero, he in many ways represents the moment of change we now find ourselves in with regard to race in America.

Both of these pieces - fact and fiction - are remarkable at this moment in time. Maybe if we're lucky, Gene will tell us a bit about his play and his thoughts about Eugene Allen.

Bonus: A slideshow of Eugene Allen's life in the White House

Bipartisan Hope

Mikaela says:
There's been a lot of admonishment not to gloat about the outcome of the election from many different sources. I'm okay with that. As long as we continue to see signs of progress toward freedom, accountability, and transparency, I'm okay with low-key waiting and watching for change.

Not only does the minister of our very liberal, very blue Unitarian Universalist congregation wish we were more diverse in order to maintain more debate and dialog and our connection to the rest of the country, but her pastoral prayer on Sunday included a request to the powers of healing and renewal to forgive us our doubts and fears about the election. That got me!

She also shared this fantastic cartogram of the 2008 election results, adjusted for population density and the gradient of votes in each county - showing a true representation of the mix of red and blue votes in most places to result in "purple america."



So I have hope for the future and pride in my country, but I'm not harboring any wishes for payback for the last Republican era of excess, greed, and power-mongering (ahem). I'm ready to move on - happily, intentionally, and thoughtfully.

The Book of Love

Maggie says:
Something crazy's going on these days, because Keith Olbermann is talking about love. Love. Watch.



I feel ashamed that in the midst of such glorious victory, we're left with Proposition 8. And I feel ashamed that my position in this world allows me to forget that. I'm planning a wedding with no legal constraints, no court orders, no protest signs. Just my heterosexual self who can get married whenever I want, as many times as I want, if that's what I choose.

I do believe that one day we will look back on the struggles for same-sex marriage equality and shake our heads that there was ever a question, ever a raised legal eyebrow, at that right. Just as we do today with interracial marriage and basic civil rights. But we are not there yet. Not yet.

I leave you with two of my favorite images I've stumbled upon in the world of wedding blogging. The emotion of these unions are always so evident to me in photographs. Take a minute and really look at these. What do you see?

I see happiness. And we all deserve a shot at it, each one of us.

(Photography by Jessamyn Harris)

While we're not looking

Maggie says:
Busy morning here, so I offer in full from The Progress Report (who do such a great job with links and atribution):

Having promised to "sprint to the finish" of his second term and "to remain focused on the goals ahead," President Bush is "working to enact a wide array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken government rules" aimed at protecting workers, consumers and the environment, the Washington Post reports. "The administration wants to leave a legacy," said Gary Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, "but across the board it means less protection for the public." Indeed, the Bush administration is implementing over 90 new regulations which "would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era and could be difficult for his successor to undo." The wide array of new regulations includes proposals to undercut outpatient Medicaid services, weaken the Endangered Species Act, and allow increased emissions from older power plants. In some instances, the administration has allowed federal agencies to circumvent public feedback methods by limiting the period for public comment, "not allowing e-mailed or faxed comments or scheduling public hearings." Transition advisers to President-elect Barack Obama, meanwhile, "have compiled a list of about 200 Bush administration actions and executive orders that could be swiftly undone to reverse White House policies." The kind of regulations they are looking at are those imposed by Bush for "overtly political" reasons, said Dan Mendelson, a former associate administrator for health in the Clinton administration's Office of Management and Budget.

My girl Rachel Maddow's been looking at Bush's quiet shenanigans in her daily Lame Duck Watch, too. (As if you need another reason to watch RM.)

Insidery goodness

Maggie says:
I've been absolutely obsessed with Newsweek's "Secrets of the 2008 Campaign," installments of which have been released throughout the day. (Bated breath for Chapter 7 right now!)

Every year, Newsweek puts full-access reporters on each campaign, with the promise that they won't publish a word until after the election. The results are always good. In fact, the 2004 compilation remains Trevor's favorite book about that election, for those of you who know my fellow politics-frenzied sidekick.

Go check it out. Some of my favorite insights, incidentally, come from the Democratic primary. And I continue to swoon over the state of the Obama marriage. Such good stuff there, seriously.

Wow.

Maggie says:
It's real, folks: Change.gov.