Contact: red_ankle@mac.com

WWW Mac-a-ro-nies

Contribute:

Entertainment: A Savage Halloween

Oh, that Dan Savage! Whoever asked him to design some Halloween costumes for kids deserves a sharp rap on the knuckles by a drag queen dominatrix. Laura, top, is wearing just what John Ashcroft ordered. Teresa, below, has chosen a famous enlistee in the U.S. Army, Pfc. Lynndie England, as her role model. View the rest of the crew at The Stranger.

Culture: It is time to fall back

Daylight Savings Time ended last night. If appliances in your home did not reset themselves, you need to turn their chronometers back one hour. The ones that are not automated are easy to forget about. Wall clocks. Stove clocks. Answering machines. Microwaves. And, of course, watches, including those you are not currently wearing. Others are set to DST, but do the forgetting themselves. Check your televisions and VCRs or DVD players. That missing hour can mean missing a program. Don't forget remote timepieces, such as the one in your car. And, we don't miss falling back only at home. I usually see the wrong time on clocks in businesses for days or weeks after DST has begun or ended. Do your employer a favor by making sure the clock is right.

This is also a good time to regain those seconds or minutes your timepieces have lost over the year. You can obtain the truly correct time by visiting the atomic clock webpage . The atomic clock is the best instrument for measuring time known. That is because of how it works.

The atomic clock, the most accurate of timekeeping devices, is based on the measurement of changes in the energy states of atoms. The energy change involved in the most common forms of the atomic clock occurs when the atom absorbs energy, causing an electron to alter its spin characteristics and, subsequently, its magnetic field. The unique frequency (number of complete oscillations per second) of the radiation absorbed by an atom when it undergoes such an energy change is a periodic phenomenon analogous to the swing of a pendulum and may thus be used as a time standard. Because this frequency is largely independent of all normal external conditions, such as air pressure and magnetic fields, the atomic clock is a highly stable device. Atoms especially suitable for atomic clocks include cesium, rubidium, and hydrogen.

The U.S. government has some atomic clocks . Locations include the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology)'s in Boulder, Colo., and Kauai, Hawaii, and the USNO (U.S. Naval Observatory)'s atomic clock in Washington, D.C.

Want to have the right time all the time? You can buy timekeepers that access the atomic clocks via radio and reflect their times.

What's the art?

The original atomic clock debuted in 1949.

Entertainment: Bjork bashes Beyonce

Bjork is so peeved with Beyonce (pictured) that she has dissed Ms. Knowles.

Bjork has blasted Beyonce Knowles [pictured] for "selling her soul to the devil" and signing up for TV commercial after TV commercial.

The Icelandic singer admits she's a big fan of the Destiny's Child star's music - but she's very disappointed she has appeared in countless adverts from Pepsi to Tommy Hilfiger's latest perfume True Star.

She says: "I love her voice, but maybe not what she stands for. I'm really p**sed off she's doing all of those commercials. I can't believe she did Pepsi.

"Doing that is like selling your soul to the devil. Maybe it's different in America, and I'm judging too hard."

You have to appreciate Bjork for being earnest. But, she's taking the celebrity game too seriously. I suspect Beyonce's father, Matthew, a former sales executive, has made the decision to exploit every opportunity to mine money that comes the way of his daughters, Beyonce and Solange. He knows that in show business the five-year cycles don't necessarily last five years. So, he is likely to have advised them to strike while the iron is hot. Few chanteuses remain atop the music business for even a decade. Bjork's earnestness reminds me of my youthful righteousness. I used to have tests for what I considered acceptable behavior by public figures, too. Women who made anti-feminist statements were on it. Black performers who groveled in the presence of whites. Closet conservatives who emerged. Sometimes, my repulsion was justified, as when some celebrities evaded apartheid South Africa's deserved pariah status by playing Sun City. But, in regard to Beyonce's all American greed, its her prerogative. Fans who don't approve are free to vote at Sam Goody.

Internet: Bushes reject Bush

Members of incumbent President George Bush's family have announced they will be supporting his opponent, Sen. John Kerry, in the fast approaching election. Like many Americans, they are disappointed by Bush's poor leadership. They express concern about the war in Iraq, the environment and other issues. The relatives reside in different states and hold differing views.

