Kids

Leaving yoga this morning, I saw a group of very young kids from the next door daycare going on a walk with the daycare workers. They had them all tied together and it reminded me of some bizarre chain gang. Two year olds frog marching through the parking lot. :)

Two or three of them spotted me walking to my car and helled out "hello." I waved back and one of them told me he was going on a walk. One of the other little boys just kept talking as if he was carrying on a conversation--perhaps with me. Or perhaps he was trying to start some kind of daycare chain gang escape.

But they all looked like they were having a great time shuffling through the parking lot. Even the one who seemed to be making a break for it.

All we need to know about Fred Thompson

Besides, of course, his response to terrorism, is that we are hearing that his campaign is in talks to hire Timothy Griffin. Who is Griffin? Not only one of the most controversial hires in the US Attorney scandal, but someone most famous for his work for Karl Rove as an opposition researcher on Democrats.

Garrison Keillor on our President and Memorial Day

Telling lies over good soldiers' graves | Salon.com : "Dishonesty makes for poor rhetoric and that's what has gutted this beautiful holiday."

(H/T Upper Left

Holy Cow

Watching Tucker Carlson tonight, I hear Pat Buchanan absolutely dismissing the recent neo-con call to bomb Iran.

What is the world coming to when I agree with Pat Buchanan?

e. coli conservatism

What a great name for the Bush administration's "conservatism."

E. coli conservatism (19): the ne plus ultra | Campaign for America's Future

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration said Tuesday it will fight to keep meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture tests less than 1 percent of slaughtered cows for the disease, which can be fatal to humans who eat tainted beef. But Arkansas City-based Creekstone Farms Premium Beef wants to test all of its cows.

Larger meat companies feared that move because, if Creekstone tested its meat and advertised it as safe, they might have to perform the expensive test, too.

Bushco resists this because if everyone has to test, there could be a false-positive that could cause great harm. Not worried about a real case. And the best way for these idiots to say that our meat is safer is to not test it! This blogger nails just how contradictory this is:

First, observe the contempt for liberty. When E. coli conservatives say self-regulation is preferable to government, they're even lying about that. Second, observe the contempt for small business. When a small company want to - voluntarily! - hold its product to a higher standard, the government blocks it, in part because bigger companies have to be protected from the competition, in part because a theoretical threat to the bottom line (false positives) trumps protection against a deadly disease.

There's your conservatism, America: not extremism in defense of liberty. State socialism in defense of Mad Cow.

Just another reason that votes matter

The two Bush additions to the Supreme Court proved the the difference in

"yesterday's Supreme Court ruling in Ledbetter v. Goodyear. The court ruled that employees must make their discrimination complaints within 180 days “after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.” In other words, the discrimination occurs at the time a woman is given a salary that is significantly lower than her male counterparts. If she doesn't catch on to the pay disparity within 180 days, she's screwed. Which is why Ledbetter's attorneys had argued that she was discriminated against every time she was handed a paycheck for less money than her male equivalent on the job -- not simply when her salary was determined. "

Isn't that wonderful. Because she didn't find out what her coworkers were paid immediately (do you know if you are over-paid--under-paid?) she is out of luck. The Republican world is amazing isn't it. The Court overturned a jury trial that ruled for this woman. So much for the will of the people, right?

I am constantly amazed at how many conservatives celebrate democracy (after all, we are fighting a war to spread it) yet work consistently to undermine democratic institutions. Our judicial process is now a political machine, our courts work to undermine the rights of individuals, and Republicans are hard at work trying to disenfranchise people. Glad we are fighting for democracy.

Oh, isn't this lovely

Item one in the list of lovely Wednesday morning news that makes you want to relocate to Canada: Sully notes that:

"the Bush administration's term "enhanced interrogation" was coined in 1937 to describe exactly the same techniques authorized by Bush, Cheney, Tenet, and Rumsfeld. The term was coined by the Gestapo."

Sigh.

We have to wake people up to what is being done in their name. There is a better way to get intelligence, and before the goons and thugs of the Bush administration, the U.S. used to practise it. We still can return to honor and excellence in interrogation - instead of shame and failure.

God I hope so. I hope that we can find our way back from this. When the VP tells West Point that the Geneva Conventions are a weakness for us, I wonder.

****

Item two is in the same vein. I still recall being chided for my liberal leanings because conservatives were more moral. Liberals, I was told, were all relativists and had no core morality, so their sense of right and wrong was dependent on the situation. Yeah.

