Tommy Hough

So now Carrie Prejean is comparing her stance on “opposite marriage” to her grandfather fighting in Patton’s Third Army in the Battle of the Bulge? Give your grandfather and the Battle of the Bulge a little more credit and respect than that, Ms. Prejean.

Do you know what the great General Patton would’ve called the pageant Ms. Prejean so holier-than-thou believes was the appropriate place to do the Lord’s bidding and apparently channel the only answer God would’ve given to Perez Hilton (!) while in a bikini with fake boobs on display? He would’ve called it what it was, a tits and ass fest, or a lap dance with questions, and slapped Perez Hilton and Donald Trump on the way out for good measure.

Yes Ms. Prejean, you have the right to express yourself publicly, and you also have the right to be criticized for what you say publicly. It’s not a violation of your freedom of speech to be criticized for speaking out or saying what’s on your mind. You might’ve skipped the day in history class when the Constitution was being discussed while you were off posing at La Jolla Cove as a 17-year old, but the freedom of speech component in the Constitution exists so the government can’t restrict your freedom of speech. And to my knowledge, the government has been worrying about more important things…like two wars and the deficit and the economy. Your employer can restrict your freedom of speech, and public opinion can reject your freedom of speech position as well. So please, get over yourself.  My God, if your fate is based upon the decision of Donald Trump, I’d take a serious look at your vocational priorities and what your God really thinks of you.

I love women and I’m married to a beautiful woman indeed. I’m not saying Carrie Prejean isn’t attractive (okay, make that a sexpot). She is, though she’s clearly had some rather unnecessary, albeit noticeable help with the body her God gave her (on better display in the allegedly dirty photos) at the expense of her employer, but it’s the ugliness of her inner hypocrisy, self-delusion, and self-victimization which makes Carrie Prejean very unattractive indeed.

For a better dissection on Carrie Prejean’s self-delusion, check out her appearance on Focus On the Family James Dobson’s radio program.

President / Vice-President:

Barack Obama / Joe Biden

(why I’m voting this way at the end of the piece)

U.S. Congressional Races, San Diego County:

49th District - Robert Hamilton (Darrel Issa, incumbent)

50th District - Nick Leibham (Brian Bilbray, incumbent)

Nick Leibham wants to make medical care of returning military vets a priority, and worked in the U.S. Attorney’s office before becoming a city of San Diego Criminal prosecutor. Leibham is also actively selling himself as pro-environment, an absolute rarity for any Congressional candidate in these parts. Incumbent Brian Bilbray is a career politician who, while mayor of Imperial Beach in the 1980s, tried to stem the flow of the Tijuana River from Mexico by literally bulldozing it closed. Cute stunt, but utterly indicative of his environmental stands. Bilbray also wanted to build a yacht marina in the Tijuana Estuary and a 1.5 mile breakwater off Imperial Beach, which was soundly opposed and eventually defeated with the help of the then-fledgling Surfrider organization.

51st District - Bob Filner (incumbent)

52nd District - Mike Lumpkin (open seat; Duncan Hunter Sr. retiring)

Mike Lumpkin is a retired Navy SEAL Commander and Iraq War veteran, and at one time was the commander of all U.S. Special Forces in Iraq. A self-proclaimed fiscal conservative, Lumpkin is running against retiring Congressman Duncan Hunter’s son, Duncan D. Hunter, also an Iraq War vet and retired U.S. Marine. Lumpkin, if for no other reason, marks an opportunity for the 52nd District to have someone without the name Hunter as their Congressman for the first time since 1980, but the former Navy SEAL also offers the district the same pro-military focus the elder Hunter provided, but from a slightly more worldly and experienced 43 years instead of Duncan D. Hunter’s 31 years. Lumpkin is also less likely to howl about building border walls and the culture wars, and instead, focus on concrete issues. A firearms owner, Lumpkin isn’t interested in taking anyone’s weapons or ORVs away, but the 52nd District is far more diverse than one might suspect with portions of Mission Valley, La Mesa, and Tierrasanta within its borders as well.

53rd District - Susan Davis (incumbent)

City of San Diego, City Attorney:

Mike Aguirre (incumbent)

I admit, I’ve been a fan of Aguirre’s since he arrived in office, if for no other reason than his willingness to buck what I see as an overly-business friendly Mayor at the expense of regular San Diegans who have neither closure on the pension crisis or even leaders with mature, non-growth related approaches to water-use issues. Aguirre can be occasionally messianic, but he’s never been inaccurate in his charges as far as I can tell, and he’s been subject to some extremely unfounded criticism by Mayor Sanders, as well as the man vying for Aguirre’s seat, Superior Court Judge Jan Goldsmith (who has the worst toupee in all of Southern California and not one friend decent enough to tell him so). Along with Sanders, Judge Goldsmith claimed Aguirre called for a mass evacuation of the city of San Diego during the 2007 fires. It’s strange for Goldsmith and Mayor Sanders to criticize Aguirre for this, since…that’s what happened. As much as the folks Downtown and along the coast might forget about inland communities, Rancho Bernardo, 4S Ranch, Carmel Mountain Ranch, and sizable pieces of Rancho Penasquitos were evacuated, with a nervous Tierrasanta primed and ready to go. These are all city of San Diego neighborhoods. Have Mayor Sanders and Superior Court Judge Goldsmith forgotten about last year already, or are they just annoyed City Attorney Mike Aguirre was on top of the problem and gave an honest appraisal. No leader should ever be criticized simply for suggesting an idea…even one which the city eventually enacted. Seriously, re-elect City Attorney Mike Aguirre. There’s no one else in City Hall looking out for the little guy, regular joe, and average San Diego city taxpayer the way Aguirre does.

California State Assembly:

73rd District - Judy Jones (open seat)

74th District - Brett Maxfield (Martin Garrick, incumbent)

75th District - Darren Kasai

76th District - Lori Saldaña (incumbent)

77th District - Raymond Lutz (Joel Anderson, incumbent)

78th District - Marty Block (open seat)

Yes, the guy with the cool, UPS-like TV ads. Vote for Marty Block if you’re in the 78th.

79th District - Mary Salas (incumbent)

80th District - Manuel Perez (open seat)

San Diego City Council:

District 1 - Sherri Lightner (open seat; Scott Peters retiring)

District 3 - Todd Gloria (open seat; Toni Atkins retiring)

District 7 - Marti Emerald (open seat; Jim Madaffer retiring)

California State Propositions:

Prop 1A - NO

I love the novelty of building a high-speed bullet train up and down the length of the San Joaquin Valley, and I might even take the train if it could get me to San Jose as fast as a cheap Southwest flight. The reality is, freight would be a more likely user of these rail lines, and with the money the project is projected to cost by 2020, we could have four additional lanes added to the far-too-few four current lanes of I-5 through the San Joaquin Valley, or add additional lanes to I-5 and SR 99, and we’d get those lanes much, much sooner. I do sincerely like the idea of high-speed rail; if anything it will be infinitely less polluting than the current traffic through the Big Valley. I just think private companies should flip the bill for this, and the public money should be spent fixing and enhancing our infrastructure, which needs a very serious makeover and overhaul. If anything, CalTrans should rebuild the I-405/101 bottleneck interchange in Sherman Oaks. If this passes I’ll live, I don’t hate it but I’m voting no on 1A. Let’s get our house in order first before we add a long-term addition, and besides if you really want high-speed rail, how about some more local light and/or high-speed rail between San Diego and L.A.? Perhaps within existing freeway footprints?

