Friday morning

Yesterday was pretty much a wash. Woke up with a mild fever and spent the day in bed. SOF had a similar experience on Tuesday, so I think we both had a 24 hour virus of some kind. As such things go, pretty mild. I just had a headache and felt tired.

But this morning, I feel better and am trying to get going. Unfortunately, that means reading the news this morning. Damn the internets. Life used to be easier when I had to wait for several days to learn that my country's leaders were inept and incompetent. Of course, it is hard to believe that any country's leaders have been this inept and this incompetent.

Item one on that list, (H/t to SOF) for this NYT's story on the destroyed CIA tapes. Turns out, they may have mucked up future and past legal cases. That's right, messed up cases against actual terrorists because they destroyed evidence. The article suggests that the only thing they may have accomplished was to destroy the evidence needed to charge someone for illegal torture (remember, there George? Torture is illegal?). Nice to know they are on our side.

****

But their prosecution of the war against sex continues. Feministe notes that with all the noise about Reverend Wright's wacky ideas about AIDS, the President nominated another person--Jerry Thacker--to the Presidential advisory on HIV and Aids, and a man who called AIDS a "gay plague." Thacker had to withdraw his nomination.

Of course, this President has done all sorts of things that are as wacky as Jeremiah Wright. You know, like appointing an anti-birth control doctor to his family planning program. Or of course, the obvious of continuing to fund "abstinence only" programs that don't work. Speaking of wacky and misleading statements, some of the pro-life groups that Bush likes to fund, spread horrible information about contraceptives and stds, such as that condoms do nothing to prevent HIV transmission, or that stds can be spread through "skin to skin" contact.

With all of that, the claim that the government spread AIDS on purpose looks wacky, but at least this man wasn't elected President.

****

Some good news from Bush justice. Don Siegelman will be released on bond during his appeal. That case stinks to high heaven and I am glad to see him out of jail.

*****

In other news, however, the surge appears to be faltering, though Bush uses the uptick in violence to suggest the opposite.

Meanwhile, military leaders told Bush the military is badly strained by this. I am less than optimistic it will result in any kind of action. Bush has done more to undermine our troops than any president in recent history, yet Republicans still get to claim they are "pro-troops."

****

Other news. Seems odd that the very same US Attorney's office of public corruption in LA has now been disbanded. After the US Att scandal and Don Siegelman, let's just say I approach this move with healthy skepticism.

*****

The Senate is investigating the bailout of Bear Stearns. On one hand, I think that these bailouts are necessary to keep our economy from cratering. But it goes against the conservative lie of "keeping government out of business" and is just ridiculous when we hear McCain and other Republicans talking about the poor and working class families needing to live with their bad decisions. If we are going to bail out the big guys, then we need to have some latitude for people who had less knowledge of their bad decision. As BB and WJ noted in the comments, I have no sympathy for those getting "interest only" loans to get a bigger house, or those speculating in the market. But those who barely qualified for their first house and are working hard to maintain that dream should not be punished for this.

*****

That is enough for this morning. Here is hoping that Friday is a good day for all of you, and that this day sees some rapprochement between the Clinton and Obama camps.

Some music for the mid week

I have previously groused about the grim prospects for new music this year. After last year's Wilco, Arcade Fire, New Pornographers, etc., I was looking at new releases by Kathleen Edwards and, well, nothing else. When I heard that Tift Merritt had a new album, my reaction was "eh." We saw her twice in Austin--the first time, she was electric and captivating; the second time, boring. Her first album was ok, but then really didn't have any legs.

But I heard some good buzz about her new album, and have always thought her voice was one of the more unique and beautiful in the business. When it showed up on Emusic, I downloaded it and it has been in my playlists often of late.

I particularly like this song. Enjoy. And let's hope that Wednesday is better than Tuesday this week. :)

Moral hazard

I think Bitebark will enjoy this column by Robert Reich. He suggests that conservatives claim "moral hazard" to avoid helping individual home owners who made bad decisions (how else will they learn?) yet are more than willing to bail out the large Wall Street firms who clearly knew better.

"It's true that people tend to be less cautious when they know they'll be bailed out. Economists call this 'moral hazard.' But even when they're being reasonably careful, people cannot always assess risks accurately. Many of the mostly poor home buyers who got into trouble did NOT in fact know they couldn't afford the mortgage payments they were signing on to. The banks and mortgage lenders that pulled out all the stops to persuade them to the contrary were in a far better position to know; after all, they had lots of experience at this game. So did the credit-rating agencies that gave these loans solid credit ratings, as did the financiers who bundled them with less-risky loans and sold them to other financial institutions, and the hedge fund managers who quietly tucked them into their portfolios."

Regular people are held to a different standard by conservatives. As Reich points out, Donald Trump can declare bankruptcy casually and protect his own personal fortune. Regular people now have a much harder time declaring bankruptcy. The people who clearly knew they were making bad loans get bailed out, while the sometimes ignorant or unlucky who took the loans are told to learn from their mistakes. I am so tired of conservatives.

Another Conservative for Obama

Andrew J. Bacevich suggests that Obama is a better choice for conservatism than McCain. True conservatism, he suggests, in the way of

a commitment to individual liberty, tempered by the conviction that genuine freedom entails more than simply an absence of restraint;

a belief in limited government, fiscal responsibility, and the rule of law;

veneration for our cultural inheritance combined with a sense of stewardship for Creation;

a reluctance to discard or tamper with traditional social arrangements;

respect for the market as the generator of wealth combined with a wariness of the market’s corrosive impact on humane values;

has fared poorly over the last 20 years:

"The presidency of George W. Bush illustrates the point. In 2001, President Bush took command of a massive, inefficient federal bureaucracy. Since then, he has substantially increased the size of that apparatus, which during his tenure has displayed breathtaking ineptitude both at home and abroad. Over the course of Bush’s two terms in office, federal spending has increased 50 percent to $3 trillion per year. Disregarding any obligation to balance the budget, Bush has allowed the national debt to balloon from $5.7 to $9.4 trillion. Worse, under the guise of keeping Americans “safe,” he has arrogated to the executive branch unprecedented powers, thereby subverting the Constitution. Whatever else may be said about this record of achievement, it does not accord with conservative principles."