Remember good old Scooter Libby? This morning, I read The Anonymous Liberal where he discusses Fitzgerald's sentencing brief. The prosecutor not only concludes that Valerie Plame was, in fact, a covert agent, but that Libby:

"lied repeatedly and blatantly about matters at the heart of a criminal investigation concerning the disclosure of a covert intelligence officer's identity. He has shown no regret for his actions, which significantly impeded an investigation.

Yet, the Scooter is a hero among right wingers. I read yesterday that even good old Fred Thompson was doing a fundraiser for his legal defense fund. Wow, remember when Conservatives brandished Clinton's lie and boasted of "the rule of law?" I do. I remember it well.

That, evidently is in the past. Newsweek reports that:

"In mid-May, Libby was a featured guest at a New York dinner honoring Norman Podhoretz, one of the neo-Conservative movement's intellectual godfathers. According to reports from the scene, the dinner, organized by Commentary Magazine, opened with cheers and a 'standing ovation' for Libby."

Standing O. For a man convicted of perjury and the underlying offense was outing a CIA agent (ONE OF OURS) for political gain.

Hmm. Torture. An unending war with a President who defies the American people. A rogue Vice President who not only thinks that torture is acceptable and moral, but thinks that he can out a CIA agent--even one working on WMD proliferation. Oh, and a conservative base awash in Bible verses who thinks all of this is moral.

Unbelievable.

Bush creates own reality

For those keeping score, this is exactly why I fear the thinking that goes into the Creation museum. When you ignore evidence that contradicts what you want to be true, you get people like this in office:

"Also in that session, Bush said: "I recognize there are a handful there, or some, who just say, 'Get out, you know, it's just not worth it. Let's just leave.' I strongly disagree with that attitude. Most Americans do as well.''

However, in a poll released Friday by CBS and The New York Times, 63 percent supported a troop withdrawal timetable of sometime next year. Another poll earlier this month from USA Today and Gallup found 59 percent backing a withdrawal deadline that the U.S. should stick to no matter what's happening in Iraq."

In Bush's world, everyone agrees with him because he is so damn right.

Is this taking God's name in vain?

I think it makes more sense than an idle swear. Here we have a scumbag politician telling people that God talks to him about Republican politics. Conservative Christians should be disgusted, but they won't be.

Letter from Washington: Party Unfaithful: Reporting & Essays: The New Yorker: "DeLay says that when, in the coming years, he is not fighting the indictment in Texas (he insists that he is not guilty) he will be building a conservative grass-roots equivalent of MoveOn.org. “God has spoken to me,” he said. “I listen to God, and what I’ve heard is that I’m supposed to devote myself to rebuilding the conservative base of the Republican Party, and I think we shouldn’t be underestimated.” "

A memorial day op-ed worth reading

I saw this cited everywhere but only read a small portion until this morning. Read Andrew Bacevich's I Lost My Son to a War I Oppose. We Were Both Doing Our Duty. in its entirety. But I like his comments about how the war machine continues and how the politicians seem disconnected from the American people. How do people like Bush hold up the soldier as a prop, but then ignore the democratic process AND undermine the soldiers themselves?

"The people have spoken, and nothing of substance has changed. The November 2006 midterm elections signified an unambiguous repudiation of the policies that landed us in our present predicament. But half a year later, the war continues, with no end in sight. Indeed, by sending more troops to Iraq (and by extending the tours of those, like my son, who were already there), Bush has signaled his complete disregard for what was once quaintly referred to as 'the will of the people.'"

The people, the soldiers, our democracy, etc. The list continues of items that Bush and Cheney reference as meaningful institutions or individuals, yet act in ways to undermine. Shaun grabs this from the NYT:

"But now on his third deployment in Iraq, he is no longer a believer in the mission. The pivotal moment came, he says, this past February when soldiers killed a man setting a roadside bomb. When they searched the bomber’s body, they found identification showing him to be a sergeant in the Iraqi Army.

“I thought, ‘What are we doing here? Why are we still here?’ ” said Sergeant Safstrom, a member of Delta Company of the First Battalion, 325th Airborne Infantry, 82nd Airborne Division. “We’re helping guys that are trying to kill us. We help them in the day. They turn around at night and try to kill us.”"