Prop 2 - YES

Yes, yes, yes. There’s no excuse, ever, for cruelty to animals and inhuman capitivity, even if you’re going to eat them. All this initiative will do is make it the law for California factory farmers to house pregnant sows, egg-laying hens, and calves bred for veal in such a way so they’ll be able to lie down, turn around, and stretch their limbs, instead of being suspended within or jammed into cages. Here’s another good opportunity for California to be in the lead on something decent and humane, and believe me, your food will taste better and be better for you when it comes from less-stressed animals.

Prop 3 - NO

Here’s where the fiscal conservative in me comes out. I have no problem funding hospitals, but it would bother me a little less if hospitals just admitted what we were really paying for (care for those without insurance), and would instead get behind a real push for across-the-board health coverage for all Americans. Furthermore, area hospitals received voter approval for $750 million dollars in a similar initiative in 2004, and that money is only about half-spent. I know new toys are nice and we need functioning hospitals able to meet the needs of the community, but in an era where we’re running deficits on everything, we’re not out of line getting our house in order first before building more stuff…instead, spend some of this money to further retrofit existing hospitals before the next earthquake.

Prop 4 - NO

In a perfect world, a young woman will go to her parents if she finds herself pregnant, the family will talk it over, and come to the best solution. Unfortunately, the perfect world scenario seldom applies. No on Proposition Four.

Prop 5 - YES

I’m a fan of the Los Angeles Times, but they got this one wrong. Two-thirds of the people who enter the criminal justice system in this state are addicted to drugs or have serious drug and dependency issues to begin with. This proposition simply expands the definition of who is eligible for treatment, because at the end of the day, treatment costs far less to the state than incarceration, and the current program may be the first time many of these criminals even have some kind of drug-habit intervention. As the San Diego City Beat wrote, “if the crime isn’t drug-related, but drugs are the root cause, and the crime doesn’t involve harming another person, a judge can give an individual the option of treatment rather than incarceration.” It may not be perfect, but I don’t think “isolating and treating” is a waste of money

Prop 6 - NO

This is an anti-gang measure, courtesy of far-right couple who’s known for bankrolling these types of measures. The proposition creates $100 million dollars for gang suppression, but doesn’t pony up anything for direct intervention. The proposal will also make it easier for juveniles to be tried as adults, and would weirdly require the state to pay for lifetime GPS monitoring of all sex offenders, gang members, and violent felons. Sounds like nice idea, but I’m still not sure whose job it’s going to be to monitor all this GPS information, and how long before ex-cons figure out how detach the ankle bracelets they’ll be shackled to even years after completing their sentence. I’m all in favor of punishing criminals, but I’m not down with this proposal, nor the short-sighted band-aid measures it proposes. No on six.

Prop 7 - NO

I had a listener ask me about this, and the short answer for me is every environmental group I pay any attention to, from the Sierra Club on down, is not interested in this, and this includes people and organizations particularly passionate and excited about renewable energy. In fact, the coalition against Proposition Seven is so broad it tells me something’s up. Seriously, if this can’t pass muster with any major California newspaper’s editorial board, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Environmental Defense Fund, and at least a dozen solar industry outfits in California, I’m voting no.

Prop 8 - NO

I don’t care what you think about the whole concept of gay marriage ~ which right-wing bedwetters think is going to somehow harm their children ~ but here’s the deal: it doesn’t matter what you think about gay marriage. This proposition is less about gay marriage, and more about the willingness of people in the state of California to write into their own state’s constitution that some people have more rights than others. That’s what this is about. It implies some people are better than others and more deserving of basic rights, and reeks more of the Nuremburg Laws than some kind of hyper-Christian right-wing wet dream. How would you possibly justify voting yes on this to Jesus Christ? How would you possibly justify voting yes on this to St. Peter? How do you possibly justify voting yes on this to the Founding Fathers? Writing intolerance into the state constitution is not just un-American, it turns the notion of democracy on it’s ear. If a county in the state wants to abstain from extending the benefits of gay marriage, let their voters decide and write it into law, but not the state freaking constitution. There’s a huge difference, and that’s just what the folks who put this proposition on the ballot intend. This is a tacky, tasteless initiative to force on a state as diverse as California, and says more about a desire for control and willingness to write intolerance into law than protecting someone’s family. Please. Vote no on eight. America is not about writing intolerance into our most basic, founding documents from which all our laws are derived. You don’t want a gay marriage? Fine, don’t get one. You may not be able handle evolution, but your kids can certainly handle a diverse California.

Prop 9 - NO

Ironically, the guy who put this initiative forward happens to be under indictment on felony drug-conspiracy and securities-fraud charges. Nice. No on nine. Courtrooms are meant to be places where emotion is kept in check and facts are supposed to speak over someone seeing red and committing crimes of passion. Let’s keep our courtrooms as the Founding Fathers intended: free of the understandable histrionics and sadness crime causes. If we divorce emotion from cold, hard reason in any segment of our society, it must be in our courtrooms where sobriety and low passion holds away. Victims have innumerable ways to relate their anger to those who wronged them on the record and off. Outside of sworn testimony, the courtroom is one place where that does not belong.

Prop 10 - NO

San Diego City Beat said it best a few weeks ago when its editors wrote “Like with Proposition Seven, [this] might sound good, but its critics charge it’s little more than a way to funnel taxpayer money into Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens’ pocket. [It] just so happens he owns a company that supplies natural gas for natural-gas-powered vehicles. The most reputable environmental organizations are against it.” That’s enough for me, plus I don’t take energy advice from anyone from Texas.

Prop 11 - YES (with reluctance)

I’m voting for this against my gut reaction. This is a redistricting proposal, and the claim is always to throw the control for this new gerrymander back to the citizens. But who are the citizens who’ll do the picking? How much influence will they have in the private sector, and since these names are ultimately picked by politicians, who’s to say someone isn’t doing someone a favor down the line? I smell something, but I’ll vote yes, even though the method for selecting citizens to be on the redistricting board sounds more medieval and confusing than the instructions for building a tank engine. Really, only a government could come up with a scheme this cumbersome for citizens’ group. A reluctant yes.

Prop 12 - YES

A no-brainer if there ever was one. Since the U.S. under President Bush sees fit to thanklessly stick it to veterans every chance it gets, this provides a bond of $900,000 million dollars to provide farm and home aid for California veterans. If you ask me, it’s not enough, but it’s got my vote.

