The Schenley Park Tea Party

Yesterday, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported on a July 4th "tea party" (herefore to be known as Hickapalooza) held in Schenley Park, near Carnegie Mellon University. The party was meant to protest all forms of government intervention, ranging from taxes on cigarettes to health care reform. Above all, the "party" sought to condemn the policies of President Obama, with at least one sign calling his election the "suicide" of America.

My Gut Reaction: If they think the country is on such a wrong course, why don't they f---ing leave? It's not like they'd be particularly missed.

Analysis: The article about Hickapalooza is a case study in right wing hysteria. Especially galling is the statement from one woman, a Czech immigrant who lived under Communism, that universal health care would turn the United States into a Communist country. Having experienced a Communist regime, the woman should have realized that if America had actually become a communist country, she and her comrades would never have been allowed to mount a protest. They would all have been rounded up by the secret police.

These people do not seem to recognize any viable role for the state, other than fighting wars and making certain they get to keep their guns. One actually wonders whether they would feel more comfortable in a country where government has effectively ceased to exist, such as Somalia.

If this is the best the conservatives have to offer, I think we can look forward to a full eight years of liberal rule.

An Insult to the First Amendment

Pittsburgh-area U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan has done it again, trampling on other people's freedoms to advance her own moral agenda. As the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports, Rob Zicari and Janet Romano, the heads of the now defunct Extreme Associates, a pornography production company, have both been sentenced to a year in prison after being prosecuted for five years by Buchanan.

Their company produced highly graphic, sadomasochistic pornography, known as "horror porn" which the U.S. Government under President George W. Bush deemed obscene. As an episode of the PBS television show Frontline documented, their videos could include subject matter such as rape.

My Gut Reaction: U.S. Attorney Buchanan is a Puritan throwback who should not have anywhere near the power she now has.

Analysis: In my opinion, the prosecution of Extreme Associates by Buchanan violates the spirit, if not necessarily the wording, of the First Amendment. Over a period of five years, spending who knows how much taxpayer money, she wore down Zicari and Romano, who are married, driving them out of their careers and ultimately their home for making films with consenting adults. When their resources ran out, they had no real choice other than to plead guilty.

That's right. No snuff films. No actual rape took place. No children were involved. All this for a fictional movie. This is unacceptable.

As an article published by the Pittsburgh City Paper demonstrates, Buchanan has a habit of pursuing cases that revolve around morality rather than the public safety. For instance, she pursued a drug paraphenalia case against Tommy Chong, and another obscenity case against an internet author whose work focused on child molestation.

Is this really the kind of person we want enforcing our laws? Someone whose main interest appears to be forcing her ideas of morality on the rest of the world. Is this what we think American justice should be like?

Some may point out that the majority of people would find the work of Extreme Associates disgusting and offensive. They would probably be right. I would probably find their videos difficult if not impossible to watch, as I personally find it uncomfortable to watch a female get hurt, even if I know it is simulated. But that is not the point.

Others may point out that Extreme Associates and its owners to a certain extent courted government prosecution by going on Frontline. Furthermore, after the charges were filed, Extreme Associates continued to sell the videos being targeted, labeling them as the "Federal Five." But that is also not the point.

The point is that the government should not be regulating the type of films people can produce when they involve consenting adults, and government officials certainly should not be pursuing filmmakers for periods of over half a decade. This is an abuse of government power, and sets a precedent that threatens the liberty of all.

What particularly makes this prosecution galling is that Extreme Associates, Zicari, and Romano were all based in California. Buchanan had a government agent based in Pennsylvania order a copy of one of the company's videos so that she could prosecute them herself. This is a practice known as forum shopping.

We need to stand up to such prosecutions, and label them as what they are-abuses of government power, and infringements on American liberty and the freedom of speech.

Irony of Ironies

Rather eerily, given my post of this morning, a shoot out broke out in the East End of Pittsburgh, in the neighborhood called Stanton Heights, killing three police officers. We express our condolences.

This only goes to show just how deep a problem this is. We have two mass shootings, in two different parts of the country, within twenty-four hours of each other. This is not just a local issue; it is a national issue. The need for a stand against the right wing gun lobby has never been clearer.

Burris's Troubles

I found a funny post on Sen. Roland Burris's ethics issues. It's on a local Pittsburgh blog, the Angry Drunk Bureaucrat, and can be seen here.

