Democrats to Push Forward Their Agenda for America!

But only, apparently, if the Republican leadership in the Senate insists on pushing ahead with the so-called “nuclear option.” In a press release guffaw, Democratic Minority Leader Harry Reid is quoted as saying,

If Republicans proceed to pull the trigger on the nuclear option, Democrats will respond by employing existing Senate rules to push forward our agenda for America.

“That’s right Republicans! If you dare push your right wing judges on us we will be forced to respond with…a Democratic Agenda!” And we thought this whole time that Democrats were already fighting for that. Am I the only one that finds this amusing? (more in expanded post)

Apparently, Reid is referring to relatively obscure Senate rules that allows him to place bills on the Senate calendar; he points specifically to “Rule XIV” in his press release. Of course, such a rule allows little more than a moral victory since Democratic sponsored bills probably won’t even come up for a vote.

Joking aside though, Reid does attempt to articulate an agenda in his press release. While the agenda isn’t exactly new, the funny quote brings up an interesting question. When will the Democrats begin to wage a fight against the Republicans based on something other than responding to Republican initiatives? I don’t mean this in a condescending sense – of course Democrats have core principles that they always do fight to uphold – but at what point will they coalesce around a clearly articulated vision and present it to the American people?

It doesn’t necessarily need to take the form of the Republicans’ 1994 Contract with America, which Reid’s agenda resembles in style, but I think that it will need to occur at some point in order to show Americans, especially those in “purple” states that are trending Republican, that there is more to being a Democrat than opposing Republicans. When Howard Dean says that he wants his country back, he needs to be able to point to clear policy proposals that would not only return it where he would like to see it, but that would move beyond that point – a real Democratic Agenda.

I don’t know what the agenda should consist of in order to be effective, I’d love to hear your thoughts, but I do know that it shouldn’t take Republican actions to force the Democrats to provide a unified vision. One would hope that the political necessity of the moment, being the minority party, would be a compelling enough reason.

British Election Ads

From Andrew Sullivan, election ad spoofs for the three major British parties can be found here.

Enjoy

by the way…

See you all tomorrow at Springfest and then at the Afterparty! Here’s to hoping the rain stays away…

FM and Springfest…

Before I check out for the weekend, I’d be remised if I didn’t mention the excellent cover article in this week’s FM. Combined last week’s tremendously interesting and well done piece on the emergence of the Black Men’s Forum, this story on the history and struggles of Spring Fest makes me think that FM is looking to take on the position of not just an entertainment weekend magazine on the culture of Harvard, but a place for broader stories about Harvard politics to come into focus. While it’s hard to generalize what FM has or hasn’t done in the past (I’ve only been here so long and haven’t always paid so much attention), it’s a welcome move.

In any event, the great thing about this story is that it makes unavoidably clear one simple truth: the Harvard administration is not willing to invest the kind of time and money into student life that would be necessary to really make this place fun. (more in expanded post)

I think the conclusion of the article summed it up well (although I highly recommend you read the whole thing if you haven’t already):

“The President’s Office doesn’t have to be accountable to students because they don’t need to draw people in—they have the Harvard name,” he says. To effect change, he cites his experience with Senior Gift Plus: “Create a petition, educate people, arouse some anger over the situation, get the press involved, and Harvard will realize it can no longer afford to marginalize undergraduates when it comes to events like Springfest.”

Longbrake says that the President’s Office is “very interested in supporting” undergraduate social life, but he did not say whether the office would increase funds to Springfest’s after-party in future years.

But if Mahan is right, the Office won’t address the need until students make it clear that a need exists. After all, Longbrake contends that Harvard’s Springfest is just as fun as Yale’s.

Hard as they may try, the UC alone can’t incite the kind of cultural change necessary to make Harvard’s Springfest look like Penn’s, Yale’s, or Brown’s. That would take more than just another $20,000 or a permanent liquor license. Maybe the President’s Office isn’t so wrong to emphasize community—they just have the wrong community in mind.

Now, I’m not interesting in Harvard being “fun” just so we can all revel in our wealth and opportunities. There’s a much more substantive reality: a college community where students don’t get together to enjoy themselves, to meet each other and to relax is not a community at all. In the day in and day out of Harvard, it is rare that we have a chance to appreciate our lives and appreciate each other. THAT is why that administration should care, because community is part of what defines our experience at this school, and therefore our persons for the rest of our lives.