County and City Propositions:

Prop A - NO

I’ve been cautioned by several firefighting professionals this is a bad move, with half of the money set aside going into some mythical slush fund which the County Board of Supervisors ultimately has control over, coupled with bad ideas involving backcountry prescribed burns (where it won’t do any good except make it look like something is being done for TV cameras). If you’re going to clear brush appropriately and sanely around neighborhoods, okay, this might not be a bad idea, but why clear brush out in the backcountry? I know the Fire Chief of San Diego is behind this, probably because she thinks this is the best that can be done in the most tax-averse county in the state. She’s a professional and I respect her opinion, I’m just thinking we need to do better. This county is going to need at least an annual budget of $20 million dollars to effectively fight fires. Orange County coughs up that amount every year, and in L.A. County it’s $200 million. Why do we lag behind? Could it be because we’re still not willing to pay for the infrastructure we NEED to live in this corner of the United States?

Prop B - NO

Really, this is one proposal you need to spend some extra time on coloring in your no bubble. This is just a wretchedly stupid idea. Let’s see…put a giant roof for commercial development over a working port. You know, with ships and cranes. How many ways can I slap the developer’s evil little hand away and tell them to leave it alone (there’s my conservative side coming out, folks). Everyone’s lined up against this from the port of San Diego Board of Commissioners to the San Diego City Council (an entity not exactly known from showing restraint in the face of developers), unions, environmentalists, you name it. Vote a hearty NO on Proposition B.

Prop C - YES

This is a great idea which will enhance the city’s parks, starting with Mission Bay, which would receive about a third of the love, with other regional parks getting the other quarter in the future. City Council members Donna Frye and Kevin Faulconer are behind this (Faulconer, naturally, since he used to essentially run Mission Bay Park), and while this dips into money from the general fund, not even Mayor Jerry Sanders is against it. There’s not even a ballot argument against it. Easy. Yes on C.

Prop D - YES

Here’s where I get into some trouble with civil libertarians. I’m not opposed to people drinking or having fun, but I’m opposed to public intoxication on city property: it’s the law. So if it’s illegal to be drunk in public, why should it be legal to drink ~ as in the present tense of getting drunk ~ in public? Because of the novelty of being on the beach? What’s that got to do with it? If you’re allowed to drink and get wasted on the beach in P.B., why shouldn’t I be allowed to get wasted and pee all over Balboa Park? Or Mission Trails? What makes those parks different from the beach? Because one is at the place where the ocean meets the land? I like beaches to be quiet places, but not without joy or fun…and families and singles can find joy and fun and relaxation at the beach without alcohol. There are a zillion places to drink when you’re at the beach without having to drink physically ON the beach. The litany social annoyances, loud, drunken profanity, waste, pollution, and bad vibes which come as a result of mass alcohol consumption is not conducive to a clean, safe, and pleasant community. If you want to go to the beach drunk, fine, drink at home or at the bar and then go down to the beach, just don’t drink ON the beach. The increased pleasantness on the city’s beaches today ~ for residents of beach communities and visitors ~ are directly the result of saying no to drinking on the beach, and if you really think San Diego is losing tourist dollars because some douchebag from Arizona can’t get his drink on in P.B., I’ve got a long line of beach-area residents who are more than happy to tell you it’s money they’re happy not to receive. The peace of mind makes up for it, and I’ve got news for you, people are going to come to San Diego’s beaches whether they can drink on them or not. Please vote yes on D.

President / Vice-President Revisited:

John McCain is a hero and brings a lot to the table, so much so that there once was a time when I voted for him: in 2000 in the Washington state primary when I took a G.O.P. ballot. Not only did it give me the opportunity to vote against George W. Bush twice in one year, it also enabled me to endorse what I saw as McCain’s genuine attempts to buck the party line and legislate from the center. I was proven right: by 2004 McCain was one of the first lawmakers to cry foul about the crimes being committed at Guantanamo; McCain was one of the first G.O.P. lawmakers to not only actively embrace climate change but offer sensible solutions; McCain was one of the first legislators to address campaign finance reform. McCain was the de facto leader of the “Gang of 12″ G.O.P. Senators who voiced moderation and good sense. All of these good marks for John McCain, however, didn’t necessarily mean I wanted him for President, and his curling up to the Bush crowd in 2004 ~ the same people who vilified him in the eyes of South Carolina voters in 2000 ~ truly amazed me.

Around this time McCain began to change and grow more erratic in position, siding with the G.O.P. mainstream when he felt he had to, even though it was clearly going against his instincts. He was no longer the Happy Warrior. He grew agitated, bitter at the thought of making peace with the same Christian hard-liners he once rightly summarized as “Agents of Intolerance.” The selling out of John McCain began around this time when he had to begin sucking up to G.O.P. bigwigs for money to fuel his lagging primary campaign, and despite his amazing comeback, McCain 2.0 reached its nadir with the selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate in late August.

Palin represents the kind of religiously-motivated warrior a guy like McCain ordinarily would’ve eschewed if not outright mocked, a Governor he barely spent any time with who, along with the financial crisis, will now likely cost him in the election. When John McCain was finally given an opportunity to exercise Presidential-level judgement, he blew it, and he knows it. Picking Sarah Palin gave a guy like me who at least respected John McCain a reason to now vote AGAINST him, and thats something I never saw coming. The gutteral, sewer-ready bile which has come out of McCain’s mouth and his campaign surrogates since the selection of Palin has forever tarnished his image and his alleged affinity for the kind of clean campaigning he imagined his mentor Barry Goldwater would’ve acted on if he’d been able to campaign against John F. Kennedy in 1964, a man Goldwater respected enormously. I think McCain was hoping for a similarly imagined, idyllic campaign against Hillary Clinton, but like Goldwater, he didn’t get it.

The reasons for why I like Obama and why I endorse him are simple: I trust his judgement. I appreciate him temperament. I’m confident he will be curious enough to ask the right questions, and listen to the responses he gets. I’m confident he will evaluate all the information which comes his way, and at the end of the day, I know the environment is going to be in better hands with a guy like Barack Obama, to say nothing of Supreme Court selections (if Obama wins expect John Paul Stevens to retire within the year), and the possibility of really moving forward on health care reform, instead of just pushing the whole thing out into the private sector, which McCain wants to do. My first choice in the Democratic race was Joe Biden, ironically, and then Chris Dodd and then Bill Richardson. I always liked and admired Obama ~ who couldn’t appreciate Obama’s soaring, inspiring oratory after all the years of Bush babbling on like as asshole loose at the mic during a wedding ~ but until last year I always felt he needed to be aged a little more. It certainly woudn’t have done him any harm, but this campaign has surely aged and humbled the man, and he’s grown into a Presidential-like figure by virtue of the toughness of this race, and he’s kept it together and made us proud.