A Scene from Election Day

The above picture was taken by me yesterday on the campus of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. It shows a group of young pro-choice students asserting their position in the face of a display of fake tombstones put up by a campus pro-life group. The display accused Sen. Obama of complicity in genocide. Unfortunately for the pro-lifers, the unborn have a notoriously lousy turn-out rate.

Ruthie, Ruthie, Ruthie...

Attn: Ruth Ann Dailey, Columnist, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Dear Ms. Dailey,

The column you published yesterday on the supposed use of white liberal guilt to rally support for Obama has to be one of the most comical attempts at a right wing polemic I have ever seen. Never mind not living up to the standards of William F. Buckley or George Will; you aren't even in the same arena with Ann Coulter or Michelle Malkin.

First, the evidence you back your assertion with is at best weak. You cite the remarks of only three figures to support your claim. (Really only two when you consider that one at the end of the column, Colin Powell, seems to have been shoe-horned in at the last minute when his support for Obama was made public on Sunday.) Three people-Powell, Rep. John Murtha, and Gov. Ed Rendell-can hardly be said to represent the overall trend of Democratic rhetoric.

What is especially amusing is that one figure you quote was not supporting Sen. Obama, while you blatantly misrepresent another. As you admit in your column, Gov. Rendell was arguing for Sen. Hillary Clinton when he warned that many white Pennsylvanian voters would not support a black candidate. Although you try to portray this as liberal elitism, you have to wonder whether Gov. Rendell knows a bit more about Pennsylvania politics than you do, given that he has won two state-wide elections here. Furthermore, your own newspaper recently published an article featuring interviews with a number of these voters. Your co-workers are cutting you off at the knees.

Particularly galling is your misrepresentation of Powell's remarks. You make reference to a short passage in his interview with Meet the Press in which he referred to the election of Sen. Obama as offering a chance at a generational change. You treat this as the entirety of his remarks, when anyone who reads about them can see is not true. Powell cites a number of reasons for backing Sen. Obama, including his position on the economy and the inexperience of Gov. Palin. The latter issue has also been noted by a number of conservatives, including Peggy Noonan hardly people one would expect to associate with liberal guilt.

Face it, Ruthie, your candidate is unable to fight it out on the issues, so he and minions like you are trying to distract everyone with irrelevant side issues.

A Few Hours Not Wasted

This morning, I spent four hours answering telephones at WQED, a local radio station in Pittsburgh which plays classical music. They are having their annual fall pledge drive, and one of our grad activity announcements mentioned that they were looking for volunteers.

I found it to be a very worthwhile, fulfilling experience. My greatest moment was when I took a call for $365 during an hour when we had a matching challenge of $1000.

My only complaint was that a lot of people called just with inane questions, like what was the CD they heard about yesterday. (I don't know, why didn't you call yesterday?) One guy called to ask if we had the weather report.

Still, I greatly enjoyed my time. It felt good to actually contribute something to my community.

Eagles Fans vs. Steelers Fans

An article in today's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette contemplates the potential effect new NFL regulations will have on Pittsburgh Steelers fans, including concerns that the regulations could affect fans' ability to celebrate. Frankly, I doubt the city's sports fans have anything to worry about.

Coming from Philadelphia, I know that Pittsburgh's fans are relative gentlemen. Unlike the fans of the Philadelphia Eagles, they have never pelted Santa Claus with snowballs on national television. They have not cheered as a critically injured opposing player was taken off the field in a stretcher. Although I am certain Steelers fans include their share of rowdies, they do not compare to their east coast rivals in Philly.

A Wise Decision

Recently, the Allegheny County Board of Elections barred two referendum questions regarding the drink tax in the Pittsburgh area because they did not meet the proper legal criteria. One question asked whether voters wanted to repeal a 10% tax on alcohol that was opposed by the restaurant and bar industry, while the other wanted to examine alternative means of raising revenue such as the property tax, as reported by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

At least the politicians in this city have some priorities straight. A rise in property taxes would make it more difficult for low income and elderly people to afford their homes. You can choose whether or not to drink, whereas you have to live somewhere.

Naturally, some people were in favor of the drink tax. An article in the Pittsburgh City Paper several weeks ago by Frances Sansig Monahan argues that old people should move out of their houses, even if they've lived in them their entire lives, just so people can pay a bit less for a drink.

Sorry, Frannie, unacceptable. These are low income, elderly people who may not have a place to go. They could easily be my parents, or my grandmother. If the drink tax is cutting too deeply into the pockets of you and your boozer friends, start ordering water.

Pittsburgh View

Here are some photos I took from the window of my apartment in Pittsburgh. They are all from the early evening / twilight hours. Hope you like them.