Yet, we are supposed to be fighting for democracy--a democracy that our Vice President doesn't even support. Cheney presented both the Geneva Conventions and our Constitution as weaknesses in our fight against terrorism. He did this, I would add, in an address to West Point where instructors are finding it harder and harder to convinced cadets that torture is wrong. But that he preaches to our military the essential message that the Geneva Conventions and Constitutional protections are niceties and not imperitives just shows how disconnected this man is. As I recall, he took an oath to protect the Constitution. Sigh.

Sully sums up the President--one that he voted for initially and supported into this war:

"What can one say? Well: we can say this at least. The president is right that al Qaeda remains a terrible threat to Americans. He is right to insist on this. But one core reason he is right is because he has been in the White House for the last six years. Al Qaeda surely never had a more helpful man in such a powerful place. After over six years of this presidency, Bin Laden is still at large. Five and a half years after Bin Laden's religious tools murdered 3,000 innocents, this president still cannot find or capture or kill him. Five and a half years after that dreadful day, al Qaeda's reach in the Middle East is more extensive than ever, centered in Iraq, where it was barely existent before the war. Over four years after invading Iraq, the security situation there is as grave as it has ever been. Tens of thousands of innocents have been added to the three thousand murdered on 9/11 - many of them unspeakably tortured and murdered by death squads or Islamist cells empowered by Bush's jaw-dropping negligence. Over three thousand young Americans have died in order to give al Qaeda this victory and this new platform."

Creation science?

Over the weekend, I enjoyed a very civil and interesting conversation with Tony and his friends about the new Creation museum opening in Kentucky. Everyone knows where I come down on this. I think the museum is dangerous because, among many problems, it presents creationists beliefs as if they are factual.

Tonight coming home from the garden store, SOF and I heard this NPR story on the opening. SOF noted that this kind of story does not help Christian's anti-intellectual image. Especially when you hear a young mother saying that this museum is Biblical truth AND science. You don't get to dismiss evolutionary science, the expertise of thousands and thousands of trained scientists and then claim that this museum is "science."

The rest of the story was equally disheartening when you hear of the room devoted to connecting evolutionary thought to abortion and pornography. This is not good for our educational system, our approach to problem solving, or the incorporation of meaningful religious faith into our cultural conversations.

Sky Blue Sky

I haven't blogged about music much lately. And there is some to blog about. I have recently been listening to The Hold Steady a lot (thanks again, Zalm) and really enjoying them. I downloaded live concerts (legally, mind you) of both Scott Miller and Centro-Matic--both of which are great shows. (We were actually at the Centro-Matic set, so was doubly nice).

But perhaps the most anticipated album of this year (at least for me) has been the new Wilco release:
Sky Blue Sky, which came out last week. SOF and I have been listening to it off and on over the time and both agree that it is really a solid album. Like most Wilco albums (after AM, that is), it requires a few listens to like it. Hell, I hated A Ghost is Born the first couple of times through--and that now makes me wince. How could I hate such an amazing album?

This one did not turn me off, but repeated listens have really brought the subtleties to the fore. Nels Cline's guitar work is really great and the entire band is in tune (no pun). Watching the DVD (I recommend buying the version with the dvd) you find out that they recorded the songs together (as Brandi Carlile did her recent album) with little or no over dubbing. It gives the album a real fresh and organic sound. Songs like "On and On and On" have a simplicity and beauty that their earlier work lacked. Or this opening from "Either Way."

Maybe the sun will shine today
The clouds will blow away
Maybe I won’t feel so afraid
I will try to understand
Either way

Or perhaps I am just biased because I think Wilco is the best band of our generation.

Fred Thompson on terrorism

spoof ad. I like it, but I am probably biased.

This President--Idiot or just speech impaired?

During the President's news conference today, David Gregory asked a perfectly reasonable question. I say that because if you watch the cable heads, there are some saying that he was out of line, and I believe Rush is running with that line. Unbelievable. Take a look:

GREGORY: Mr. President, after the -- mistakes that have been made in this war, when you do as you did yesterday, when you raised two-year-old intelligence talking about the threat posed by Al-Qaeda, it's met with increasing skepticism. The majority in the public, growing number of Republicans appear not to trust you any longer to be able to carry out this policy successfully. Can you explain why you believe you're still a credible messenger on the war?