Obama is not just a better campaigner now, he’s surely a better leader; the rigors of this campaign have consistently brought out the best in him. He’s got a lot riding on his promise of hope, change, and belief, but I’m more than confident Barack Obama is the right choice for President in 2008 as a defining, watershed moment in history, and as a purely pragmatic choice. We break walls and barriers this year, and we get the best man for the job. Just the way America’s supposed to work, and Obama managed to do it by not being ceaselessly negative, which seems to be all the Republicans have been capable of for the last 20 years. A far cry from John McCain’s longing for a statesmanlike exchange of ideas.

               

The Department of Commerce hearing regarding the proposed southern extension of the Foothill South 241 toll road at San Onofre State Beach and Trestles is Monday, September 22nd, from 10:30 am to 8:30 pm. The hearing will be held at the same place as the California Coastal Commission hearing in February: O’Brien Hall at the Del Mar Fairgrounds. Turnout is going to be EXTREMELY important, so please make time to attend.

If you would like to speak at the hearing, you must submit a written request via U.S. mail or a commercial carrier to the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration by THIS FRIDAY, September 12th. Requests after this date will be disqualified, and requests submitted by fax, e-mail or voicemail will, for whatever reason, not be accepted.  Submit your written request NOW.

While crucial issues include retaining the integrity of California State Parks and keeping a six-lane freeway out of the backcountry of San Onofre State Beach and the intact San Mateo Creek watershed ~ which makes up the bulk of the San Onofre backcountry and empties onto Trestles Beach ~ the message is simple: SAVE TRESTLES.

Like Eddie Vedder says, "Save Trestles."
(photo courtesy of Elizabeth Willes)

On September 22nd from 10:30 am to 8:30 pm at O’Brien Hall at the Del Mar Fairgrounds, the fight to save Trestles goes from being a state matter to a federal matter. The Orange County Transportation Corridor Agency has been appealing the state Coastal Commission’s denial of a permit to build the toll road through the park to the federal government., so this will be our only opportunity to tell the Commerce Department we want our state parks and intact watersheds to be left intact.

Send a brief, polite letter or postcard asking to speak at the Commerce Department public hearing at the Del Mar Fairgrounds on September 22nd. Be sure to indicate you are speaking only for YOURSELF, not an organization. Put a stamp on it and mail it to:

Mr. Thomas Street
NOAA Office of General Counsel for Ocean Services
1305 East-West Highway
Room 6111
Silver Spring, MD 20910

Even if you don’t want to speak at the hearing, take a vacation day or a personal day and come to the public hearing at O’Brien Hall at the Del Mar Fairgrounds on Monday, September 22nd, from 10:30 am to 8:30 pm.  Turnout is EXTREMELY important.

Rogue Wave supports the fight to Save Trestles.
(photo courtesy of Elizabeth Willes)

The proposed Foothill South 241 toll road through the San Onofre backcountry won’t just compromise the surfing quality, clean water, and wild character of Trestles, it will also throw into jeopardy long-protected burial and cultural sites of the Panhe Nation, close miles of backcountry trails, force the closure of the San Mateo Campground, further dissect wildlife habitat area and corridors into ever-smaller pockets, and set a terrible precedent for the disposability of parks and protected places.

Interestingly, according to the Orange County Register, toll road supporter Congressman Gary Miller of California’s 42nd District (Brea/Mission Viejo) has a financial stake in seeing the Foothill South 241 toll road built through San Onofre. Coincidence?

This rebuttal from the Transportation Corridor Agency in the North County Times seems to indicate whatever wild character the backcountry of San Onofre State Beach may still retain isn’t worthy of the protection it was originally granted because it’s not 100% wilderness; therefore it’s okay to build a six-lane toll road through it. Unfortunately, the original sin proposition of building a toll road through a state park in the first place is not addressed.

Click on the video below to see Clint Eastwood talk about why Trestles and San Onofre State Park need to be saved and preserved, as was the case when the park was set aside by Governor Reagan in 1971.

You owe it to yourself to read this ABC News article about all the partying going on in Minneapolis-St. Paul, despite a greatly reduced convention schedule and Sen. McCain’s call on Republicans to think about someone other than themselves first (like their country), and work towards raising money or easing the suffering of folks along the Gulf Coast in the wake of Hurricane Gustav. Or, in the words of special interest Republicans, “poor people.”

Granted, this storm isn’t (thankfully) as bad as Katrina, and national and state authorities are clearly on their game for this one (it only took them three years to show up), but it still is pretty tacky that all your usual G.O.P. suspects/guilty parites/donors like Lockheed Martin and the National Rifle Association are partying it up at some exclusive restaurant to the music of the band Hookers and Blow while wearing pink boas (ah, yes, the “family values” crowd, indeed) while their candidate and his running mate are encouraging them to be a little charitable for five minutes, if for no other reason than for some good public relations. Guess the NRA and Lockheed Martin guys opted to turn their Blackberries off so it wouldn’t get in the way of Hookers and Blow (I wonder of they take checks or do ZZ Top covers?).

Although, when you think about it, Republicans really do have something to celebrate. Not only are the official aspects of their convention being “forcibly curtailed” by a Category One storm on the other end of the country, all of the fun, social get-togethers and corporate welfare fund-raisers all go on without anyone having to worry about looking hungover for platform discussions the following morning. Man, hookers and blow indeed.

Plus, the Republicans have conveniently excused themselves from having to have either President Bush or Vice President Cheney show up and remind everyone of all the great accomplishments of the past eight years, and no one from the G.O.P. has to go to the podium before a TV crowd any bigger than the average C-SPAN quarter hour viewing audience and go on the record saying anything about all of the positive benefits of the 2008 model of the G.O.P. Plus, the Republicans were able to use Gustav as an effective cover screen to “come clean” on Governor Sarah Palin’s knocked-up 17-year old daughter (good news “value voters,” she’s keeping the kid and marrying the stud) and her husband’s 24-year old DUI (no biggie, it had been 24 years when Bush’s drunk driving arrest was revealed in 2000 as well). I’ll be the first to admit there’s never been a natural disaster the Republican party didn’t seek to benefit from, but they’ve got to be thanking their lucky political stars for Gustav.

And it’s not just in Minneapolis-St. Paul where Republicans are ignoring their candidates’ call to be magnanimous. According to the ABC News article linked HERE, “Along the Mississippi last night, corporate lobbyists for the chemical industry were entertaining Ohio Republicans on two large yachts. Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH), one of about 700 guests, said he ‘could not remember’ who paid the costs of the river cruise.”

Seriously, it must be great never having to say you’re sorry, or even be slightly ashamed or self-aware. Where’s the hookers and blow?

Well lookee here, it’s Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, the new darling of the maniac right and the Republican Party’s choice for your new Vice President. Wonder what ‘ol Sarah is up to here?

Well, apparently the Governor of Alaska is posing with a caribou she just shot. Nice to see she’s got one of her children with her. What better way to teach kids love and respect for the world around them than by watching their mother shoot something and then watching it die?

