Feeding the Hand that Bites You

June 8, 2007

For my first post, first a few disclaimers/identifiers: I live in Nevada, and due to our ratcheted up early Democratic caucus date, I’m probably more into this race than I have been previously, at least this early in the game. More importantly, I am a civil rights/civil liberties attorney for the ACLU.

It is hard for me to focus on much else: I obsessively watched for references to civil liberties in the Dems debate. While I consider abortion a civil liberties issue and am heartened to see discussions of traditional civil rights memes such as equal opportunity, I am most focused on what I consider to be the greatest threat to the American people - namely, specific restrictions on liberty in the name of the ‘war on terror.’ (For the record, no one mentioned them in South Carolina. In NH, Obama gave them a nod, Edwards mentioned them briefly).

I didn’t have to look so hard during the Republican debates. Guiliani and Romney fell all over themselves to out-anti-civil liberties themselves (from Romney’s “Double Guantanamo” to Guiliani’s relentless fear-mongering). Even Chris Matthews, of whom I am NO great fan, has publicly said (OK, maybe he’s flirting w/ Ben Affleck) that he agrees that Guiliani’s tactics are themselves the heart of what terrorism aims to accomplish - that is, giving the terrorists what they want by changing our fundamental American values (hence the title of this post). Check it out: Hardball.

While it’s no bombshell that civil libertarians view internal threats to our liberties as the Real terrorist threat, it’s nice to see it appearing sporadically in the corporate media. And while I reel at the shamelessness of Romney’s and Giuliani’s race to the bottom of the Bill of Rights, it’s nice at least one of their compatriots takes our constitutional rights seriously. If it takes a racist, anti-choice, Texan psycho to provide a foil for the civil liberties ‘mala fides’ of our anointed Eight, I’m all for it. I leave you with Ron Paul:

I would work very hard to protect the privacy of American citizens, being very, very cautious about warrantless searches, and I would guarantee that I would never abuse habeas corpus.


And Then There Were Eight

May 25, 2007

For a while now, I’ve been trying to figure out what this blog would be all about. The 2008 Presidential Election – yes. The candidates involved – yes. Grandstanding, broken promises, and sex scandals – definitely. But what could make it different from every other political fanatic’s blog (oh, I forgot b.s.) out there? A collaborative effort’s a good start, but how do I get a bunch of brilliant people on the same page? And what about my apparent obsession with the number 8?

Then I though: well, it at least needs to be a blog. So, I’ve decided it would be a good idea to actually write something. For now, this blog will be about the 2008 race (brilliant…) and I’ve decided to get things started by choosing eight candidates, categorized to the right. I’m thinking the choices alone will give us something to write about:

Hillary Clinton

John Edwards

Rudy Giuliani

John McCain


Barack Obama


Bill Richardson

Mitt Romney


Fred Thompson


My thinking is that these are currently the four front runners from each party that are either running and are likely to run. Which means I don’t think Al Gore or Newt Gingrich will run. Minus those two, these are the top four in most polls, but I invite debate and will even include a category for it: The Others.

As the poles change (and interpretations of the many poles may change as well) and new candidates declare (and if Gore or Gingrich declare I will endure some sort of blogosphere embarrassment dictated by other bloggers on this site) the eight will change. In fact, there will eventually only be two (or maybe three…nah, not in this country), so you can see that this eight thing is a loose category (and a catchy web address…).


Welcome

March 17, 2007

Eight For 08 is a collaborative of bloggers covering the 2008 presidential race.