THE PRESIDENT: I'm credible because I read the intelligence, David, and make it abundantly clear, in plain terms that if we let up, we'll be attacked. And I firmly believe that . You know, look, this has been a long, difficult experience for the American people. I can assure you, Al-Qaeda, who would like to attack us again, have got plenty of patience and persistence. And the question is, will we? Yeah, I talked about intelligence yesterday. I wanted to make sure the intelligence I laid out was credible, so we took our time. Somebody said, "Well, he's trying to politicize the thing." If I was trying to politicize it, I'd have dropped it out before the 2006 elections. I believe I have an obligation to tell the truth to the American people as to the nature of the enemy. And it's unpleasant for some. I fully recognize that after 9/11, the calm here at home, relatively speaking, you know, caused some to say, "Well, maybe we're not at war." I know that's a comfortable position to be in. But that's not the truth.

I am voting for idiot. He mischaracterized Gregory's question, then asserted that because he reads the intelligence, we have to believe him, even though the question really goes to that question. After all, he cited intelligence to take us into this quagmire. Oh well, I am sure he is right now.

BTW, let's not forget that even moderate Republicans think he is lacking credibility. Only Bush thinks he still has it.

More on Religious education

Sorry, Tony. I just can't resist. Today in her testimony on the hill, Monica Goodling admitted to political hirings, which is against the law in those positions.

"Both in her opening statement and in further testimony, Goodling admitted to weeding out candidates for assistant U.S. attorney positions because they were not Republicans.

Under questioning from Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA), Goodling admitted that she did block the hiring of an assistant U.S. attorney in the D.C. U.S. attorney's office because she judged him too liberal. "I made a snap judgment and I regret it," she said. When Sanchez pressed as to how many times Goodling had done this, Goodling said she couldn't come up with a number, and that she didn't "feel like there were that many cases."

Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) later pressed her on whether she had committed a crime. “I don’t believe that I intended to commit a crime," she said at first. Then, when he pressed, “I know I crossed the line of civil service rules."
Did that mean she crossed the line of breaking the law, he asked? "I believe I crossed the line, but I didn’t mean to," she said."

Evidently at Regent University Law school, you only break the law when you intend to break the law.

Now how is this supposed to make me feel better about religious education in this country?

See, the problem is secular education...

From the can't make this up category, one of Falwell's students made a bunch of bombs to use on people protesting that late reverend. But I thought that schools like Liberty were superior because they teach the Bible.

"And Campbell County authorities arrested a Liberty University student for having several homemade bombs in his car.

The student, 19-year-old Mark D. Uhl of Amissville, Va., reportedly told authorities that he was making the bombs to stop protesters from disrupting the funeral service. The devices were made of a combination of gasoline and detergent, a law enforcement official told ABC News' Pierre Thomas. They were 'slow burn,' according to the official, and would not have been very destructive."

Yeah, they really teach the basics at Liberty U. And we also see another example of the bias here. Good Christian guy makes incendiary devices, but he isn't called a "terrorist" and the officials note that they weren't that dangerous. If he had been Muslim, I can't help but imagine a different response.

But that may be the lasting memory of Falwell--religious extremism.

Sigh

And this man was our Ambassador to the UN? Not only does he not know the meaning of diplomacy, he, like many misunderstands American history and the meaning of American democracy.

On democracy

Couple of stories this morning on the nature of democracy. One dealt with the problems of 911 service, especially in the age of cell phones. We voted not that long ago to fix our own system to allow the system to catch up to the technology. Listening to this story, however, we heard that Missouri is way behind on this issue, and some 23 counties don't even have 911 service for land lines. They interviewed one of the state senators who said that his constituents hated taxes so much that they preferred no new taxes over an improved 911 service. Are you kidding me?

This is Republican talking points gone nuts. This is what you get when you say that "all taxes are bad."

*****

Item 2. Interesting op-ed connects the US Attorney scandal to Iraq:

"One benchmark the Bush team has been urging the Iraqi government to meet is to rescind its broad 'de-Baathification' program - the wholesale purging of Baathists after the fall of Saddam - which has alienated many Sunnis and hampered national reconciliation.
But while the Bush team has been lecturing the Iraqi Shiites to limit de-Baathification in Baghdad, it was carrying out its own de-Democratization in the Justice Department in Washington, D.C. We would feel that we had failed in Iraq if we read that Sunnis were being purged from Iraq's Ministry of Justice by Shiite hard-liners loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr - but the moral equivalent of that is exactly what the Bush administration was doing here. What kind of example does that set for Iraqis?"