NEWS FLASH: John McCain really wanted Joe Lieberman to be his running mate, not Sarah Palin (who?), but the conservative “agents of intolerance” (McCain’s words, not mine) who still run the Republican party would not stand for McCain to pick a former Democrat, someone with pro-choice credentials, or someone who ran with that awful agent of Satan in 2000, Al Gore. Read the article HERE, and check out this article in The Economist (not exactly a standard-bearer for the ‘wacky left’) bemoaning McCain’s loss of gravitas, not to mention his soul.

As Michael Kinsley wrote in the September 1st edition of the Washington Post:

It’s about honesty. The question should be whether McCain, and all the other Republicans who have been going on for months about Obama’s ‘dangerous’ lack of foreign policy experience, ever meant a word of it. And the answer is apparently not. Many conservative pundits woke up this morning fully prepared to harp on Obama’s alleged lack of experience for months more. Now they face the choice of either executing a Communist-style U-turn (’Experience? Feh! Who needs it?’) or trying to keep a straight face while touting the importance of having been mayor of a town of 9,000 if you later find yourself president of a nation of 300 million.

This is especially damning to McCain because his case for himself (besides not being Obama, a standard under which many of us might qualify) has rested on his honor and integrity. The North Vietnamese couldn’t break him, and neither could the Brahmins of his own party in the Senate. He was a maverick who always told it straight.

So much for that.

Tommy’s Thoughts Regarding John McCain’s Choice for Running Mate

(short version)

John McCain’s selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin proves Republicans remain curiously obsessed with Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, and somehow think putting a female western governor on the ticket with McCain will entice Hillary supporters without anyone noticing the litany of concerns about Palin’s far-right stances.

If you’re a G.O.P. bigwig who’s been a on the fence about McCain, would you be writing a check in support of this ticket, especially after qualified guys like Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty, or qualified women like Kay Bailey Hutchinson were passed over? All of whom could’ve brought much of the same crowd McCain and the G.O.P. are hoping to get with Palin, plus the Republicans would’ve passed the one most important test that’s required when selecting a running mate: someone who can effectively and competently step in as President in case something happens to the Chief Executive.

McCain’s “tried and true” judgement? Either way it’s disturbing. If he picked Gov. Palin, what does that say for his judgement, unless he’s publicly shopping for wife number three, and if the party chose Palin for McCain, what else are they going to put on McCain’s plate?

I have a feeling Republicans are going to be waking up on November 5th stunned at the breadth of their loss, but that doesn’t mean this is over. Send a message on November 4th and take your country back. The American flag belongs to you as well, don’t ever forget that.

(long version)

For most of the summer I’ve been figuring this was going to be a close race between John McCain and Barack Obama, and the polling numbers leading up to the Democratic convention seemed to confirm this, pretty much an even 50/50 split. In the wake of McCain’s disturbing V.P. choice, however, I’m feeling pretty good about calling this for Obama now. There are other reasons why Obama has the edge (one has to do with a seriously flaw in the way tracking polls are conducted), but picking Palin doesn’t seem to bring anyone else to the ticket who wasn’t already on board or leaning towards voting for McCain, and the immediate reaction I’ve seen has been an angry turn-off of moderates who were waiting to see how McCain handled his first Presidential-style choice.

The reasons for Governor Palin’s selection says more about the alleged judgement of a more and more elderly John McCain, and a Republican party growing more desperate to be interesting, engaging, welcoming, or having something to do with that C word Obama keeps throwing around. Like their desire to drill in every nook and cranny of the continent ~ on and offshore ~ for oil to keep their status quo-benefitting pals in the oil companies alive and afloat, the G.O.P. is completely bankrupt. It’s not that the Republican party doesn’t have bad ideas, they no ideas.

So what do they do? They call Obama a Muslim (a “bad thing,” obviously…) and send out mysterious e-mails alleging he attended Pakistani madrasas while McCain spends a month bashing on the guy because he has nothing to say about himself, and at the exact moment when McCain needs to step up and deliver some content and win over those moderates waiting on the fence for him, he passes over a solid crop of seasoned, ready-to-go running mates as the Republican Party decides it has to go as far west as Alaska to find a young, cute, cuddly western governor who also happens to be a gun nut (yes, having video taken of you firing assault rifles makes you a gun nut), a moose hunter, someone taking an active interest in the untimely demise of polar bears, and an evangelical pro-life mom of five kids who somehow has the time now to be the Vice President. Heck, if she’s so pro-life and pro-family, tell me who is going to be raising her boys and girls while she’s attending cabinet meetings and her husband is running around the Yukon in snowmobile races? This woman is the conservative Republicans think McCain needs? Jesus, does a double-wide come with this?

However popular Gov. Palin may be in Alaska, despite being under investigation (which seems to be a rite of passage for most G.O.P. politicians these days anyway) for using state employees to settle petty family disputes, the reality is she’s so far to the right she makes George W. Bush look like a liberal. The decision is just so crassly, transparently political.

I have nothing against someone who eats buffalo burgers (I had one the other day) or who owns firearms, but I do have problems with gun nuts and folks who are trying hasten the extinction of polar bears, and as much of a reformer as she claims to be, she’s every bit an oil person as Bush, she’s just clearing the old guard out of the way in Alaska for her and her dumb husband who spends his time running dogs to death in the Iditarod while no doubt leaving a trail of beer cans across the Alaskan interior.

Either McCain really thinks women and Hillary supporters are so stupid they’ll vote for this gal just because she’s a woman ~ never mind that her positions are anathema to Hillary Clinton ~ or he’s just not afraid to insult people’s intelligence (to his credit, it’s worked before in this country), or he can’t tell because he’s become too elderly. Maybe he’s publicly looking to trade up in the wife department.

A V.P. choice generally doesn’t have a HUGE effect on the outcome of the election, but it shouldn’t get in the way. Whoever picked Palin, whether it was really McCain or party operatives who forced the decision on him, they failed the one, single most important criteria for choosing a Vice Presidential running mate: someone who can immediately step in and take over as President should something happen to the Commander In Chief. It’s the first presidential decision a candidate has to make, and it’s not something you fool around with. McCain just flunked it. So much for his good judgement.

As much as I despise Dick Cheney, he’s clearly competent even when his Darth Vader tendencies get in the way, and if something happened to W there’s no doubt in my mind he would adequately be able to handle being President, provided his heart was able to handle the surprise (the martial law would come later). Lots of folks weren’t nuts about Al Gore being in the V.P.’s office in the 1990s, but even Clinton detractors knew if something happened to the President, Gore could’ve likewise stepped in and not immediately run the ship into a floating iceberg (no doubt having calved off the melting Arctic ice shelf).

In the event something happens to the President, the business of the Executive Branch needs to be able to continue with at least someone competent who could ask the right questions from Day One at the helm. The same holds true for other competent, if not always brilliant V.P.s, some of whom became or ran for President themselves, like George H.W. Bush, Walter Mondale, Nelson Rockefeller, Gerald Ford, Hubert Humphrey, LBJ, Richard Nixon, and some guy named Harry Truman who had to wrap up a little something called World War II (although, in all truthiness, Truman was thought of as something of a lightweight when FDR named him to the ticket in 1944).