Is this how conservatives see race?

I would have ignored this from Pat Buchanan except it sounds a lot like the rant Glen Reynolds linked to the other day about race.

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.

Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ’60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream.

Is this the way conservatives see race? That slavery, segregation, lynching, etc., were simply minor blips to offering great opportunities to African Americans?

Perhaps the best take on the Obama/Wright controversy

From Frank Schaeffer, the son of the late Francis Schaeffer:

"When Senator Obama's preacher thundered about racism and injustice Obama suffered smear-by-association. But when my late father -- Religious Right leader Francis Schaeffer -- denounced America and even called for the violent overthrow of the US government, he was invited to lunch with presidents Ford, Reagan and Bush, Sr.

Every Sunday thousands of right wing white preachers (following in my father's footsteps) rail against America's sins from tens of thousands of pulpits. They tell us that America is complicit in the "murder of the unborn," has become "Sodom" by coddling gays, and that our public schools are sinful places full of evolutionists and sex educators hell-bent on corrupting children. They say, as my dad often did, that we are, "under the judgment of God." They call America evil and warn of immanent destruction. By comparison Obama's minister's shouted "controversial" comments were mild. All he said was that God should damn America for our racism and violence and that no one had ever used the N-word about Hillary Clinton."

Saturday morning

Still recovering from the trip. That drive home is harder.

Love this story about the White House email problems. I am sure you remember that a computer expert called their system "primitive" and said that it was highly likely that data would be lost. Now we find out just how important that was to these people:

"Under pressure to provide details about its computer system, the White House told the congressional committee that it never completed work that began in 2003 on a planned records management and e-mail archiving system. The White House canceled the project in late 2006 and says it is still working on a new version."

I am sure they will have a plan in place for 1-20-09.

****

In other news, the Bush people seem to have rediscovered budget cuts. Spend a trillion dollars on two wars and no bid contracts? No problem. Provide educational opportunities that might allow people to escape poverty? No, sorry. No money for that.

****

Speaking of that war, according to Bush, Mission Accomplished. Again.

As Froomkin put it:

The supposed victory against bin Laden that Bush is celebrating is belied by the fact that al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq before the invasion, that its Iraqi namesake is a mostly home-grown version with limited ties to bin Laden's organization, that the administration's own intelligence has concluded that the war has helped rather than hurt al-Qaeda -- and that bin Laden himself likely remains safely ensconced in Pakistan.

I love how this administration moves the goal posts. "Starting now, things are great and you can't criticize us for the past decisions" has been their mantra. Bush trumpets the surge and ignores the previous four years--the four years in which he stubbornly and churlishly refused to alter the course, fire Rummy, or even acknowledge problems in Iraq--because of his giant ego. In fact, he kept Rumsfeld on precisely because critics wanted him to go. And in doing so, cost how many American and Iraqi lives? And that is supposed to pass for leadership?

****

When Cheney was asked about the American people, he doesn't care what we think and that makes him just like Lincoln.

Raddatz: "Two-thirds of Americans say it's not worth fighting, and they're looking at the value gain versus the cost in American lives, certainly, and Iraqi lives."

Cheney: "So?"

Raddatz: "So -- you don't care what the American people think?"

Cheney: "No, I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls. Think about what would have happened if Abraham Lincoln had paid attention to polls, if they had had polls during the Civil War. He never would have succeeded if he hadn't had a clear objective, a vision for where he wanted to go, and he was willing to withstand the slings and arrows of the political wars in order to get there."

Funny. I thought we were living in a democracy. I also remember this ass being more than willing to tout public support in the polls when it was on his side. Ass.

Back

Back. SOF and I left town last Sunday for a little skiing and cursing (most of the cursing was mine) and some great dinners with a nice group of families who let us in on their tradition. That is cool enough. The skiing was good and I went down a slope as steep as I have ever seen.

But for now, we are trying to unpack and catch up. Our motel promised wireless, but it was down all week. In many ways, I am glad, because it allowed for a more real vacation experience. But I had intended to inform more that we were on the road.

Today was spent driving and catching up on the news. I may need to read more, but it strikes me as extremely odd that Barack Obama is getting criticism for his pastor's criticism of America. Evidently, his pastor subscribes to some of the more ridiculous conspiracy theories about the government and Black America. Yeah. And John McCain's two spiritual advisors think God destroyed New Orleans because of the gays, and that America was founded to destroy Islam.

Oh, and one of his previous buddies from the religious right said that liberals and feminists allowed 9-11. Why is it that white idiots are not a political liability?

I will leave my bright blog friends to answer that. I am off to finish some dinner. Hope you are all well.

This explain much but makes my head asplode

Seriously. Bush now thinks serving his country is romantic. Of course, when he had the opportunity in that war, you know, where he drank and avoided service, he, well, drank and avoided service. But now...

"'I must say, I'm a little envious,' Bush said. 'If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed.'

'It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks,' Bush said."

The term "Chickenhawks" comes to mind. Cowardly, and entitled assholes who now send young men and women into harm's way. Am I the only one who wants to scream now?

Just sent this to the Clinton campaign

I am a loyal Democrat and have sworn that after this last 8 year disaster, I would never vote for a Republican again. John McCain is just more of the same. Until a few days ago, I was just happy with both Democratic candidates and so proud of the history unfolding before us.

But Senator Clinton, if you continue this "scorched earth" campaign against Senator Obama and actually win the nomination, I will stay home. I cannot support this Rovian politics that you seem to have embraced. What ever happened to "I am proud to be up here with Senator Obama?" What happened to that Senator who was running a reasoned and passionate campaign? Now you are playing the race card and playing coy with the Muslim whisper campaign? And suggesting that Senator McCain would be a better President than Obama?