Two female cousins decided to set up a website reflecting their views. Other relatives agreed to participate. They hope to stimulate discussion, and, remind voters that even some family members dissent from Bush's views.

The Associated Press has the story.

BOSTON (AP) - There goes the invitation to the Texas ranch. Seven distant relatives of President Bush have created a Web site urging visitors: ``Please, don't vote for our cousin.''

The Bush relatives, supporters of Democratic challenger John Kerry, say they've never met the president but disagree with his policies ranging from the war in Iraq to the environment.

The Web site was launched in late September ``to help America heal from the sickness it has suffered since George Bush was appointed president in 2000.''

``I don't really feel like it's a betrayal,'' said Sheila House, the president's second cousin and co-creator of the site. ``I'll definitely admit that we're using the relationship as a hook to get people to talk about politics.''

The people behind the Web site are all grandchildren of Mary Bush House, the sister of Prescott Bush, who was the father and grandfather of the two Bush presidents. That makes them second cousins of the president.

. . .The site, which includes the headline, ``Because blood is thinner than oil!'' offers testimonials from the Bush relatives.

Who knows? With this vivid precedent, Bush's mother, Barbara, may vote her conscience.

Visit http://www.bushrelativesforkerry.com .

What's the art?

A mug shot of presidential neice Noelle Bush. If she has been convicted of a felony, she may not be able to vote for either candidate.

Business: Photo iPod, U2 deal impress

You know you want one of'em. Or perhaps you're bi. So, then it would be both the pleasing new iPod Photoand the so sharp you might cut yourself U2 Edition. Apple Computer released them yesterday and introduced a new online store, just for the iPod. There had been whispers at Mac rumor sites. Just wait a few weeks to upgrade and you'll be able to get an iPod with a color screen that will allow you to show the pictures you store on it, the denizens of the iPod Lounge said. But I discounted the rumors since generation four of the iPod was released just this summer. Surely, no one has a devlopment cycle that fast. So, here I sit with a gorgeous two-month old iPod that is no longer cutting edge.

The U2 Edition iPod is the first to depart from the pristine white and gray color scheme. It looks like rock-and-roll. Black and red and shiny all over. The members of the extremely successful band have autographed the back. But there is more going on in the heads of different thinking geeks at Apple than two new industry jolting products right in time for the Christmas shopping season. Go on. Be trite. Say 'paradigm shift.' Chief geek and CEO Steve Jobs has signed the first of what may be many agreements with artists for content for the iTunes Music Store, a leading seller of digital music and books online.

Read the description of the iPod Photo and try not to salivate.

Share your life in photos everywhere.

If you love what iPod did for music, just see what it can do for photos. With a color display, up to 15 hours of battery life,(1) and room for up to 10,000 or 15,000 songs or 25,000 photos,(2) iPod Photo will change the way you experience your digital photo collection. Now you can bring all your favorite memories with you anywhere and easily share them with family and friends.

In living color.

Browse through your photos one by one or view them in a slideshow on the 2-inch color LCD display. You can even connect iPod Photo to a TV and watch them with friends. And with the new color screen, your entire iPod experience is enhanced—view album art, games, calendars, and contacts all in vivid color. Starting at $469, iPod Photo is available now at the all-new iPod Store, where you can get free ground shipping. Order by January 10, 2005, and get free personalization on any iPod.

News24.com has the details.

California - Apple Computer Inc. on Tuesday introduced a new larger-capacity iPod with a colour display as well as a first-of-its-kind digital compendium of the rock band U2's songs.

U2's lead singer Bono and guitarist The Edge joined Apple chief executive Steve Jobs on stage in a newly renovated 1920s era theatre in San Jose to unveil the new products.

Apple's latest effort to maintain supremacy in the portable audio player market and the online music business also includes a new special edition U2 iPod.

Analysts expect the Apple-U2 partnerships to be the first of many to come between artists and music product providers.

With three-quarters of the MP3 player market and successive profitable quarters, Apple did not really need to do more this year to enhance its standing. But, it seems that Jobs and designer Jonathan Ive never rest. Once again, they have pleasantly surprised us.

Today, Merrill-Lynch raised estimates on Apple's stock because of the launch of the new iPods and iPod store.

Merrill Lynch raised estimates on Apple Computer after the company unveiled its iPod Photo--earlier than the research firm expected--and announced the iPod U2 special edition.

. . .Merrill-Lynch, citing increased iPod shipments, raised the estimate for the fiscal first quarter ending December to earnings of 42 cents per share on revenue of $2.95 billion, up from earnings of 40 cents per share on revenue of $2.85 billion.

Lie to me. Say the iPod is just a geegaw. That you prefer your compact disc player. Besides, you are not the acquisitive sort. But, be warned, those droplets falling from your mouth to your keyboard give you away.

Politics: Nader off Ohio ballot

Sources sent me information alleging there were signature gathering and other problems with Ralph Nader's campaign last week. I had written an entry criticising Nader for accepting donations from the nefarious Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Readers said there were other alleged irregularities. Among them were claims persons gathering signatures to place Nader on ballots did not meet the requirements of state law. It was also said that many of the signatures presented were false. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Nader. He has been permanently removed from the ballet in Ohio.

The Associated Press has the story.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to put independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader on the ballot in the battleground state of Ohio.

On Friday, Nader asked the high court to review Ohio's decision to remove him, arguing that a state law that requires people who collect signatures on candidates' petitions be registered voters violated free speech rights.

Nader's request for a review went to Justice John Paul Stevens, who referred the matter to the full court. The justices denied the request without comment Tuesday.

. . .Democrats, fearful that Nader could cost them votes if his name is on the ballot, had presented evidence to Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell that petition collectors registered at fraudulent addresses or places they didn't live.

The campaign is responsible for making sure its signature collectors meet the requirements of the various states they solicit in. That can be difficult since the rules in regard to signature gatherers vary from state to state. And, the companies providing labor sometimes send workers who are not citizens of a state to gather signatures there. Still, the basic requirements of due process were met in this situation. The Nader campaign was aware of the laws requiring that signature gatherers in Ohio be residents and registered voters.

The Toledo Blade describes the circumstances that resulted in Nader's removal.

Michael Cassidy, a suburban Cleveland attorney representing Mr. Nader's campaign, said Ohio law requiring petition circulators to be Ohio residents and registered voters violates the First Amendment. The reason: The signatures of registered voters were invalidated because the state said circulators weren't Ohio residents.

In ordering Mr. Nader off the ballot, Secretary of State Ken Blackwell accepted the conclusion of an assistant elections counsel who ruled that 2,756 of the Nader petition signatures should be invalidated.

Of that total, 1,956 were invalidated because the petition circulator falsely identified himself or herself as an Ohio resident and/or didn't witness people signing the petition.

Whether it matters if a temporary employee is a registered voter is a more difficult issue. On its face, the requirement seems arbitrary. Seasonal and/or temporary workers in other fields are free of such interference. The constitutional test for deciding if a law which effects a protected right is unduly burdensome is whether it is reasonably related to an objective of the government. The importance of preventing fraud in voter registration may justify a law that would otherwise be onerous. SCOTUS has been inconclusive regard to the legality of such requirements.

The U.S. Supreme Court in 1999 ruled that a Colorado law requiring petition circulators to be registered voters was unconstitutional. A court majority, however, declined to address whether the Colorado law requiring circulators to be state residents is unconstitutional.

"In view of the [1999 decision], it appears clear that the requirement of Ohio law that circulators be registered is unconstitutional," [U.S. District ] Judge [Edmund ] Sargus wrote.

The trial court did not reach the issue of the legality of the residency requirement because the finding of fraud rendered the petitions invalid.

It is reasonable to believe that residents of a state are less likely to perceive signature gathering as only a means of making money. Furthermore, they will not be moving on and will have to deal with any consequences that arise from their signature gathering. The requirement may create a disincentive for falsifying information on petitions. Therefore, the high court may uphold it in a later case.

The persons most likely to benefit from the outcome of this case are the Democratic candidates. Nader attracts votes away from other liberal and progressive candidates. If he is not on the ballot in Ohio, some of the 2.5 percent of the vote he received there in 2000 will likely migrate to the Democrats. That, of course, assumes potential Nader voters don't resent the party for forcing Nader off the ballot.

Nader is still on the ballots of 35 states. He has been rejected after challenges in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Law: National sales tax is bad, backward idea

When I say that discussions in the blogosphere start with a bias to the Right, I can rely on someone denying that. Then the someone will go on to say the South had a right to secede from the Union or there is no difference between a non-viable fetus and a person. Some people in Bloggersville do not realize how far out their beliefs are. Robert H. W. Welch, the founder of the John Birch Society, would be at home here. Language he was fond of, such as 'pinko,' 'Commie' and 'statist,' is tossed around rather, well, liberally. A recent blog entry by Dave of The Big Lowitzki's Random Ravings is demonstrative. Though he is not a Right Winger, he found himself discussing a topic with a far Right bias. Dave considered proposals for imposing a national sales tax. He blogged his analysis at Blogcritics.

There was a lot of talk recently about creating a national sales tax in place of an income tax, supposedly causing more "fairness". I strongly agree with the assumptions that this will create more fairness, and strongly disagree with an idea of a national sales tax. Here is why:

First, we need to take a look at what a national sales tax would look like. Lately there has been much talk centering on the possibility of replacing out current income tax system with a national sales tax system. Fairtax.org has a somewhat clear look at what this look would like. Politicians like Tom Delay (Rep., House Majority Leader) and Dennis Hastert (Rep., Speaker of the House) have begun to address this system, with Hastert saying that he will attempt to push this sometime next year. Even George W. Bush chimed in this week saying that this is an idea "that we ought to explore seriously," though him and his administration have since attempted to back away from those original comments.

There are different national sales tax proposals floating around, but I will try to give an overall summary. The national sales tax plan would set a flat sales [tax] on good[s] purchased. There are different ideas of what this would like - do services get taxed? What about homes? Healthcare? Used goods? But generally, we would expect to pay a percentage on everything that we purchased. Fairtax.org states that a 23% rate on all goods would be necessary to meet the nation's current budget. Along with this tax rate, most proposals include a rebate. In the Fairtax.org plan, the rebate would be a flat amount based on the poverty level, which would mean a family of four would receive a $361 monthly rebate, regardless of your income.

It is commendable that Dave rejects the idea of a national sales tax, which would be inherently regressive. But, it is odd to actually be discussing such a plan, which is a flat tax proposal in disguise. Mainstream thinkers in economics, law and public policy would not consider a national sales tax because it would conflict with federalism, as well as be unworkable. However, in the Rightward blogosphere those issues are ignored.

One of the impressions one gets looking at some of the material supporting a national sales tax is that it has not been considered and rejected. It has been, before the barrier of federalism arose.

The Tax History Project tells the tale.

One of the most sustained periods of interest in a national sales tax came during the early 1940s. . .

Treasury officials evaluated sales tax plans according to several criteria, including revenue yield, equity, and administrative concerns. In addition, resurgent inflation during the early war years prompted officials to consider what effect sales taxes might have on rising price levels.

Generally speaking, Treasury tax specialists consistently attacked federal sales taxes as regressive. As one report put it, "All general sales taxes apply the principle of ability to pay in reverse; they are regressive instead of progressive." Moreover, officials insisted, sales taxes would likely create "very unequal economic effects among taxpayers." As one report put it, "the general application of a constant formula must necessarily induce haphazard and undesirable results."

Treasury also cited various administrative problems as impediments to a national sales tax, including the need for a new collection mechanism. Furthermore, efforts to craft a list of exempted items were certain to prove nettlesome. Some studies saw a future clouded with protracted wrangles over very specific exemption lists.

As the costs of war mounted, the Roosevelt administration considered softening its stance. But, ultimately, it rejected a federal sales tax.

As late as 1942, Roosevelt was still reading to reporters from a briefing sheet entitled "Evils of the Sales Tax." Equity concerns made a federal sales tax unpalatable, Roosevelt insisted. The levy, he said, "violates the ability to pay. It falls more heavily on the poor; it is, in fact, a 'spare-the-rich' tax."