In a tragic situation like JFK’s assassination, you had at least a competent official like LBJ able to step in and take over the business of the executive branch. What’s Gov. Palin going to do if something happens to McCain? Pose for another round of Glamour Shots and ask for help finding the Ukraine on the map? My God, Obama has lived overseas and spent time from Asia to Africa in addition to the U.S. Has Sarah Palin ever been out of the country before? (the ski trip to Whistler doesn’t count)

The selection of Gov. Palin, however much of a cute V.P.I.L.F. she may me, proves the Republicans remain curiously obsessed with Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, and somehow think putting a female western governor on the ticket with McCain will entice Hillary supporters without anyone noticing the litany of concerns about her hysterically far-right positions, which include all the sexy G.O.P. fundamentals from the Bush years you’d think they’d be screaming to get away from by now, like an eagerness to drill in ANWR, the aforementioned gun nut concern, pro-life positions, clear-conscience ability to allow hunting of polar bears and Alaskan gray wolves from f—ing helicopters, etc. Plus, as I like to say, John McCain isn’t getting any younger.

Obama has proved he’s ready to lead and has made it a point to display his ability to listen and make good judgements, ergo working class Delaware Senator and foreign policy whiz Joe Biden as his running mate. Is Sarah Palin really ready to take over the helm of the United States during a time of war and economic fluctuation? Hillary Clinton would’ve been, but you know what, it’s not because she doesn’t have a Y chromosome. Doesn’t the Republican party brass know this?

Even a guy on Sean Hannity’s (!!) website wrote, “Scary Scenario: Like [William Henry] Harrison, McCain dies 30 days into office as the newly elected President. We then turn to a 44-year old mother of five and say, “We are at war in Iraq [and Afghanistan]. Iran threatens. Russia will test you. China will test you. North Korea will test you. The economy is in crisis. Use your degree in journalism and the two years you served as Governor of Alaska (which is akin to serving as the Mayor of Memphis, Tennessee ~ except that Memphis has a larger population) and lead us through the trials we now face. Despite the fact you have a son in Iraq and an infant to care for at home and the task before you may seem overwhelming, you cannot falter, you must not let emotion overcome you, you must guide and protect the citizens of this nation. How can conservatives criticize Obama for his lack of substance and yet applaud the Palin pick as brilliant?”

If you’re a G.O.P. bigwig who’s been a little on the fence about McCain, would you be writing a check in support of this ticket, especially after qualified guys like Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlenty, or qualified women like Kay Bailey Hutchinson were passed over? All of whom could’ve brought much of the same crowd McCain and the G.O.P. are hoping to get with Palin, plus the Republicans would’ve passed the one most important test that’s required when selecting a running mate: someone who can effectively and competently step in as President in case something happens to the Chief Executive. How hard are valuable G.O.P. allies like Gov. Pawlenty or Mitt Romney going to work for McCain now that they’ve been vetted and led around for the last two months and passed over for someone who’s only been Governor since We Are Marshall and Apocalypto were in theaters?

Wikipedia lists a litany of concerns about Gov. Palin from well-known conservative columnists and opinion-makers. Granted, the voters McCain/Palin 2008 may be chasing at this point may not read these guys or know who they are, but faultlines are appearing in the G.O.P., and my guess is more Republicans will now cross the line to vote for Obama. Even the always annoying blowhard Charles Krauthammer writes in the Washington Post, “The Palin selection completely undercuts the argument about Obama’s inexperience and readiness to lead. To gratuitously undercut the remarkably successful ‘Is he ready to lead’ line of attack seems near suicidal.” in The National Review, David Frum writes “The longer I think about it, the less well this selection sits with me. If it were your decision, and you were putting your country first, would you put an untested small-town mayor a heartbeat away from the presidency?” Even in Palin’s native Alaska, in the city where she opted to be inaugurated in over the capital Juneau, the local Fairbanks Daily News-Miner published a staff editorial saying Palin “is not ready for the top job.” My goodness, this is a sitcom scenario waiting to happen!

Two guys I know who are both political moderates were waiting to see who McCain picked for his running mate. Both are now happily voting for Obama, and one of them is angry and feels betrayed and what he sees as purely political machinations behind what was an important decision for McCain. As a Hillary supporter and then a McCain supporter, he feels his intelligence has been insulted. He thought he was backing the 2000 version of John McCain. But the real John McCain wants to be President too much, and will clearly say or do whatever he needs to in order to get there, with the help of a former Karl Rove lieutenant leading him by the nose.

If you remove McCain’s hyperbole over the last month and Obama’s oratory skills, these guys have nearly the same positions, but there’s one difference: I trust one’s judgement more, and it’s not the guy who’s a known hothead who married into Budweiser dinero after he dumped his first wife who waited six years for him to get out of the Hanoi Hilton in 1973. Hmm, no wonder the G.O.P. felt they had to get a “values” candidate.

McCain’s “tried and true” judgement? Either way it’s disturbing. If he picked Gov. Palin, what does that say for his judgement, unless he’s publicly shopping for wife number three. If the party chose Palin for McCain, what else are they going to put on McCain’s plate, or in his mouth? He’s already a long, sad way from the John McCain of 2000.

The Economist said it best this week. To paraphrase, “we want the old McCain back.”

I have a feeling Republicans are going to be waking up on November 5th stunned at the breadth of their loss.

Oh, and for a final insult, check out this obnoxious clip of Glenn Beck (!!) interviewing Gov. Palin a few weeks ago. Glenn Beck is one of two guys I would punch right in the nose with zero provocation if I ever saw him (yep, the other is Sean Hannity).

I didn’t say she wasn’t cute.

NOTE: This meeting has since been cancelled by the federal government at the behest of the Orange County Transportation Corridor Agencies, since they were concerned 10,000 people might show up and let them know they don’t want a toll road built through a state park with an intact watershed and a wild beach with the best surf break in Southern California at the end of it. Surprise surprise. A new meeting has been scheduled for September 22nd at the Del Mar Fairgrounds. We need you there! A new blog post will give details shortly, but please, just go to my Treehuggers International page at FM 94/9’s website for a forest of weblinks and more information than you’ll know what to do with. - Tommy

Right now we need as many people as possible to be present at the Bren Center at U. C. Irvine on Friday July 25, 2008 for the Commerce Department hearing on Trestles! If you care about Trestles beach and San Onofre State Park and want to see them preserved, we need you there, like at the successful turnout at the California Coastal Commission hearing in Del Mar on February 6th.

See my FM 94/9 Treehuggers International page for more, and clear your calendar for Friday, July 25th! We need your help to succeed and preserve Southern California’s natural heritage.

I’ve posted this clip before, but while you’re at it, click on the video below to see Clint Eastwood talking about why Trestles and San Onofre State Park need to be saved and preserved, just as they were when the park was set aside by then-Governor Reagan in 1971.