Keith Olbermann is right, Senator, you need to reclaim the reins to your campaign. Unless this is exactly what you want. I can't count how many times I have defended you and your husband to Republican friends. That is at an end as well.

More McCain advisor scandal

McCain's Spiritual Guide: Destroy Islam: "Senator John McCain hailed as a spiritual adviser an Ohio megachurch pastor who has called upon Christians to wage a 'war' against the 'false religion' of Islam with the aim of destroying it."

I keep telling you people. Watch Parsley sometime on TBN and see if you can spot the crazy. It does not surprise me one bit that he is declaring war on Islam. But it does make me sad.

Tuesday rant

It has been a while since I really ranted. Unfortunately, item one is from here in Oklahoma where State rep Sally Kern said that the gays are a bigger threat than terrorism and even compares homosexuality to cancer. Today (or yesterday) she responded to the national uproar over such comments:

"“To put this simply, as a Christian I believe homosexuality is not moral. Obviously, you have the right as an American to choose that lifestyle, but I also have the right to express my views and my fellow Oklahomans have the right to debate these issues."

Absolutely, Sally, you have the right to spew whatever. But when you say things like this, it makes you look bigoted and small. And I suspect that if I were to suggest that religious fundamentalism was a "cancer" you might object. Such as when you and other fundies pass legislation making it against the law for an earth science teacher to count a student wrong for dating the earth at 6000 years? (Will legislation follow that makes me allow students to say that the Constitution was written by God?) Or when they elect a President like George Bush?

****

Oh, Elliot Spitzer, what the hell were you thinking? Not only hiring a prostitute, but evidently arranging for her to cross state lines thus violating the oddly-named Mann act. While the facts appear clear that he did use prostitutes and that is clearly wrong (and illegal) the hypocrisy appears a little troubling. First, the Bush people seem to be investigating Democrats much more than Republicans. And second, the same Republicans who will no doubt be tsking at the immorality of this act (and were apoplectic about Clinton's hummer) gave David Vitter a standing ovation.

Why is it that John McCain is given a pass for the fact that he cheated on his first wife before divorcing her for a much younger and richer woman? Why is it that the family values crowd gave us the first divorced President (Reagan) while it is the Democrats who are supposedly the immoral cheaters?

(Former Republican rep) Mickey Edwards suggests that it is because Newt Gingrich turned politics into a zero-sum game.

(W)hile I was in the House, Newt Gingrich sort of rose in power. And Newt decided that the purpose of the Republican in Congress was not to carry out the fundamental principles that they had originally believed in, but to defeat Democrats. That was all that mattered. And it became how do— it’s always war Democrats versus Republicans, all the time. And when you look at it from that mindset, you have a Republican president — you know, he is not any more the head of a different branch of government. He’s your team captain. He’s your quarterback.

To hell with the rest of the country. Cheney appears to operate by the same rules.

****

I may have posted this before, but have had to really work on my instinct to give the finger to anyone in a Hummer. Something unbelievably obscene about those "vehicles" in today's world. Since they seem to be giving the finger to the planet, our troops, and anyone else on the road, it only seems fitting.

*****

And finally, one of Sully's readers sends in a good reason why today's conservatism is off the rails crazy:

The same people who say the government is incapable of providing basic health care for its citizens are the same who say that it’s capable of torturing people responsibly. Of course that will change in January now won’t it?

The same goes for the death penalty. The incompetent and corrupt justice system is fine when it is executing the poor and minority prisoners. Can't be trusted to address the telecoms, mind you, but can oversee killing. Or torture.

Sigh.

More than Bush's veto that is problematic

As several have noted, Bush and company seem to have succeeded in the word game where torture becomes "harsh interrogation techniques." And that, in some ways, is scarier.

Ok, you guys explain this

Many are writing about Bush's veto of the torture bill. I find it horrific and the last in a long line of shameful acts by this President. But it does raise a question in my mind. Why would he do this? He has ignored Congressional action before. He wrote a signing statement on the first anti-torture bill where he said he would ignore it if he felt it in our national security.

So why not simply sign it into law and then ignore it if he feels like it? Why attach his name to torture as his administration's legacy? Surely his political people have suggested that. Unless, of course, they really believe that the Bush base doesn't mind torture (which I also believe). But that doesn't explain this completely.

Any ideas?

Well, we knew this was coming-Updated

But Bush Vetoed torture bill. We knew he would do it. He has made his stand that his presidency will be known for defending torture.

"'President Bush's veto will be one of the most shameful acts of his presidency,' Senator Edward Kennedy said in a statement Friday. 'Unless Congress overrides the veto, it will go down in history as a flagrant insult to the rule of law and a serious stain on the good name of America in the eyes of the world.'"

And that is a long list--most shameful of this presidency. But it is truly mind boggling that we are here at this place in time.

*****

The Democratic primary is wearing on all of us, I think. I wanted to like Hilary, I really did. But her scorched earth tactics against Obama make that harder and harder. At this point, if she were to win, I would vote for her against McCain--simply because I cannot vote for another Republican until there is some reckoning of the damage the GOP has done to our country. Just look at item one in this post. McCain urged Bush to veto this bill not because he supports torture, but because he knows the GOP base loves torture and wants more. Enough said.

But Hilary is making the case for more of the same. More of the politics of Rove and division. More of the self-centered President. If I ever had any doubts about Obama, they have been erased in the last few weeks. Hilary trying to change the rules of the Democratic primary during the contest, etc.

Obama really is a departure from the past.

*****

I am looking for a new bumper sticker. Actually, I want a magnet. When this president is gone, I don't want to display anything about him on my car. The magnet I found so far is from here and I like their stuff, but the one that comes closest what I want is this one.



A good one, don't get me wrong. But I really just want one that says "1-20-09," or "1-20-09 can't get here soon enough."