Happy Arbor Day!

Today is Arbor Day! The best non-holiday of the year – dedicaed to planting trees. Every state has its own Arbor Day, since the optimal time for planting trees varies by region, but the last Friday in April is always Arbor Day Across America. Check it out here. Hug and kiss a tree today!

friday joke…

Q: How many Bush Administration officials does it take to change a light bulb?

A: None. There is nothing wrong with the light bulb; its condition is improving every day. Any reports of its lack of incandescence are just spin from the liberal media. Illuminating rooms is hard work. That light bulb has served honorably, and anything you say undermines the lighting effort. Why do you hate freedom?

the return of family guy

The New Republic has a great article on the return of one of the funniest television shows of the last ten years: Family Guy. I’m sure most CC readers know the show (we’re in college, could you avoid it if you tried?). What’s great is that this TNR article places it in our political climate brilliantly:

The current climate has understandably made Fox executives skittish about the return of the Griffins. In repeats aired in recent months, Fox blurred out shots of Peter’s and Stewie’s cartoon buttocks, even though the episodes had been broadcast without incident years earlier.

But the chill in the air is also the reason the show’s return couldn’t be more timely. Less assaultive but brainier than “South Park,” “Family Guy” isn’t just indecent–it all but proclaims indecency as its subject. The show enjoys needling the American viewer’s pretensions to propriety.

(more in expanded post)

In one episode, a disapproving neighbor nosing in on the Griffins’ business gets yelled at by her husband: “Gladys, it took me two hours to work up the courage to rent this porno. Now are you gonna watch it with me or not?” In another episode, Peter and Lois bemoan the decline of their community’s values, even as they put on their S&M regalia for the evening. (“The safety word is ‘banana.’”)

So what’s the lesson? Whether or not you like the family guy, turn it on this Sunday to make a statement that you’re sick of the moralizing censorship of television. Also, it’s really funny.

wow, 1000

Well, since “going public” on Monday, the site just broke 1000 individual visits. Partially I’m excited because I’m glad people care enough about campus issues to read the idiotic ramblings of myself and my co-writers. More importantly, however, this is exciting because it speaks to the possibility for the conversation that could happen on this site. Every day, hundreds of people have read the site without contributing their thoughts. That’s really too bad. Why? Because my opinions are no more relevant than yours, in fact, in the cases of many things where we here at CC are commenting on other communities etc., our opinions are much less relevant.

One of the best things about what Cambridge Common could be, is a place where students from all across campus can share their thoughts with a broader reach than email lists and a more interactive discourse than other publications. So, if you’re one of the 1000 visitors from this week, join the conversation…

who’s responsible for combating racism?

A friend of mine asked me a question last night at the town hall meeting on race and Harvard organizations that got me thinking: “when was the last time you saw a group of white people working together to end racism? I honestly didn’t know. But why is that? Shouldn’t all of us be just as concerned, me as someone who benifits from a racist system and someone of color who is hurt by it? Shouldn’t white people care? I recommend this OpEd from yesterday and I’d love to hear what you think (whether you’re a whitie like me or not…)

whoops…

This is kind of petty (but maybe speaking to a larger hypocrisy), but really funny. Via Time:

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And sometimes, according to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a cigar is an economic prop to a brutal totalitarian regime. Arguing against loosening sanctions against Cuba last year, DeLay warned that Fidel Castro “will take the money. Every dime that finds its way into Cuba first finds its way into Fidel Castro’s blood-thirsty hands…. American consumers will get their fine cigars and their cheap sugar, but at the cost of our national honor.”

DeLay has long been one of Congress’ most vocal critics of what he calls Castro’s “thugocracy,” which is why some sharp-eyed TIME readers were surprised last week to see a photo of the Majority Leader smoking one of Cuba’s best—a Hoyo de Monterrey double corona… (more in expanded post)

… which generally costs about $25 when purchased overseas and is not available in this country. The cigar’s label clearly states that it was made in “Habana.” The photo was taken in Jerusalem on July 28, 2003, during a meeting between DeLay and the Republican Jewish Coalition at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem.