http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/co0 3_salazar/PR_091009.html

As a constituent of Salazar's I'm familiar with his somewhat blue dog ways which is why I found this press release to be somewhat of a pleasant surprise.  He has actually gone on record as supporting the public option (if it came to a vote anyway).

I thought he was probably going to support any health care bill, but here he has finally stated that he would vote for a public option.

I just wrote him to ask him to join the progressives in signing that letter to Sebilius ;)

(Please note: This originally posted on http://www.stevesword.com/ and will be cross-posted on openleft too.)

"All warfare is based on deception.  Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near." - SunTzu The Art of War

So those of you who read this site regularly probably know that I like to spout off at length about the linguistics of our political culture.  But there are times when actions truly do speak much, much louder than words.  Let me begin at the beginning.

Hey all, just another Palin Rally video.  Campaigning in Mesa County has been good because it makes me realize that the people in this video are fewer than I originally thought.

Just saw a couple articles on this story today.  

The crazy thing is that these groups haven't done anything yet.  It's like the FBI are handling MoveOn types like they were the Black Panthers.

Lets hope that it gets a little more coverage between Palin and Gustav.  Forward it on and rec if you like.

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/aug/3 1/protest-leaders-arrested-in-raids/

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2 008/08/31/raids/

I understand that the convention is already over and I wish I had realized it earlier but I have to say it.  Most people in the MSM and indeed here in the blogosphere refer to the site of last nights speech as Invesco Field.

I'm asking you all (especially you posters like Todd, Jerome, Johnathan, and Natasha) from now on to call it MILE HIGH STADIUM.  "Phooey," you say, "Mile High was demolished years ago."  Furhermore aren't there better, more noble, less nit-pickey causes to write about?  Certainly all these points are true, but let me explain my reasons before you dismiss this as moon-bat-ery.

As many of you may know Denver was home to a Stadium called Mile High Stadium from 1948 to 2001. Around 1998, after the Broncos finally won a Super Bowl, the owner of the Broncos, Pat Bowen, strong armed the city into building a new stadium for the team which they did using mostly taxpayers dollars to do.  The new stadium was slated to carry the same name as the old one.  However, once the new stadium was built, Invesco bought the naming rights to the stadium and changed it to Invesco Field, setting off a PR firestorm in the local media.  The Denver Post refused to use the name Invesco.  Citizens who had paid to build the stadium felt they had been betrayed and finally Invesco settled to call it officially "Invesco Field at Mile High."

So why should anyone care about a name?  A rose is a rose is a rose, right?  As George Lakoff would say, its all about the framing.  The importance of using Mile High instead of Invesco is that Mile High reminds us that the stadium was built on taxpayer dollars.  The name Invesco concedes the "right" of private companies to rename -- and metaphorically take ownership of -- a building that we the people of the City of Denver paid for.

After a speech like the one that Obama delivered last night, one in which he criticised this conservative doctrine of private companies freeloading on publicly funded projects, it just isn't right to call it Invesco Field.  Granted the stadium isn't a public park, but we paid for it and then Invesco slaps their name on it.

Obama's speech and this convention will be talked about for years to come, so when you write about it call it Mile High Stadium.  It doesn't cost you anything and it reinforces the idea that the building was built by us and not Invesco.  Its also going to make you popular with people from Colorado.

I just Stumbled! upon a video by a journalist for the Nation which had some disturbing things to say about our candidates and their position on private contractors in Iraq.

View it in the extended entry and then tell me what you think.

I realize this is a bit of a digression from politics proper, but I just had to ask everyone what they thought about the Andrew Meyer/UF Taser incident.

It's a strange thing to see, and if you haven't seen it yet, here it is.

A little more background appears here.

Your thoughts on the incident?  The media's response?  What do you think we should do about it?

So it seems like there's still a great deal of question in everyone's mind as to who is and who isn't running for the President of the United States of America.  Post after post mention polls taken that do or don't consider Al Gore.  Earlier today on this site we had a couple of posts regarding Bloomberg and Hagel and their emphatic "I am not running."

With specific regard to Al Gore, and I'd love comments about all the others, why the hell is he still on the radar?  Seriously.  I'm not trying to be a smart-aleck here.  I genuinely want to know if there is any substantial evidence that Al Gore still might run.  Anyone?

I feel silly even posting this diary, because it's more wasted breath on a guy who isn't actually running.  Please, enlighten me.  Otherwise, lets focus on the people who are actually running for office.