Gay rights rally: This weekend…

More details over at the inimitable Hahn at Home: http://hahnathome.com/?p=1454

Step 1 is admitting you have a problem

This blog is having an identity crisis. I started it off to talk about all the things I love about Sacramento, but I’ve wound up talking politics more than anything.

A few years ago, I had the privilege of experiencing what it’s like to work the halls of what I always liked to call “HOB and SOB” in D.C. (The little peons like me who ran around those halls? Hallrats, of course.) After that, I was shaking hands with power brokers in Sacramento. And you know what I learned? I am just not cut out for it. I simply don’t possess the drive, diplomacy, and subterfuge that are the survival skills needed in politics. Having had my spirit thoroughly broken (not really, I just realized I sucked at it), I decided to quit cold turkey. Walk away–out of the darkness and into the light (cue inspiring music). I have a nice, apolitical job now. An organic veggie garden. A dog and a cat.

But, no, I’ve fallen back into it, that morass, that rabbithole. Local politics as a gateway drug. Perhaps it should be considered a controlled substance. And there should be treatment programs for addicts like me. “Hello, my name is 6 Degrees, and I can’t stop blogging about politics and referring to myself in the third person using a stupid handle. I watch way too much CNN and listen to NPR all the time. It’s ruining my life.”

Yesterday, I went to get a pedicure and read “Cosmo” at the salon. I’ve heard these are clinically proven to reduce political junkieness. It didn’t work. As soon as I walked in the door, I was right back at it, mainlining Anderson Cooper, who I don’t even actually like all that much, but I was all out of Blitzer and Stewart wasn’t on yet.

Maybe I’ll just start posting cute pictures of my cat.

Baby, have I got a Proposition for you!

So, 6 Degrees recently was blessed with the power of omniscience. Crazy, huh? Not really, but the BF (henceforth referred to as “Tater”) and I went through the “Official Voter Information Guide” last night and came up with our Unbeatable Strategy for Voting on the Propositions. We came up with two simple rules: If it’s a bond, it gets a no vote. If it’s longer than 2 pages, they’re up to something fishy and they get a no vote. Do you have any idea how easy that makes the voting?

There are still a few props I need to do a little more research on…and I still have not decided who I’m supporting for Mayor. Seriously, I am *struggling* with this one, folks. And if one or two of my one or two regular readers would like to to weigh in…knock yourselves out.

We’ve got a metric buttload (as my pal Scott says) of props on the ballot this time, and wading through them just begs comparison to wading through–yes, a metric buttload. The Secretary of State has a far less biased information site here.

But here’s my (our) take on it.

Prop 1: Voting NO. High-speed rail is a great idea. However, California’s deeply in debt, the feds probably aren’t going to be able to help out any time soon…so yeah, no bonds. This is a tough one for me, because I think it is needed from an economical standpoint and from an environmental standpoint; however, I think we need to get our budget under control before we agree to billions of dollars in new debt…especially right now.

Prop 2. Voting YES. This is the farm animal confinement prop. I believe that allowing a living animal to stand up, turn around, and extend its limbs is not asking too much, and this prop is supported by groups I respect. As I’ve mentioned before, I respect small farmers and local farmers. I don’t want to put them out of business, and maybe this is a flawed fix. It’s tough to tell, but this one seems reasonable enough to me.

Prop 3.  Voting NO. Children’s Hospital $$. California voters just approved a similar bond recently. I just can’t stand the thought of more state debt. I guess this makes me sound like some kind of baby-hater. Augh.

Prop 4. Voting NO. Totally blatant attempt on the part of the anti-abortion crew. I do get some of their concerns, but my answer is still no.

Prop 5. I think expanding drug treatment for convicted drug users–and nonviolent criminals at that–is a good idea. After looking into it more, and checking out the “fors” and “agins,” I’m voting YES. Tater has not yet decided.

Prop 6. Voting NO. Hey, I’m actually a fan of the police. I happen to appreciate my public safety. But a $365 million bump in the dedicated General Fund dollars (above the existing $600 million in dedicated funding)? Huh-uh. Again, not this year, not in this economy.

Prop 7. Voting NO.  Wow, there goes my green-cred. However, I’m in good company. This one’s opposed by the League of Conservation Voters and the California Taxpayers’ Assn. Even though I’m pro-renewable energy, this one seems a little shifty.

Prop 8. Voting NO. As the guy from Texas said, if there was a “Hell No” button, I’d push that. Next year, I am putting a proposition on the ballot to ban bigoted weenieheads from putting their stupid propositions on the ballot.

Prop 9. Voting NO. From what I can tell, after looking at numerous sources, this one is redundant, expensive, unneeded, and opposed by several organizations whose opinions I value.

Prop 10. Voting NO. Another doozy. Is this really the “T. Boone Pickens” boondoggle, or what? Costs the state $10 billion over 30 years. I’m saying no even though I am a huge proponent of alternative fuels and renewables.

Prop 11. Voting YES. It would be hard to make things worse–redistricting-wise.

Prop 12. Voting YES. Theoretically, this one will pay for itself. I support this ongoing, long-term program.

How are YOU voting?

The Chiang Corollary, and its effect on Fargo-in-the-Moon Marigolds

I know, Iknow–it appears that I’ve been drinking. But I haven’t. I swear. Not yet, anyway. It’s called free association, and it worked for Joyce, although not as well without the help of absinthe or something.

It may be a little premature, but I’m thinking out loud here; work with me. So John Chiang, State Controller, demonstrates what I consider to be the pinnacle of common sense in California politics this week. And then, just today, our beloved mayor HF pulls the stupid city adminstrator raise proposal off the table. Two events that demonstrate it’s never too late to pull your head out of your…uh, yeah.

So, I’m thinking this whole Chiang thing could be setting off a chain reaction (Chiang reaction?) of sorts. Every day, another elected official steps up and does something sensible. Wouldn’t that be (a) refreshing, (b) a relief, and (c) complete fantasy? Fantasy aside, I think my theory of this historic moment deserves a name, like the Doppler effect. But “Chiang Effect” doesn’t have much of a ring to it. Corollary sounds nice, but (not being much of a scientist) I had to look it up to confirm. Per Merriam-Webster:

Corollary: a condition or occurrence traceable to a cause

Perfect. The Chiang Corollary is born.

Chiang Corollary: A condition or occurrence demonstrating integrity and common sense (not to mention huevos) in the face of political inanity and/or budget squabbling, traceable to the direct influence of John Chiang.

Please share it with your friends, family, city council member, whomever. I’m looking forward to tomorrow. Maybe the Legislature will be the next to exhibit signs of being affected by the Chiang Corollary?

Still baffled by the obscure reference in the title?

Take that, Schwarzie.

Okay, is anyone else as impressed by our State Controller as me?  As I’ve watched the budget standoff and the strange, all-stick-no-carrot approach from Arnie, I have practically cheered every time I’ve heard a quote from John Chiang. At least someone is showing some sense around here.

Check out these two quotes from the L.A. Times, showing Chiang’s response to Arnie’s lawsuit:

Chiang called the administration’s lawsuit “reckless and unnecessary.”

and

“The governor could not be more wrong with regard to the need for this lawsuit and his understanding of the consequences,” Chiang said.

And my personal favorite, from KCRA’s report last night:

“The governor has created a solution to a problem that does not exist…,” Chiang said in a statement after the lawsuit was filed.

Why, I think them’s fightin’ words. Love it. Love John.

Not in my little happy place today.

6 Degrees has been distracted by school for the past few weeks. And by distracted, I mean, freaking overwhelmed with trying to stuff my head full of book learnin’ and remembering what it’s like to be a student. I am also proud to say I managed to eke out an “A,” but barely.

Going to school had a side benefit in that it kept me from paying much attention to the national hysteria over the economy and the antics of our elected officials.

But this morning I woke up with politics on the brain, today’s Bee waiting on my doorstep to catch me up on what I’ve been missing. And I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry at this point. The past few weeks in politics have illustrated perfectly one of my favorite H.L. Mencken quotes:

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.

So, Schwarzie is giving it to us good in the form of cutting the jobs of thousands of the lowest-paid public servants and proposing a most-unRepublican tax increase, the Dems and Reps in the Legislature are naturally blaming each other like tiny tots fighting over the Tonka dump truck, and who-the-hell Chiang is looking like David v. Goliath (go you, Chiang). And, way to stick it to the little guys, Arnie. If you *really* want to motivate the Legislature, wouldn’t it be more effective to cut all the salaries of your highest-paid workers? That is, cut off all the pay for every top-level appointee in every state department. Frankly, you’d save considerably more money and you’d have the big dogs on the phone putting pressure on the Assembly and Senate.

More locally, our myopic leaders continue to wring their hands over the budget while approving noncritical expenditures and freaking raises for city staff. You have got to be sh***ing me, right? Can this get any more ridiculous? (No, don’t answer that. First, it’s rhetorical, and second, it can get much worse and we all know it.) Seriously, does a city manager making more than $200k a year really need a raise? Oh, sure, considering the *stellar* job he’s been doing, when he’s not busy with the Dalai Lama’s people making sure Sacto gets a tour stop for the Lama-palooza ‘09. And, as Joe Sac says, “I hope they count them trees better than they counted them water meters.”

