(Originally posted to Politics at EraBlog on Fri, 07 Feb 2003 08:44:21 GMT)

The Independent profiles Congresswoman Barbara Lee, the sole Representative to vote against President Bush's resolution of September 15, 2001 asking Congress for the authority to make war on any person, nation, or organisation deemed responsible for the attacks.

Lee's argument for voting against the resolution: "Pared down to its essentials, it ran like this: Congress represented the rational. It was a body that had to remain above the fray. What decisions it made had to consider the lasting good and not respond to the emotion of the moment. By pushing for a vote so quickly, Lee believed, the Bush resolution was taking power out of the hands of legislators and giving it to the executive branch."

"It was something said at the memorial service that finally decided her. A clergyman implored the assembled Congressmen and Senators: 'Let us not become the evil we deplore.'"

Would that more members of Congress had had the fortitude to take such an unpopular stand. We might not have had the USA PATRIOT Act foisted upon us with so little debate a month later.

(Originally posted to Queer at EraBlog on Fri, 07 Feb 2003 08:51:06 GMT)

Amy Sohn writes about Hasbians: Women who came out of the closet only to end up in heterosexual relationships.

I came out as bi in 1991. I was very careful never to call myself "gay" because that label never fit me. Even so, that must have been what many people heard, because only that can explain their surprise when I told them a few years later that I had fallen in love with Emma and was going to marry her.

Now many people believe I'm heterosexual, unless I take the trouble to educate them. Bisexual Invisibility. <sigh>

(Originally posted to Politics at EraBlog on Fri, 07 Feb 2003 GMT 03:19:36)

I didn't listen to Bush's State of the Union last week, because I was still at work. Reading about it afterwards, I found it to be predictably objectionable.

I'm a Toastmaster, so I found Salon's "Horrible" speaker, great speech to be an interesting critique of the delivery and presentation.

The only parts of the speech that I did care for were the hydrogen car and the promise to help prevent and treat AIDS in Africa.

Hydrogen cars would be a big improvement over gas-guzzling SUVs, but there are a few problems. First, they're many years out and the Administration is making no moves towards more fuel efficiency in the short-to-medium term. A big part of the Iraq crisis is our dependence on foreign oil, but the Administration is riddled with oil and energy industry veterans.

Secondly, hydrogen may be environmentally friendly to consume, but the production of hydrogen can be environmentally harmful. "96 percent of hydrogen produced in the world today comes from natural gas, oil and coal -- the same fossil fuels that environmentalists would like to abandon."

AIDS is ravaging Africa. 90% of new cases of HIV infection occur there, 30 million are HIV+, and millions have already died. Many of the dead are adults in the prime of their life, leaving behind orphans to be cared for by the elderly. Generic versions of the AIDS antiretroviral drugs, although much cheaper than the first batch of drugs, are still beyond the reach of most Africans. Not only is it the morally right thing to help Africa, but it's a good for our security. Failed states breed terrorism.

Apparently this has been in the works for several months and I applaud the Administration for this. Despite the Bush Administration's preference for abstinence instead of safe sex, condoms are reported to be part of the package. Unfortunately, much of the new money is coming out of money used to fight malaria and malnutrition.

(Originally posted to Cool Stuff at EraBlog on Fri, 07 Feb 2003 01:25:48 GMT)

Strange and beautiful: Pencil Carvings. Pencils carved into double spirals, chains, rings, and honeycombs.

(Originally posted to Politics at EraBlog on Fri, 07 Feb 2003 07:13:08 GMT)

Tomorrow [Wed Feb 5th, 2003], Colin Powell goes to the UN to make his case against Iraq. Reportedly, he has "no smoking gun".

To my mind, the Bush Administration has not yet made a compelling case for going to war.

Yes, Saddam Hussein is a murderous tyrant. Yes, he has not come clean with the UN and appears to be in "material breach" of Resolution 1441. Yes, he almost certainly has chemical and biological weapons, though probably not nuclear weapons.

But, to my mind, this is not a case for war. Containment has worked for the last twelve years. Why should it not continue to work? It worked against the Soviet Union for forty years of Cold War. And Saddam must surely know that if he tries anything, he will be bombed back into the Stone Age.

Many suggestions are mooted for the Administration's yearning for war. Oil is the most prominent one. Unproven links to Al Qaida. Finishing what was started in Gulf War I. Strategic control of the Middle East. "Weapons of mass distraction" to divert the US public's attention from the failing economy and the Administration's war on the poor and the economy.

Or some combination of all of these. I don't know. If there is a good reason, now is the time to tell us. Excuses about needing to protect intelligence sources don't cut it. Hard evidence is required.