One of the funniest guys I’ve worked with in this business and one of the most unusual, lovable characters I’ve come across in my 20 years of doing radio, or anything else, died this week in Cincinnati from injuries sustained in a motorcycle accident. Mr. K was 48.

Mr. K’s real name was Ken Glidewell, but I know no one who ever called him by that name. It was always Mr. K. Even when he was being yelled at by a brand new Program Director only moments after we learned we were being fired only to be rehired by the new company owning our radio station, he was still referred to as Mr. K, or sometimes, in anger or exasperation, just “K.”

K was the first guy I came across in radio who worked from his “own set of notes,” as I like to say, having long thrown out the worrying-how-to-live-your-life-and-get-along-with-others rule book. Mr. K did his own thing, made no bones about it, and didn’t put much thought into what anyone else thought about it, but did so in such a good-natured, if curmudgeonly mischievous way. Likeable guy.

Mr. K immediately, if innocently, let you know what was on his mind in the most engaging manner, and whether he was dealing with a new boss or anyone else, he never changed his tune to suit the person in front of him. Man, did I admire that. K was real-deal on-air talent. I can’t imagine him having any other job, other than playing bass in his band.

I met and worked with a lot of great, wonderful people during my Ohio radio days, I learned a lot and had a lot of laughs, but Mr. K remains the one guy I would tell stories about for years afterward. I was just talking about him at FM 94/9 a few days ago. K taught me more about doing your own thing and doing the right thing, and he was such a funny goddamn guy in that matter-of-degrees-from-insanity, good-natured-degenerate way the most creative people in this business tend to be. Some folks call people like Mr. K a force of nature. Mr. K would’ve said that’s bullshit.

I first met Mr. K as a nervous, commercial rock radio rookie in 1992 when I started at the now-defunct 102.9 WAZU in Dayton, Ohio. The station was an active rock outlet, and a complete asylum of zanies. Mr. K was one-half of the morning show, and on the air and off the cuff Mr. K was absolutely, over the top hilarious, but also really fun to be around off the air. He always had lots of patience with me while I was still learning how to do radio for real.

Mr. K would make time to explain how things worked around the office and in the business in his own “look kid, here’s how it is” way, and he was the first to make me feel like part of the team. When WAZU was LMA’d by the now-former Great Trails Broadcasting in early 1993, Mr. K was the first guy to ask our new managers, who were all dressed in suits and weren’t even sure if they knew what to do with our rabble of an airstaff, if we were going to be subject to drug tests. You had to know him. Swear to God, he really was asking for the rest of us. You should’ve seen what I’d been doing the night before!

Later on that morning he led us down to this bar/diner around the corner from the station where we all used to hang out, and we breathed a laughter-filled, “we showed them” sigh of defiant relief. I remember spending several heavily inebriated nights (or days, perhaps) in the country bar underneath our rock station with Garth Brooks and Alan Jackson blasting over the bar’s sound system, watching a seemingly sober Mr. K subversively encourage everyone on the airstaff to take a turn riding the bar’s mechanical bull. He would work on the most reluctant person for HOURS, alternately explaining to them why and then yelling at them to do so over the music. It was hilarious. Seriously, who got me on a mechanical bull the one time in my life I was dumb enough to ride one? Mr. K. There was barely four pieces of straw on the metal floor in that place to break your fall, and believe me, it didn’t take long.

While at WEBN a few years later in the summer of 1997, some of the crosstalk breaks I had with Mr. K when he was getting off the air and I was getting on were positively surreal. I remember one of the last times I saw him he was haranguing WEBN’s Assistant Program Director over the phone P.A. from the studio in a mock Voice of God for scheduling too many Metallica songs during his airshift: “Rhino, how many f—ing times do I have to tell you? Stop scheduling Metallica songs! I hate f—ing Metallica! I’m not going to play them!” Later I recall K playing back a video of his band playing a nudist colony gig somewhere near his home in Hamilton, Ohio where such things are generally frowned upon. Mr. K, playing a nudist colony! In the buff, of course! You had to know him.

Ken, rest in peace pal. I’m so terribly sorry to get this news.

Thanks for the laughs and thanks for the guidance, but most of all, thanks for making me feel like part of the team. You will be greatly missed.

To read more about Mr. K on WEBN’s tribute page at their website, click HERE.

Americans with friends and family in the armed forces have given up a great deal over the years, particularly since the Iraq War began in 2003. Over 4,000 Americans have given up their lives, and many times more have returned home with shattered bodies and permanent, lasting mental scarring. And what has President Bush given up during these difficult times? Well, he’s given up golf.

That’s right, golf. Hey, the man already gave up drinking, right?

President Bush said in an interview with Yahoo and politico.com he quit playing golf in 2003 out of respect for the families of Americans killed in the war in Iraq. “I don’t want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the Commander-in-Chief playing golf. I feel I owe it to the families to be in solidarity as best as I can with them. And I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal.” Really, Mr. President?

Ignoring the fact Bush actually used the word “solidarity” in regards to his relationship with G.I.s, but “the wrong signal?” Like cutting taxes twice while fighting two wars? That’s not sending a wrong signal?

Or ignoring hard intelligence and only cherry-picking what supported your case for an invasion of a sovereign state against the advice of legions of intelligence professionals saying Iraq had no weapons of destruction and the case for an invasion of Iraq was deeply flawed, Mr. President, sir, that didn’t send a wrong signal?

Deliberately feeding and leaking information to the media to be printed as fact in articles (Time magazine and the supposedly anti-Bush New York Times, in particular), only to quote those same articles and stories back as evidence? That sir, was not sending the wrong signal?

Or unleashing your hatchet men from the administration, your political party, and the media, to call and ridicule anyone voicing a word of protest against your administration’s designs as cowardly and traitorous? That sir, did not send the wrong signal?

Or declaring, sir, the war to be over in a made-for-TV event designed to enhance your 2004 re-election chances 18 months in advance, when each and every one of your generals and commanders on the ground felt and said otherwise, that sir, did not send the wrong signal?

Clearly your decision to quit playing golf lays bare the depth of your concern and sacrifice for those involved in carrying out your decisions, sir. Clearly, leaving your golf game on the links, sir, is your ultimate sacrifice.

For shame. I’m used to being fed and up and angry with what President Bush says, but I’m tired of being embarrassed for my country over what he says. I’m tired of Bush’s constant, airheaded belittlement of the men and women in the armed forces, whom he sends back into the Iraq meat grinder again and again and again, knowing full well these patriotic men and women will say “yes” every time they’re asked out of their sense of duty and honor. The pattern of abuse at work here akin to child abuse, and yet no one responds to the social services call.

This guy is down to a 20% approval rating, and yet he still babbles the most insane, inane, hurtful things to the press, revealing each time like another layer of an onion how utterly out of touch and isolated he is from what is going on. Czar Nicholas II had a better grasp of what was going on around him than this man. And he still has a job leading this nation, and will collect a full pension upon his retirement from office.