6 Degrees is impatient, cranky, and undiplomatic, which means I can never run for public office. The few times I have had to sit through council meetings, I have alternated between wanting to throw things at people or throw myself off the nearest bridge (fortunately, the two opposing urges created a form of stasis and prevented me from taking either action, and I just ended up going home and drinking a bunch of tequila).  If it weren’t for these darned character flaws, I’d totally run for public office…although as I write this, it occurs to me that character flaws don’t seem to be stopping anyone else from running for office…in fact, it appears you can be insane, unethical, criminal, and/or just plain idiotic and still hold public office. (Still, there are certain events from my undergrad years that I’d prefer kept out of the papers.)

With “leadership” like we’re seeing now, it’s no wonder our state and city budgets are in the crapper. I heard a snippet on the radio the other day (don’t remember the show or the speaker), but the person called it “malfeasance in office.” I couldn’t agree more. Seriously, from Arnie on down, our elected officials are just behaving like clowns–the evil, scary-type clowns with too much makeup and a dangerous sense of entitlement.

And on that note, I am going to go sign up for my fall classes–I could use the distraction.

Drought, fires–and “Flooding? What flooding?”

A recent letter to the editor in the Bee opined that our plague of wildfires was caused by a certain pissed-off deity. (Said deity, the letter writer posited, was likely registering his objection to same-sex marriage.) I, being a mere mortal, do not have the inside scoop on what might be eating the deity, but methinks it could be something else.

So, using the “sinners in the hands of an angry god” hypothesis, I set about looking for a message from the wrathful one. First, California’s got its drought on and we’re all supposed to be taking shorter showers and flushing infrequently. Second, because it’s so dry, half the state is ablaze. Third, the wild salmon fishery had to be shut down this year because of a steep population decline, largely because of loss of their river habitats. All sounds sort of water-related, if you ask me.

Maybe s/he’s pissed off because we’ve managed to put so many of our rivers in a chokehold.

An article in Salon.com today talks about the floods in the midwest. In the article, “A deluge waiting to happen,” reporter Katharine Mieszkowski writes that the catastrophic flooding was the result of “more than 100 years of narrowing and constricting the river.”

Although much of the blame is placed squarely at the feet of the Army Corps of Engineers for placing navigation structures in the river’s path, levees receive their share, too. Some of her article will sound eerily familiar to us’n here in Sactown, particularly the following paragraphs:

Levees, which are essentially piles of mud, dirt, clay and gravel, permit farming and development on the historical flood plain, yet greatly narrow the river’s course. “Where levees are added to the flood plain, they take away the capacity of the flood plain to both store and take away water,” says Pinter. Revetments, which line the river banks with boulders and concrete, prevent the river from meandering, which protects valuable land on the flood plain and makes the river straighter for shipping.

Now that the river can’t naturally spread out on its flood plain or meander, the extra water under flooding conditions has nowhere to go. “If floodwaters can’t spread out as they would in a natural flood plain environment, they can only go up,” explains Criss.

(Emphasis added. Note: The quoted individuals “Pinter” and “Criss” are, respectively, Nicholas Pinter, a geologist from the Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, and geology prof Robert Criss from Washington University of St. Louis.)

It may seem like cognitive dissonance to talk about flooding disasters while we have Arnie declaring a drought and 1,000+ wildfires raging all over the north and central state, but it’s not.  Although the front pages are taken up by our other natural disasters, we can’t afford to ignore what’s happening here in Sac. How many catastrophic floods will it take before we stop building in the floodplain? Does one have to hit here, at great cost to our lives and economy, before we get it? Isn’t it enough that we have the “there but for the grace” moment to watch the destruction in New Orleans and the midwest?

I won’t give away the final quote in the article (just go read it), but let’s just say it’s applicable.

Anyway, if there is a deity, and if s/he is pissed off, my research concludes that it’s probably not about same-sex marriage.

See a related post about Sacramento’s flood issues.

The Irony of Freedom

I admire the many couples who are choosing to get married today. People who are my neighbors, colleagues, and friends have struggled long and tirelessly against bigotry and ignorance about their lifestyles.

Californians are infamous for our tolerance and strange ways. Having grown up here means I find it mystifying that people would protest gay marriage. I really don’t get that. While I have no desire to marry someone of the same sex, I cannot conceive of denying someone else their right to do so.

The folks who oppose gay marriage seem to be overlooking a great hypocrisy in their own actions:

KJ and FroYo

So, 6 Degrees accidentally encountered the KJ phenom this Saturday at the newest addition to the frozen yogurt scene, Yogurtagogo in midtown. There I was, out with friends, politics the last thing on my mind, and suddenly,  there was 50% of the mayor’s race looking over my shoulder. I said hello. He seemed to be having a good time, posing for pictures with fans.

It’s all about…stasis, oh yeah…

So tomorrow is the big day. I’m curious to see if my fellow travelers, er…citizens…follow the Bee’s unconventional suggestion and vote for the peanut gallery candidates for mayor, or if we have closure to this year’s incredibly depressing mayor’s race.