The idea, a very bad one, has, fortunately, remained buried. In the interim decades, policymakers began to take the concept of federalism -- the division of powers between a national or central government and local authorities -- seriously. Federalism confers some powers in the national government and others in the states and lesser entities. The power to tax is considered a concurrent one. That means both federal and state governments can exercise it. But, in practice, states have been the units of government imposing and relying on sales taxes. Indeed, many of them rely on such taxes as a major source of revenue. If the federal government were to preempt them by imposing its own sales tax, they would be at a loss for necessary funds. The Articles of Confederation, which preceded the Constitution, forbade the federal government from collecting taxes. In regard to a national sales tax, that tradition has continued.

Governors are already concerned about creeping preemption depriving them of needed funds. Former Michigan Gov. James Engler expressed those concerns in testimony before Congress in 2001.

Preemption of state regulatory authority and restrictions on state revenue sources is becoming a very serious intrusion into state sovereignty. Some prime examples include:

~ The Estate Tax

~ International Trade

~ Financial Services

~ Food Inspections

~ Telecommunications

In addition, the patients' bill of rights and energy legislation include significant preemption concerns. Moreover, the education bill now in conference -- which features many provisions that governors support -- cuts governors out of the process of writing state education plans. This is classic one-size-fits-all Washington micromanagement at its worst.

[This material has been edited for brevity. See the source document for details.]

Any effort to preempt the states in regard to a national sales tax would be vehemently opposed. I also believe the Supreme Court would side with the states if the matter ever reached it.

The reasons why a national sales tax is a bad idea are unlikely to be discussed in the blogosphere. The Right Wing bias is so entrenched here that the idea will be treated as if it is mainstream instead of the prattle of fringe groups on the far Right. That lack of balance is one reason I urge people to read sources of information other than blogs.

News: Newsweek clarifies stem cell debate

When I initially wrote about Christopher Reeve's death, several readers attempted to chastize me. They said I should not have mentioned his determined and able advocacy for embryonic stem cell research. It is disrespectful to bring it up, I was told. Describe the actor and leave the activist out. Reeve's family members would be upset if they read the blog entry. How dare I bring up politics at such a sensitive time? Shame on me.

Furthermore, I was said to be misstating the actions of the incumbent president, George W. Bush. I said he opposes research on stem cells derived from human embryos. His actions include banning further production of embryonic stem cells by executive order three years ago.

Of course those persons had a motivation other than respect for Christopher Reeve. They wanted to downplay his support for embryonic stem cell research. In fact, it would have pleased them if the issue were not discussed at all. The current edition of Newsweek has yanked the covers off the topic. Newsweek is the first mainstream publication to bring the controversy to the forefront. The cover features Christopher Reeve.

At the heart of the stem-cell furor is the most fundamental question: what is a human life and when does life begin? Even Roman Catholics like Frank Cocozzelli, who has muscular dystrophy and is founder of the Committee for the Advancement of Stem Cell Research, says embryos that would otherwise be discarded should be salvaged for life: "There's no dignity in watching people die unnecessarily." Mary Tyler Moore, a pro-life Republican and international chair of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, equates using leftover embryos for research to organ donation. Chris Chappell frames the dilemma in a simple way: "For me, an embryo is not a human embryo until it's placed in a woman's womb. That's when it has the potential to become life." This year Chappell will vote Democratic for the first time.

For religious hard-liners -- the base Bush dares not alienate -- it's a black-and-white issue. There is no justification for tampering with embryos. Ever. And now, with news that Harvard scientists want to pursue therapeutic cloning, the alarm bells -- and fears of "human embryo farms!" -- are sounding louder. Although scientists draw a line between therapeutic cloning for research and cloning of human beings, which they expressly oppose, that distinction is irrelevant to Richard Doerflinger, of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "There are elements to this agenda that make it even more serious than abortion," says Doerflinger. "You have the prospect of creating lives just to destroy them." Bishops can't endorse candidates from the pulpit, but the Conference has produced a booklet, circulated to thousands of parishes, that outlines the church's position on embryonic research.

Kerry supports therapeutic cloning; Bush opposes it. If elected, Kerry would lift restrictions on federal funding for embryonic-stem-cell research. White House aides say Bush has no plans to change his stand. . . .

The death of Reeve, the foremost celebrity advocate for embryonic stem cell research, has acted as a catalyst to bring this issue to the front page of political discourse. For millions of people, it will be one of those determining their vote two weeks from now.

The full text of the Newsweek article is well worth reading. Christopher Reeve would want you to.

Reasonably related

Republicans in the Senate seem to have retaliated against Reeve after he died. Legislation bearing his name that was about to pass has been stopped.

Politics: Right stops Reeve Act in its tracks

Yesterday, I read an interview of actor and activist Christopher Reeve in the current issue of Reader's Digest. It was a poignant experience since Reeve died before the magazine became available. In the five-page piece, Reeve describes his life nearly a decade after becoming paralyzed. He was looking forward to the airing of his latest project, a movie about a quadriplegic, paralyzed from the age of eleven, who achieves her goal of attending Harvard. He struggled with illness while directing "The Brooke Ellison Story." Reeve said he believed aging was impacting his objective of maintaining a healthy body so that he could benefit from innovations in spinal cord injury research. He was enthusiastic about what he thought was the upcoming easy passage of legislation he advocated by the U.S. Congress. The Christopher Reeve Paralysis Act would have set up an integrated infrastructure for providing rehabilitative services to persons living with SCI throughout the country. Reeve pointed out that the Act carefully avoided any reference to embryonic stem cell research, which the far Right, with the help of President George W. Bush, is determined to stymy. ESC research offends the anti-abortion movement. Treading softly didn't matter. A Republican senator has sandbagged the legislation that would be Reeve's legacy.

The L.A. Weekly reports.

L.A. Weekly has learned that, just a day after the actor's death, one or more Republican senators put a surprise hold on the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Act. The uncontroversial legislation had been expected to sail through committee and then the Senate as easily as it had the House of Representatives where it passed 418 to zero last week. Monday’s action was beyond cruel; it was like opposing Mom and apple pie.

Congressional sources confirmed to L.A. Weekly Tuesday that the hold was placed on the oft-called 'feel good' legislation from the Republican side of the aisle. Democratic committee members led by Senator Edward Kennedy are trying to find out which Republican senator or senators sandbagged S. 1010. The way the Senate system works, any senator can hold up a bill without accountability because anonymity is assured.

“We’re shocked"a source inside the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation told L.A. Weekly on Tuesday. 'We heard it was because Chris has been too outspoken on the stem-cell issue. That was the trigger.

So it would have passed if Chris hadn't died.'

But the actor's bill had NOTHING to do with stem-cell research. . . .

The Republican senators on the committee considering the legislation are Bill Frist of Tennessee, Chairman Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Mike Enzi of Wyoming, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Christopher Bond of Missourri, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Pat Roberts of Kansas, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, John Ensign of Nevada, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and John Warner of Virginia.

No one knows which Republican senator or senators gleefully took the occasion of Reeve's demise to stop the passage of legislation bearing his name. One suspects a rock-ribbed Right Winger with Christian fundamentalist beliefs. The guarantee of anonymity means the person will not have to weather the criticism directed at someone who refuses to show minimal respect for a true American idol.

What's the art?

Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent.

Reasonably related

~ Read the full text of the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Act at the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation site.

~ Read about the life and death of Christopher Reeve at Silver Rights.

~ On his last day of consciousness, Reeve left a long message of encouragement for presidential candidate John Kerry. His widow, Dana, reminisces.

~ "The Brooke Ellison Story" premieres Monday, Oct. 25 at 8 p.m. on A&E .

Update: Dana Reeve has joined the Kerry campaign. She will be appearing with the candidate Thursday. The Associated Press has the story.

Commentary: The downfall of a model minority

The identity 'model minority' can be a complex one. Yes, the objects of the term, usually Asian-Americans, are being flattered. But, the flattery is also a backhanded slap at other minority groups. Indeed, the model minority is being approved of in comparison to them, not white Americans. And, the approval is contingent. The approval can be withdrawn, casting the recipient back into the second-class citizenship reserved for the non-model minorities by many.

An Oregon Congressman is now feeling the backlash that is held in reserve for the model minority who offends in some way. After serving three terms in the House of Representatives, it appears Democrat David Wu (pictured) may not be returning to Washington.

The Oregonian exposed a secret that Wu, who represents the 1st Congressional District, must have thought buried in his past. Now, his opponent, an immigrant from Iran, is taking advantage of that information.

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — Republican challenger Goli Ameri launched a new TV ad Tuesday highlighting allegations of sexual misconduct against Democratic U.S. Rep. David Wu.

The 30-second spot, airing on Portland TV stations, features excerpts from a story published in The Oregonian last week in which a former girlfriend of Wu's once claimed he had tried to force her to have sex.

With less than two weeks before Election Day, the ads are intended to call into question Wu's character and help Ameri overcome the three-term incumbent's name recognition in the 1st District.

The episode the Republican candidate may be able to ride into Congress occurred when Wu was a college student, way back in 1976.

That summer, the 21-year-old Wu was brought to the campus police annex after his ex-girlfriend said he tried to force her to have sex, according to Raoul K. Niemeyer, then a patrol commander who questioned him.

Wu had scratches on his face and neck, and his T-shirt was stretched out of shape, Niemeyer said.

Earlier, someone had interrupted a scuffle in the woman's dorm room. A Stanford professor said the woman told him the next day that Wu had angrily attacked her. An assistant dean who counseled the woman for two months said that the woman called it attempted rape and that Wu used a pillow to muffle her screams.

The passage of time, and lack of criminal charges, or a conviction, might have caused Portland voters to shrug off news of the incident. But, the revelation occurred in the wrong year for that. Just months ago, a former mayor and governor of Oregon admitted to having had a sexual relationship with a girl from the time she was fourteen. The fallout has tarnished the reputation and impacted the wallet of Neil Goldschmidt. The commonality of his behavior and Wu's is unlikely to prove beneficial.

Though he refused to be interviewed during the months reporters investigated the alleged sexual assault, Wu apologized effusively after the cards were on the table, and the story was in the paper. He says the experience changed his life, implying he emerged from it a better person.

There are two other controversial issues that will effect Wu's electability. He has not been particularly effective during his three terms by most measures. Wu has neither penned nor passed legislation. Nor has he established a reputation as a member of the House. In addition, he has alienated the high tech community he claimed affinity with as a lawyer by opposing closer ties with China. Wu is from Taiwan. But, I believe the make or break issue will be whether the attempted rape allegation is taken seriously. The clash between it and his image as a model minority will determine the outcome of his embattled candidacy.

Wu, then persuing a policy of not speaking to the press, refused to meet with The Oregonian's editorial board in regard to endorsements. It endorsed Ameri instead, but says that choice had nothing to do with the yet to break article about the incident at Stanford.

We should also note that The Oregonian's editorial board endorsed his opponent in the general election and would have reached the same conclusion -- that Wu has been ineffective in Congress -- regardless of the college incident. . . .

The questions about Wu may not be easily resolved for voters, however. Each one has to decide whether this 28-year-old accusation should follow Wu through the years.

We think it's relevant. Voters must decide whether they should forgive Wu or remove him from office.

That decision will likely be known the night of Nov. 2.

Reasonably related

Former Portland mayor and Oregon Gov. Neil Goldshmidt had a three-year relationship with a teenaged girl that would have been considered statutory rape if he had been charged. I blogged that situation here.

Politics: Greens propose compromise

We're living in rather rigid times. The hard-line position taken by the Bush administration regarding the invasion of Iraq and other issues has resulted in the most politically polarized circumstances I recall. Then, along come people like those at Sinclair Broadcasting and the shameless liars of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to pour salt in the wound. So, it was with some relief that I read a recent email from David Segal, chairperson of Greens for Impact. He is a city council member in Providence, RI. After considering the ramifications of casting a vote for a third-party candidate this year, Segal and his compatriots have decided on a compromise. Yes, I said compromise. In these uncompromising times, they are willing to consider a middle road.

What is Greens for Impact?

Greens for Impact is an organization of principled, pragmatic Green Party members and progressive populists dedicated to the goal of defeating George W. Bush in his bid for a second term as president, while simultaneously furthering the growth of the Green Party as an independent alternative to the corporate-dominated parties.

While we do not represent or work with any of the presidential candidates, we believe that this agenda is most-readily forwarded by a strategy designed to maximize the Green Party's impact. Greens for Impact works to:

1. Encourage voters to register Green,

2. Encourage voters in safe states -- those that are so overwhelmingly Republican or Democratic that we can be confident today of who will win there in November -- to vote for David Cobb in the General Election,

3. Encourage voters in swing states to vote for John Kerry in the general election, and

4. Actively and forcefully push for the use of instant runoff voting (IRV) wherever suitable, alongside ballot access reform and full public financing of campaigns.

The effect of GFI's plan will be bifurcate support from the Green Party in the presidential race. The party will continue to build its profile by establishing a presence in states barely contested by one of the major parties. In the swing states, estimated at from eight to 12 by various sources, Green Party voters are urged to cast their presidential vote for Kerry. As a resident of a state in which Ralph Nader achieved five percent of the vote in 2000, I can attest that the drain on votes for an embattled liberal candidate is real when some voters defect to progressive third-party candidates. I believe Greens for Impact's proposal has merit. And, why stop with Greens? Nader supporters should also consider GFI's proposal.

People who consider themselves strong adherents to principle will have doubts. If a member of a third party votes for a major candidate, has he abandoned his principles? I think that is determined by his reason for making the choice. Greens for Impact has considered why a break with convention makes sense.

The Presidential Election of 2004 is not a debate about voting your fears or voting your conscience. It is not an academic or theoretical exercise. Real people's lives are at stake. Women, people of color, the GLBT community, our nation's poor, and many others, save for the privileged few, will face real consequences from the outcome of this election. As a result, we must view the effect of our votes collectively, not merely by what they mean to us as individuals. Vote with your mind. Vote with a plan.

Segal observes that the margin of victory for Bush in several states was less than 7,500 votes in 2000. Votes from supporters of progressive third-party candidates can have a measurable impact on the close race of Election 2004.

Reasonably related

~ Visit Greens for Impact on the Web for more information.

~ In Oregon, members of the Green Party debated whether they should consider voting for Kerry. Hear the discussion at NPR.

Opinion: Nader deserves swift kick for Swift Vets tie

Thursday night I listened to longshot presidential candidate Ralph Nader lecture a television audience about principles. He said that adhering to your principles when choosing a candidate to support should be more important than whether the candidate can win the election. Friday, I learned that this advocate of principles has accepted money from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, people who epitomize absence of principles. The group of politically reactionary Vietnam veterans and fellow travelers has engaged in smear campaign of epic proportions in an effort to prevent Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) from being elected president. The evidence that their seedy allegations are false is convincing.

The Washingon Post became inquisitive about Nader's new bedfellows.

Swift Boat Veterans for Nader? A handful of donors to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, an organization that has run controversial ads attacking Democrat John F. Kerry, have also given money to independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader.

Five donors, who contributed a total of $13,500 to the anti-Kerry group, also gave $7,500 to the longtime consumer advocate. That has infuriated some Democrats, who complain that Nader is taking money from supporters of not only a Republican group, but also one he has repeatedly denounced. In August, at a speech at Tulane University, Nader called the group "proxies" for the Bush campaign, which, he said, was attempting to "smear" the Democratic nominee.

When confronted about his hypocrisy, Nader said there is nothing wrong with his campaign accepting the contributions. He asserted that the donations prove his appeal across the political spectrum. One is expected to believe the money changed hands because Right Wing zealots admire Nader's crusades for safer cars and appliances. But, there is a more likely reason for the Swift Boaters to encourage Nader -- he can act as a spoiler in this election. Though there is no prospect of a victory for Nader, he can damage or destroy John Kerry's ability to prevail if he achieves two or three percent of the vote in key states. That is the reason why Republicans have fought to add him to ballots in states where the GOP and the Democrats are neck and neck. It is also why conservatives, including the Swift Boat crew, are willing to donate money to someone they normally would not give the time of day.

Being principled means, at the very least, not bowing to expediency. Ralph Nader, in service to an ego that has become burdensome to himself and others, has not only bowed, but groveled, to persons he should be embarassed to be associated with. He may have tarnished his reputation, which relied on his integrity to an extent most politicians' stature doesn't, irrevocably.

Photo album: John Edwards visits Portland

Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, the Democrats' nominee for vice president, spoke at Pioneer Courthouse Square Wednesday evening. An audience estimated at about 10,000 people was on hand. The large gathering was among three get out the vote efforts Edwards attended in Oregon that day. The candidate was energetic and upbeat. The crowd was enthusiastic and remarkable in its diversity.