I don't ever fly a flag because I believe in neither religious nor political idolatry.

But Loyalty Day is an anti-communist holiday (that's why it has been on May 1 since 1921). Just wanted to mention that in case anybody things this is a new thing Bush thought of.

Thanks for clearing that up. I figured it might have been, considering the timing, but nothing in that linked document gave any indication whether it was new or old.

It alludes to being an older law, as it talks about "this loyalty day" (as opposed to prior loyalty days). I'm merely amused, in a cynical way, by the not-so-subtle connection in this particular proclamation of loyalty, patriotism, and support for military actions.

Maybe this explains why I've had Deutschland über Alles going trough my head all day....

It was originally called Americanization Day. If the celebrants are already Americans in America, I'm not sure what was supposed to be accomplished. But I imagine that that name also exposes some anti-immigrant (or at least non-integrating immigrant) feeling while the date selection was anti-communist.

So, on a procedural vote yesterday to move forward in the Senate with the immigration compromise bill the vote was 69-23. That is 8 abstentions.

7 were Democrats, and one was a Republican.

I'm sure they were just busy and, after all, it was just a procedural motion. There is an interesting common thread among most of the abstentions:

Joseph Biden
Hillary Clinton
Christopher Dodd
John Kerry
Barak Obama
John McCain

That's six of the eight. Number 7 is Tim Johnson of South Dakota who is still recovering from a brain hemorrhage last year, so he probably actually was otherwise occupied. The eighth it Bill Nelson from Miami-Dade and I would guess he honestly doesn't know what to do since his Cuban constituents can't, almost by definition, be illegal immigrants.

So, six of the seven real abstentions just happen to be people heavily involved in the run for the White House (or, in Kerry's case, flying in those circles on some kind of political inertia). I could be wrong, but when everybody running for president suddenly develops prior obligations preventing them from getting to the floor for a vote I would have to argue that the issue isn't a popular one.

I would agree, Alex- and the make-up of that list is not at all surprising.

I am really hating politics of late. Is there no one out there who has conviction and the courage to stand for....something?

I would say that, no, there isn't. I've yet to see one candidate that I would feel comfortable voting for, on either side of the fence. Republicans suffer a lack of integrity and Democrats, lack of any noticeable spine. Neither side has one idea that is remotely progressive or even hints at having an imagination. All of it sickens me,

Of course, if the press actually did their job any more, rather than letting both sides get away with their crap all the time, we might have a better chance of seeing things change.

And yet, popular or not - - frankly, I'm glad to see the Legislature proceed with a compromise that pleases no-one. I think it's the essense of represenative government - i.e., no winner takes all, but a compromise that addresses concerns of either side, but - of necessity - none addressed fully.


Nothing's perfect. But I prefer flawed action to no action, compromise to gridlock.

And if you don't stand for something you will fall for anything.