Giving up golf. Because it would send the wrong signal. Jesus Christ, I wish there was some way I could turn this around and make it funny or let everyone down with a joke. There isn’t. It just gets my blood up.

From: Hough, Tommy
Sent: Tue 4/29/2008 4:28 PM
To: (name deleted by poster)
Subject: Re: Al Sonja Schmidt

Hello Ms. ——–,

My name is Tommy Hough, I host an environmental affairs and natural science program at KBZT FM 94/9, a unique alternative rock station in San Diego, California.

I received a fax copy of The Inside Straight for today, April 29th, and aside from being slightly horrified and taken aback by the usual Shirley and Banister content presented for consideration, I did see one slug which may fit the bill for my environmental affairs and natural science program: the release of Deb and Seby’s Real Deal On Global Warming, and the availability of author Al Sonja Schmidt.

Just looking at the book’s cover art at the page for it on Amazon, there are so many deliberately obtuse, utter falsifications, it comes on like a circa 2002 political attack ad. In fact, there’s SO much divisive nonsense, just on the jacket (!) and in the fax your firm sent me promoting the book, you almost have to catalog all the willful inaccuracies like a listing of phone numbers in order to keep track of them.

Of course, that’s the idea, isn’t it? To overwhelm with falsifications and nonsense, hoping some will stick, all presented as a hip kids’ book…and who benefits? The “hip” childrens’ parents who want to perpetuate and even encourage a polluting lifestyle? Or the kids who have to live in and solve the problems of a world growing more toxic every day.

Does Shirley and Banister really hope Americans are so lazy and blinded by greed that pressing problems which affect everyone who breathes air and drinks water cannot at least be addressed, let alone solved? It’s such a shame such creative energy goes into something so selfish and so lacking moral leadership. That your firm seeks to promote this book says a great deal about Shirley and Banister’s values.

Of course “we are not all doomed,” as the book’s jacket suggests. Who says we are? What an awful straw man argument to bait a global-warming debunking book with, and targeted towards teens? Especially troubling. The invented, agenda-pursuing slang of “chill-ax” (don’t worry kids, there’s no climate change nautral or man-made), “green meanies” (concerned folks are mean), “eco-oopsies” (God must’ve made a mistake), “wacky global warming solutions” (Shirley and Banister’s client John McCain is certainly on the record believing and acting otherwise), and “man-made global warming…not” (despite new evidence to the contrary in this month’s edition of the science journal Geoscience, and again, contrary to the statements and action of Shirley and Banister client John McCain), are all a collective disgrace…and again, that’s just the outside jacket. I can only imagine the kind of rampant, willful misprepresentation found inside, and would be more than happy to have my suppositions proved wrong by questioning the author.

So while my program is the furthest thing from an obnoxious, cable TV-style shoutfest, I’d like to invite Al Sonja Schmidt onto my program, if for no other reason than to ask why, and to try and figure out what the motivation for such a book is. Perhaps there’s a connection to a polluting entity which wants to keep it’s tax breaks in place and an already declawed EPA off their back.

While I typically like to have my guests in the studio with me to record a program, and I’m happy to extened that courtesy to Al Sonja Schmidt, we also have ISDN capabilities at our radio station, and perhaps we could arrange an interview or discussion in this manner if Al Sonja Schmidt is not available in person in Southern California. I’ll certainly name the book in the course of a potential conversation or interview, if for no other reason than for others to see the book for what it strikes me as: a willful misrepresentation of a serious, growing concern facing the world which we all have to work together to iron out.

We may never be able to undo the damage done to the planet’s long-term health and ecosystems from 200 years’ worth of burning coal, oil, and other fossil fuels and 200 years’ worth of man-made industrialized activity, but encouraging kids to disregard scientifically valid concerns even being recognized by many in the conservative communuity which Shirley and Banister seeks to represent or endorse, and presenting such willful misrepresentations in the form of a hip kids’ book, is a shameless, tragic new low in cynicism.

You or Al Sonja Schmidt may e-mail me back at this address. My office phone is (619) 718-7—. Please do not add this address to any e-mail lists; I already receive your faxes.

Best,

Tommy Hough

From: (name and e-mail address withheld by poster)
Sent: Tue 4/29/2008 4:54 PM
To: Hough, Tommy
Subject: RE: Al Sonja Schmidt

Mr. Hough,

I would be happy to remove you from our fax lists if you have no interest in receiving them.

Thanks,

——-

From: Hough, Tommy
Sent: Tue 4/29/2008 9:05 PM
To: (name withheld by poster)
Subject: RE: Al Sonja Schmidt

Hello Ms. ——-,

Thanks for getting back to me.

>> I would be happy to remove you from our fax
>> lists if you have no interest in receiving them.

I’m happy to receive the faxes. Please continue to send those as normal. You’re aware that’s not what I was writing about.

What I’m asking for is an opportunity to interview Al Sonja Schmidt about some of the concerns, theories, and general content in the kids’ book Deb and Seby’s Real Deal On Global Warming, which your firm apparently is arranging public relations for. Is that not what was advertised in The Inside Straight fax transmission today?

With one of the teaser lines in today’s fax reading, “False information has led to useless spending and legislation in an effort to change our lifestyle,” I would love to know how Al Sonja Schmidt’s lifestyle has been aversely affected by any kind of greater “eco-sensibility.” If the author has made a career out of debunking Rachel Carson, certainly as a member of the media I should be allowed to ask why, and frankly, anyone who proposes drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in a children’s book ought to explain themselves and their position on my program.

For what it’s worth, there’s no shelf life on the interview opportunity, and once aired my program is also available on the FM 94/9 website for anyone to stream. You may assure Al Sonja Schmidt, if this is a real person, all professional courtesies will of course be extended.

Again, nice of you to reply.

Best,

Tommy Hough

Interesting news story here. A piece in the San Diego Union-Tribune gives details on a top Army Corps of Engineers official who says proponents of the Foothills-South 241 toll road mischaracterized and even made “inaccurate statements” which “misrepresent” the Army Corps of Engineers’ own research regarding the validity of the proposed toll road and plan for reducing traffic congestion, going so far as to refer to the Corps’ neutral conclusions as “unanimous recommendations,” all detailed in a letter from the Corps to the Secretary of Commerce and NOAA. Ouch. Read the entire Union-Tribune piece HERE.

Meanwhile, Lt. Governor and State Lands Commission member John Garamendi, Senate President pro Tem Don Perata, Senate Resources Committee Chairman Darrell Steinberg and Senator Christine Kehoe recently called on Washington D.C. to recognize California’s right to protect it’s own coastline, saying in a letter to Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez the federal government must let stand the California Coastal Commission’s rejection of the proposed toll road through the San Mateo Creek backcountry of San Onofre State Beach. Lt. Governor John Garamendi says, “After careful deliberation and an open and transparent public review process, the Coastal Commission did precisely the job it was established to do: fully and properly carry out the intent of both the California Coastal Act and the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act.”