That doesn't appear the only contradiction. Bush pushing for less religion in government in Iraq while stocking our own with religious fundamentalists, or criticizing just about any other country for their civil rights policies. (Take note, there N15, the next time we criticize Iran or anyone for jailing someone or mistreating them in jail. We used to have a certain legitimacy doing that, but now, everyone laughs at us.)

****

The last story was also on NPR this morning about the conservative war critic--Andrew Bacevich--who lost his son in Iraq on Mothers day. He asked what kind of a democracy we have when the people have spoken so loudly and nothing happens?

I wished I had an answer. I want so badly to believe that our system still works.

Huckabee panders to base

Or that is my interpretation. From Melissa Rogers:

"The Florida Baptist Witness, a Southern Baptist publication, reports that Mike Huckabee has withdrawn as a speaker at the Celebration of the New Baptist Covenant. Huckabee cited what he called an “unprecedented personal attack” by former President Jimmy Carter on President George W. Bush and his administration’s foreign policy. --snip--

Hucakbee said: “While I continue to have great respect for President Carter as a fellow Christian believer and Baptist, I’m deeply disappointed by the unusually harsh comments made in my state this past weekend regarding President Bush, and feel that it represents an unprecedented personal attack on a sitting president by a former president which is unbecoming the office as well as unbecoming to one whose conference is supposed to be about civility and bringing people together.”"

It always amazes me how Bush is held to a different standard. He can start a horrible war, undermine our constitutional system, back torture, but Carter says what everyone knows to be the truth and Carter is the bad guy.

Sigh.

Torture and the Ticking Time Bomb Scenario (TTBS)

As people know, I am not a John McCain fan. I found his kissing up to Falwell disgusting, his willingness to endorse Bush unsettling, and his romp through Baghdad ridiculous.

But during the GOP debate the other night, he was exactly right about torture. While the other seemed to be in a one-upsmanship battle to show who was more willing to torture (I think Romney won that--evidently Mormons don't sweat torture. But then again, neither do Baptists--er, the SBC leadership) McCain categorically said that we don't torture. As AL noted, that alone is no small point:

" I would point out that discussing torture in an appropriately somber tone--as opposed to pandering to people's worst instincts in order to win applause--is no small difference. Even if tone were the only difference between McCain and his opponents on this issue, it would still be a significant difference. Watching Giuliani, Romney, and the second-tier wannabes trip over each other to endorse extreme interrogation techniques the other night was more than a little unsettling."

McCain also rejected the Fox News scenario mongers. Britt Hume practically salivated as he described the theoretical bombing of American shopping malls and the scum bags that the Americans now held in custody who knew where the next bomb was going off. What do you do? What do you do? McCain knew that this is not a movie where you can jump a speeding bus over a 100 foot chasm. He said, just as straightforward that this scenario was a one in a million scenario (and subtext--shame on Fox for trotting it out). AL agrees:

If you construct the right scenario (nuclear bomb about to go off, suspect knows the target, etc.) just about anyone will answer yes to this question. But that's not at all surprising or informative. After all, it's possible to construct a hypothetical scenario where you'd be morally justified in shooting a little girl in the head (you're in a cave running out of air, there are four other younger children, they'll all die unless you off yourself and the oldest kid, etc.). The bottomline is that all of us are capable of simple utilitarian moral reasoning. If you are presented with a choice between something very bad and something even worse, the moral logic is pretty clear.

As AL notes, just because you can construct a scenario where you do that worse thing, you don't make that worse choice legal--which is what Bush and company want to do.

As I have noted before, I worry about this kind of thinking in many areas of our society. In this case, they judge the morality or efficacy of the TTBS and then refuse to really look at the real use of torture and the real victims of it. Our commenter did the same thing. The people he claimed we were not technically torturing were, in his mind, all guilty terrorists. It is a vastly different moral scenario when you consider that we don't have a clue if we are even "interrogating" the right people. Or have we completely forgotten

"Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen who was abducted by the Bush administration during a layover at JFK Airport on his way home to Canada, and then brought to Syria to be 'interrogated.' He was kept in a tiny cell for the next 10 months in Syria and was repeatedly tortured. All along, he was guilty of nothing and had no ties of any kind to terrorism."

Yet the same thinking justifies abstinence only programs that don't work, and defends a death penalty that is biased and flawed to a shocking degree.