****

Update:
As usual, Obsidian Wings has a great take on this:

"The torture debate has two parts that often get conflated – (1) the morality/legality of the act itself, and (2) administrability (i.e., how do we know these powers won’t be abused?). Bush’s supporters tend to ignore the second point altogether, although it’s arguably the strongest – and most Burkean – argument against “coercive interrogation.”"

Publius connects this very well to the death penalty in a way that I have argued before. To support the death penalty you have to believe it is moral in some cases, but that isn't enough. You also have to believe that it can be administered fairly and effectively. Most people stop with the first question and never bother to check if it is implemented correctly. What is more, they don't seem to care. The correlation to torture is telling. And, I might add, that logical fallacy seems to underscore a great many failed policies, from supply side economics to abstinence only. People stop with the theoretical and then never even check to see if they actually work. And academics are divorced from the real world?

Troubling

Some of our top Iraq contracting firms have found ways to avoid paying US Taxes. That's right, we pay for their services, but they don't pay taxes.

Katha Pollitt rips Charlotte Allen's "women are dumb" essay

And it is worth reading. Several great lines, but here are couple:

"Women even read fiction by men and about men, further evidence of their imaginative powers -- while men, if they do pick up a novel, make sure it's estrogen-free. Who's really the dim bulb, the woman who doesn't see the beauty of 'Grand Theft Auto,' or the man who thinks Tom Clancy is a great writer?"

and this:

But I suspect that Allen, who works for the right-wing anti-feminist Independent Women's Forum, is just annoyed that so many educated middle-class women are cultural, social and political moderates and liberals. Democrats, in other words.

. . . Hillary Clinton running for president instead of spending the rest of her life apologizing for her marriage -- it does indeed make a picture. But it isn't one of women's unique "stupidity" -- raise your hand if you think Hillary Clinton has a lower I.Q. than George W. Bush. What bothers Allen about this picture is that these women reject, with every fiber of their latte-loving beings, the abstinence-only, father-knows-best, slut-shaming crabbed misogyny of the Republican right.

Heh.

Great post on migraines

As everyone here knows, Wilco and Jeff Tweedy are among my favorites. One reason, I think, is that Tweedy himself certainly appears to be an interesting and complex person. If you rent the dvd Sunken Treasure not only do you hear some great acoustic guitar work, but you get a glimpse into his personality.

I knew he had a problem with prescription drugs and knew that A Ghost is Born came out of much of that experience (just about my favorite song "Handshake Drugs" comes from that album) but didn't know much behind that. In this interesting NYT blog post, Tweedy explains his battle with migraines and panic attacks. Not only does it explain some of the songs on that album (read the post) but it is a great example of introspection and brutal self-honesty.

A glimpse at wingnuttery

Josh has a great video collection of the idiot Hagee and his new BFF (John McCain). My favorite is his explanation of hurricanes and Katrina as timed to destroy a gay pride parade. Seriously. God, evidently, is such a bad shot that he had to destroy much of the state and even parts of Mississippi--to say nothing of the bulk of New Orleans--just to stop a gay pride parade. And evidently, God has it in mostly for the poor people of NOLA. Because they were the gayest?


****

And then Charlotte Allen answers questions about her "column." She does little to dispel the idea that she is batshit crazy. And hey, all the batshit crazy wingnuts like Katrina. No wonder they didn't punish Bush for his horrible response. My favorite is when she uses the fact that many poor people have been unable to return to New Orleans as proof that the hurricane was good at breaking their dependency on welfare. Gah.

Primary wildness

A month ago this would not have surprised me at all. Actually, a month ago, Hilary was holding an 18 point lead in Ohio and a large lead in Texas as well. So in that terms, Obama did very well, and we are still waiting to see how the delegate count works out. Some I read suggest that it won't change the delegate math much at all.

Also significant (possibly) was Fathead Limbaugh calling on Republicans to go vote for Hilary in Ohio. Be interesting to see how many dittoheads there still are out there. I don't think any of them read this blog, but who knows?

Oh, and finally, the fake candidate
dropped out.

McCain's good buddy Hagee

Lengthy kos diary on the ramblings and craziness that is John Hagee. Many miss that his brand of Zionism masks anti-semitism--they like Jews, but only as converted to Christianity or foils for the end times. Make no mistake about it, Hagee is one messed up dude. The fact that the GOP cuddles up to him is sickening for the party and for our country.

Dumbest column ever?

Perhaps, and it isn't even written by Bill Kristol or plagiarized by a White House staffer. Instead, it is an obnoxious anti-feminist screed written by an anti-feminist woman who argues that women swooning over Obama is proof that women, in general, are not as bright as men.

"I am perfectly willing to admit that I myself am a classic case of female mental deficiencies. I can't add 2 and 2 (well, I can, but then what?). I don't even know how many pairs of shoes I own.

And then gets worse:

"So I don't understand why more women don't relax, enjoy the innate abilities most of us possess (as well as the ones fewer of us possess) and revel in the things most important to life at which nearly all of us excel: tenderness toward children and men and the weak and the ability to make a house a home. (Even I, who inherited my interior-decorating skills from my Bronx Irish paternal grandmother, whose idea of upgrading the living-room sofa was to throw a blanket over it, can make a house a home.) Then we could shriek and swoon and gossip and read chick lit to our hearts' content and not mind the fact that way down deep, we are . . . kind of dim.'"

Well, I am glad she admits she isn't that bright, but I am deeply saddened that she thinks it is because she is female.

Sunday morning Music

This week we will have one of the few really anticipated album releases of this year (for this household, anyway) when Kathleen Edwards releases her third album--Asking for Flowers. Edwards was one of our favorite acts at the last ACL festival and her first two albums are regulars in my playlists. Her first album (Failer) was just stunning, and I really thought her sophomore (Back to Me) was even stronger. Amazing voice and solid song writing. Here is a video off that second album, and another about this most recent album.

So, Tuesday morning, I will be at the record store buying this cd.

****

Wilco played on SNL last night. It was kind of cool, though I thought they were not nearly as good as normal. But still better than the average fare. Speaking of that, the band played 5 nights in Chicago recently which must have been amazing. See for yourself (if interested) as you can download mp3s from this run of shows. I have four of the nights in my Itunes right now--7 hours of wilco live. See you in 8 hours....

How we got the "compassionate conservative"

Or at least one reason. A compelling examination of the press coverage of Bush and Gore.

Saturday morning news

From the west coast comes this story about a Quaker teacher fired for altering her loyalty oath and is about as dumb as it gets. This woman actually read her loyalty oath, and thoughtfully signed it as an honest reflection of her values. But to do so, she inserted "non-violently" before "support and defend (the state and US constitution) and "affirm" instead of "swear."

Sure glad the loyalty oath people caught her. I feel safer already.

****

While I was at the San Francisco paper, this great column on the challenges facing the GOP if Obama is the Democratic challenger. Because, as he notes, the name calling (Obama's middle name) is too easy and will surely inflame the denizens of "Bush's 'Merka" into "loading up the bunker with Ding-Dongs and Coors just in case the Muslim radicals take over."

No, the problem for GOP strategists is not how to inflame the troglodytic, Limbaugh/Coulter-grade sects of the party who, assuming Obama goes the distance, are already hugely terrified of the notion of a black liberal president, given how he'll surely be a slippery slope straight to gay marriage and rampant lesbianism in schools and hourly shriekings to Allah as everyone's forced to give up their guns and drive a hybrid moped to the tofu store.

The true difficulty facing the GOP's henchmen in the coming months will be how to get those who are just a tiny bit smarter, calmer, less easily swayed, those on the right who might actually be a bit impressed and charmed by Obama's obvious intelligence and oratory power, to hate him, fear him, find his genuinely moving brand of hope and inspiration to be suspicious and problematic and even deeply dangerous.

It won't be easy. Because at the same time, they must make their own unlikely candidate, a feisty but fuzzy 71-year-old war hawk whose entire campaign is apparently now being fueled by a giant hunk of Cold War phlegm, the nauseating notion that not only is a perpetual state of war and aggression desirable for America, but is actually essential to a healthy and functioning nation, they must make John McCain's musty, patriarchal brand of regurgitated Republicanism seem fresh and visionary and not horribly regressive and embarrassing.

*****

More on Hagee. Earthquakes are God's loudspeaker and he shouts at the gays and the liberals. Hear that, Cali-liberal-fornia?

So why doesn't God just "shout" at Iran and take care of this little problem?

Hilzoy notes that the comparison is not actually Farakhan,

it's the flap over Donnie McClurkin, the gospel singer who " has detailed his struggle with gay tendencies and vowed to battle "the curse of homosexuality,"", and who was invited to participate in some Obama events in South Carolina. The comparison is instructive.

And in stark contrast, Obama denounced the homophobia and actually did so in an African American church. To keep up, McCain would have to go to Hagee's Corporation church and preach tolerance toward Catholics and Muslims. Don't hold your breath.

Why is this outrageous now?--updated

Perhaps the media is picking up on the whole McCain/Hagee story, after Bill Donohoe raised a fuss about Hagee's open hatred of Catholics. What is interesting to me is that Hagee is hardly new to the political scenery. He was a prominent Bush supporter. Why did Donohoe not object then?

Are we seeing a reemergence of the conservative Catholic/conservative Evangelical split that seemed to disappear under Bush?

Update: NPR Blog has the McCain story.

And this from Greenwald's post about McCain's tepid "I don't agree with everything, just that he likes me" response:

As has been noted many times, most recently today by Matt Yglesias, Hagee's so-called "commitment to Israel" actually means that he wants Israel united so that the Rapture can happen and all Jews, including Israelis, will be slaughtered and sent to hell. And the "spiritual leadership" which McCain heralds consists of calling the Catholic Church the "Mother Whore" and a "cult" and arguing that Hurricane Katrina, which resulted in the devastation of tens of thousands of lives, was God's punishment against New Orleans because it scheduled a gay pride parade that week.
The fact that McCain thinks he can get away with openly embracing one of the most influential and hateful bigots in the country is a reflection of the profound media double standard he knows favors and protects him. Just imagine if Obama had issued a statement similar to McCain's with regard to Farrakhan: "I am very proud of Minister Louis Farrakhan's spiritual leadership to thousands of people" and "don't have to agree with everyone who endorses my candidacy. I'm still 'honored" to have his support."

As it is, Obama -- who never appeared on a stage with Farrakhan or sought or praised his support -- was attacked by the Jamie Kirchicks of the world even though he denounced Farrakhan's views and rejected his support. Yet here is McCain, refusing to denounce anything about Hagee, instead openly embracing him and expressing "honor" at receiving the endorsement, and there is . . . . almost nothing. For those in the media who sputtered on about the nonexistent Obama/Farrakhan matter -- and even for those who didn't -- how can you possibly justify not covering all of the aspects of this odious McCain/Hagee association?

Sullivan adds:

"There really are double standards for white fundamentalists, aren't there?"

Yes, for all their victimology about how Hollywood and the media are so anti-Christian, they are treated with kid gloves so often. Hagee's views are horrendous and oddly similar to Iran's nutjob leader. But one is derided while the other gets to meet with our own President.

Oh good God!

The incompetence of this administration simply blows my mind. Remember the deputy secretary of state who oversaw abstinence and anti-prostitution programs being caught calling a prostitute? Well, now, we have Bush's "chief liaison to religious groups" admitting to plagiarizing a column he wrote for his hometown paper, the Fort Wayne (Ind.) News-Sentinel and several other columns are showing up with other people's words. Seriously. It is almost as if these people go out of their way to be incompetent and unethical.

Speaking of that, Froomkin has the transcript of a very funny bit from the Daily Show that is almost too close to the truth to be funny.

"The Daily Show's 'senior White House correspondent' John Oliver, tells Stewart: 'President Bush has done good in Africa. I did just say good there, didn't I?'

Stewart: 'You did say good.'

Oliver: 'I kept saying 'bad' in rehearsal. It's force of habit, I suppose.'

Stewart: 'It's hard for you to accept that the president has done something admirable.'

Oliver: 'Well, it's just -- what's his angle? He's not running for reelection. There's no ulterior military objective. He's got no chance of becoming King of Africa. What the hell is going on?'

Stewart: 'Well, maybe he's just trying to do something good in a difficult part of the world.'

Oliver: 'No! No! No! That makes it worse. Over the past seven excruciating years, I've come to terms with the president being incompetent. The fact that we now know he's been capable of doing good all along, and has simply chosen not to -- that really burns.'"

When the Media turns on Barack--and they will

Eric Boehlert lists the current meme's coming from the right about Obama

1) That both Obama's might not be patriotic enough.

2) (This one is new) Obama is effeminate?

Meanwhile, in Sunday's New York Times, Obama was twice described as being overly effeminate: He's an "elusive starlet" who prefers "playing the tease," while espousing a "feminine management style." Compare that to the media's portrayal of Republican Sen. John McCain as sort of a man's man, and it's obvious where those competing narratives are headed.

3) That Obama is a self-centered snob who thinks he is better than the rest of us. See the Kingston attack on the flag lapel, or anything Bill Kristol has written on that. Or:

"He is the brilliant young black man as American dream," wrote Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan, whose hatred of Hillary Clinton is limitless. But with the Clinton campaign now wounded and Obama grabbing the inside track on the nomination, Noonan quickly flip-flopped. In her February 22 column, she suggested the Obamas are self-centered "snobs" who can't relate to "normal Americans."

4) Obama might be a communist. Seriously?

I'm not referring to the truly nutty stuff that the radical right is starting to churn out, like National Review's Lisa Schiffren, who argued, with zero proof, that Obama's mixed-race parents had communist leanings because back when they got married, the only reason black and white people married was because they were communists. Or Accuracy In Media's Cliff Kincaid and his retro Red Scare column about how "Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA."

5) and most common--that Obama is some kind of cult-leader. Sigh.

CNN's Carol Costello suggested that the audience response at an Obama rally represented "a scene some increasingly find not inspirational, but 'creepy,' " while on-screen the text read "OBAMA-MANIA BACKLASH" and "PASSION 'CULT-LIKE' TO SOME."

The Los Angeles Times' Joel Stein referred to "the Cult of Obama," while mocking the campaign as "Obamaphilia" and his supporters as "Obamaphiles." (If Obama supporters were wondering what it felt like to be openly derided by the mainstream media, now they know.)

Time's Joe Klein complained, "There was something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism." The Times' Brooks joked that Obama's supporters would soon be "selling flowers at airports and arranging mass weddings."

And most egregiously, ABC's Jake Tapper made fun of the "Helter-Skelter cult-ish qualities" of Obama's supporters. That's right, the Charles Manson-led Helter Skelter cult that slaughtered five adults during the summer of 1969, and the same cult that believed murderous blacks would soon stage a bloody revolution and try to take over America. That's who Tapper compared Obama's base to. Ha-ha. Get it?

Why is the media so bad? That is a different question--one we have grappled with here some. Partly it has to do with the celebrity of the modern media. Tim Russert makes money off his reputation as a tough interviewer--not because he is dedicated (ala Ted Koppel) to journalistic excellence. Most of these people on the TeeVee wouldn't be there except they look good on camera and can read a teleprompter. And Boehlert points to one of the biggest problems in the media today:

Why? Because when McCain and the entire GOP establishment play the liberal media bias card and complain that the press is going too easy on the Democrat, the press will listen.

History shows us that the press panics when faced with the charge of liberal media bias, especially during a campaign year.

It is very true.

Bush says he is a lot like Putin

Well, kind of:

"As you know, Putin's a straightforward, pretty tough character when it comes to his interests. Well, so am I."

But even in context it makes the man look as dumb as a bag of hammers.




*****

In the comments of the last post, Leighton pointed out the obvious--that John "Sidney" McCain is a "closet Australian." I am not sure how I missed it before. Nearly endorsed by Australia's former Prime Minister, Alexander Downer, and liked by Australian conservatives everywhere, and seen here auditioning for "Crocodile Dundee 3"


It was only a matter of time before we put the pieces together. It is now clear that if we elect McCain President, it will only be a matter of time before the NFL is replaced with Australian-rules Football, Budweiser is replaced by Fosters (ok, that is an improvement) and "Waltzing Matilda" becomes our national anthem. Be afraid--be very afraid.

*****

The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan: "America once fought to end torture. Now we fight to euphemize it. This is a classic WWII poster:"



****

And finally, a nice little thank you to the feminists of the past who have created a world where young women can aim for any profession. And I agree.

Yeah, except Obama renounced (or rejected, whatever) his radical minister

As Glenn Greenwald points out, Some hateful, radical ministers -- white evangelicals -- are acceptable. I used to watch Hagee for some kind of sick entertainment. Watching him and Parsley feed off the "sick and the old," as Bono called it, and build a Corporate Church is a sickening sight. Watching them encourage bigotry towards gays and Muslims--denigrate feminists and liberals--all in the name of their version of God is horrifying. Watching some idiot like Hagee cheering for Armageddon and urging our President to bomb Iran is just stupefying.

Watching John McCain embrace both as "spiritual advisors" is enough to make you start drinking at 9 in the morning. If Obama had embraced Farakhan and took his endorsement gladly, he would be correctly pilloried in the press. McCain can sidle up to these charlatans and the MSM is silent.

Tony is equally horrified and is asking for some "Pepto for the soul." I hate to tell you this, Tony, (because, of course, you already know this) but you aren't going to find any of that in the GOP (a wholly owned subsidiary of the worst evangelical Christianity can produce) today.

Obama needs to reject more--Jon Swift has a list

Just brilliant as usual. My personal favorite:

Incidentally, the "Yes We Can" video is directed by Jesse Dylan, whose father Bob Dylan wrote "Subterranean Homesick Blues," which included the lyric "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows," which is where the violent, radical, left-wing group the Weather Underground got its name. And this is not Obama's only association with the 1960s terrorist organization. Obama once went to a party at the home of Bill Ayers, who was once a member of the Weather Underground and is now a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Does Obama endorse the Weather Underground's plot to foment a violent overthrow of the U.S. government? And how does Obama feel about Dylan's betraying thousands of very sincere fans of folk music by going electric? Why didn't Tim Russert ask him about that?

****

Speaking of brilliant, you should catch a couple of vids going around. First is Will Farrell's exit from Letterman. Before you click over there, be warned, the second clip is a long and boring clip with Meredith Vieira from the Today Show. It is not funny. But the first one is.

Some of you may have seen the Chris Crocker's "leave Britney alone" video. I can't watch the entire thing, but it is a sobbing plea to leave Britney Spears alone (performance art, not a real plea). But Louis Black's sobbing "Leave Mike Huckabee alone" is hilarious.

Hagee supports McCain--What a maverick!--updated

NPR: McCain Picks Up Important Conservative Endorsement: "NPR's Scott Horsley reports that McCain won the support yesterday of Texas evangelist John Hagee. Hagee leads a megachurch in San Antonio, and founded the organization Christians United for Israel.

Hagee is a leader in the Christian Zionist movement, who predicted a showdown between Israel and Iran in his 2006 book Jerusalem Countdown."

Updated
Sarah Posner has more:

"Even though Hagee hosted Mike Huckabee for a guest sermon at his church last December, his support for McCain is not a huge surprise. Last year, Hagee and McCain had a private breakfast in San Antonio after which Hagee declared McCain 'solidly pro-Israel', which, in CUFI parlance, is code for opposition to a two-state solution. Hagee contributed $1,000 to McCain's campaign (although he also later contributed to Huckabee's as well.)

This past summer, McCain appeared at CUFI's annual summit, where he 'joked' about how hard it is to do God's work in the city of Satan. (He repeated a similar line earlier this week at a town hall event in Cincinnati at which McCain 'spiritual guide' Rod Parsley shared the stage.) While McCain might be able to laugh this off as a little quip about the foibles of Washington, to followers of Hagee and Parsley, 'spiritual warfare' is a very real part of everyday life, in which they, as godly people, do battle with Satanic forces. When talking about CUFI, though, talking about battles is really no joking matter, since Hagee has been beating the drum for war with Iran -- which he believes will result in the world-ending battle at Armageddon -- for over two years."

From last year

But more relevant than ever:

"Russert passes for a 'tough' interviewer by adopting a confrontational pose rather than asking genuinely challenging questions. Which is why he's a terrible moderator for our presidential debates."

Few news items

The guy who warmed up John McCain's crowd with repeated questionable attacks on Obama is now furious and says that McCain threw him under the Straight Talk Express. Which is funny. And he also says that anyone who has a problem with his repeated emphasizing of Obama's middle name--those people are the racists.

****

Without comment:

After promising last year to search its computers for tens of thousands of e-mails sent by White House officials, the Republican National Committee has informed a House committee that it no longer plans to retrieve the communications by restoring computer backup tapes, the panel's chairman said yesterday.

****

Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, the current director of the Defense Intelligence Agency says that waterboarding is a violation of international law.

The scum line up to endorse McCain?

After last night's Russert attack on Obama about Farakhan, the blogosphere was alive with discussion--did Obama distance himself enough? Why not be more forceful? Why was Hilary so annoying about that? But at least Obama denounced and rejected Farakhan and has done so before.

Isn't Rod Parsley cut from the same cloth? And in this case, McCain not only doesn't distance himself, he embraces the nut:

"Yesterday at a rally in Cincinnati, Ohio, John McCain was flanked by Rod Parsley, who called the candidate 'strong, true, consistent conservative,' according to the Columbus Dispatch. McCain referred to Parsley, who preaches the same word of faith doctrine as the televangelists under investigation by McCain's fellow Republican Senator Charles Grassley, a 'spiritual guide.'"

Sully and TPM live blog the debate

Sully

Talking Points Memo: by Joshua Micah Marshall | Live Debate Blogging (There Will Be Blood Edition)

Check out their different responses to the Farrakhan question. And I so agree with Josh--sweet jesus, I hate Tim Russert. I don't think there is a more over-rated interviewer on Television.

A good day

Not terribly productive with the grading, mind you, but a good day. Had a nice lunch with SOF at our favorite place. (Yes, CIL, THAT place).

Then I had a delightful coffee with my good friend JS. We have been meaning to have this coffee for sometime and finally pulled it off. I am afraid I talked his ear off, but thoroughly enjoyed the good coffee, company, and conversation. That is hard to beat.

Then in the midst of all the bad news around the country--right wing idiots who are waiting to attack Obama--and a President who sends out his National Security people to lie to the American people--comes this story about the New York Philharmonic playing in North Korea:

Maazel wasn't the only New Yorker moved by the event. The Philharmonic's principal bassist, John Deak, said when the musicians started leaving the stage, the North Koreans started waving at them.

"Half of the orchestra burst into tears, including myself and we started waving back at them and suddenly there was this kind of artistic bond that is just a miracle. I'm not going to make any statements about what's going to change or everything. Things happen slowly. But I do know that the most profound connection was made with the Korean people tonight."

I like to think that music is good for people. Let's hope this translates into even more good.

I wonder why the GOP is afraid of appearing sexist or racist?

GOP fears charges of racism, sexism - David Paul Kuhn - Politico.com: "The Republican National Committee has commissioned polling and focus groups to determine the boundaries of attacking a minority or female candidate, according to people involved."

Obama calls Repubs on their faux patriotism

And about time:

"About not wearing an American flag lapel pin, Obama said Republicans have no lock on patriotism.

'A party that presided over a war in which our troops did not get the body armor they needed, or were sending troops over who were untrained because of poor planning, or are not fulfilling the veterans' benefits that these troops need when they come home, or are undermining our Constitution with warrantless wiretaps that are unnecessary?"

Falling randomly

I was looking for "Falling Slowly"

Hansard and Irglova win Oscar for best song

And it really is a great song. Even better in the film.

Conservative support for the troops

In a conversation with a very conservative person, I questioned why liberals were un-American when they questioned the military leadership or administration of the war, but conservatives could maintain the pro-military stance even when they cut taxes and failed to provide the troops what they needed. He responded that the troops want to be taken care of, for sure, but what they want more is to win and for people not to question that.

I think I sighed when I read that. And when I read how the right responded to Obama's story about soldiers finding it easier to get more ammo from the Taliban than through their own channels, I was reminded of that. (A friend of mine confirmed that this happened routinely in country, btw.) The right simply denied the story, and then of course heaped criticism on the left. ABC's Jake Tapper said what a lot of us think:

"I might suggest those on the blogosphere upset about this story would be better suited directing their ire at those responsible for this problem, which is certainly not new. That is, if they actually care about the men and women bravely serving our country at home and abroad."

This morning, I read this unbelievably gripping report on the counter-insurgency efforts and what life is like for these men and women--and I feel like weeping. They confirm (indirectly) what Obama's Captain reported. These guys are fighting the Taliban under stop-loss and while taking anti-depressants. When you consider how different this could be if the resources tied up in Iraq could have been focussed here... When you consider how we have to have tax cuts while these guys have trouble getting the right size boots and enough ammo....

Those "support the troops" bumper stickers don't make up for this.

Sighing doesn't do it justice.

Ack, I have been tagged

Kevin tagged me with this blog thingy:

If you accept (and I know you will) you must:

1. Pick up the nearest book (of at least 123 pages).
2. Open the book to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five other people."

Ok, here goes. The book is Richard White's It's Your Misfortune and None of My Own.

Fremont's success and his rise to prominence were aided by his advantageous marriage to jessie Benton, the daughter of Senator Thomas Hart Benton of Missouri. In the 1840s Senator Benton helped Fremont gain a virtual carte blanche in the West to serve science and American expansion while engaging in endless self-promotion. Fremont's explorations enabled him to achieve a prominence that eventually brought him the 1856 Republican nomination for the Presidency. Fremont's expeditions during the 1840s covered a variety of objectives.

Heh.

Ok. I tag Anglican, Small Glimpses, Okie Okasan, Bitebark, and Two-Headed Blog.

Hey, it is Saturday

And Bush's approval rating last week was at 19%. Wow. That doesn't stop him from ruling as if he had a 19% disapproval rating instead. After all, he really doesn't care what we think. He just wants us to be afraid. And we also learned, of course, that American Telecommunication firms are patriotic, but not if it causes them any problems. If they are going to have to hire lawyers when they break the law for our President, then they would rather the terrorists win.

Sigh.

And I am afraid that his heir apparent is just another chip off the old GOP block. Couple of things come out of that NYT piece. It appears to be a rather weak journalistic effort, but as I said at the time, the issue is not really whether he had sex with Vicki Iseman, but whether McCain the Reformer was actually a fraud. And that is what we are learning. McCain is ass-deep in lobbyists and lied about that. (If he were Bill Clinton he would have already been impeached.) And not only that, but one of his top advisors:

Of all the lobbyists involved in the McCain campaign, the most prominent is Black...even as Black provides a private voice and a public face for McCain, he also leads his lobbying firm, which offers corporate interests and foreign governments the promise of access to the most powerful lawmakers. Some of those companies have interests before the Senate and, in particular, the Commerce Committee, of which McCain is a member.
Black said he does a lot of his work by telephone from McCain's Straight Talk Express bus.

Interestingly enough, the right is downplaying the possibility of an affair, but also downplaying its importance. I still remember the mantra about Clinton "If he can't be faithful to his wife, he can't be faithful to us."

Whatever. As I have said repeatedly. I warn any of my conservative colleagues that after this last 8 years, they should avoid lecturing me on morality. Ever.

*****

Air Force Col. Morris Davis--this one:

Davis also repeats to the AP what he told The Nation: that William Haynes, the Pentagon official currently overseeing the tribunals, had told Davis in 2005 that "We can't have acquittals, we've got to have convictions."

Will appear as a witness for the defense at Gitmo. Fascinating that some very moral and gung-ho people have reached their limit with the "justice" that Bush and Cheney built.

*****

I missed this during the debate, but Obama told a story about an Army Captain in Afghanistan who said it was easier to get ammo from the Taliban than through Army channels. Evidently, the right has jumped out of their skin, even though sources have confirmed it. Right wingers still don't believe it. I asked someone who was there and he confirmed that was more than believable.

Sigh.

*****

In music news, I am sad to learn that No Depression magazine is done. I completely understand their situation, but what a great magazine. I am sorry to see it go.

Just as logical as Abstinence Only programs

From Feministing:

"ABSTINENCE-ONLY DRIVER'S ED.
BY SUZANNE KLEID
- - - -

Thanks for making it out on a rainy Saturday, kids. Slippery out there, huh? Let's get started. We're gonna have some fun today!

Car accidents are a leading cause of death for teenagers. The school board and your elected representatives want to make sure that you and your families are spared from such a tragedy, which is why the money for driver's ed was eliminated from the budget. Whereas last year I was teaching your older siblings how to shift and brake and three-point-turn during a six-week course, it has since been decreed that I actually need just one afternoon to tell you the only piece of safety information I'm permitted by law to share:

The ONLY 100 percent effective method for avoiding car accidents is to ABSTAIN from driving until marriage."

Fox News: Who are they kidding?

This was a poll question from Faux News:

"Who is Usama Rooting For?

I would think that whoever wrote that poll would feel shame and would want to punch themselves in the face. But I know that isn't true. What morons.

Just more of what we already know

Froomkin grabs several stories that deserve a little more disgust. First is the sleaze that is Karl Rove--who 60 Minutes will suggest on Sunday had been working for years to take down former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. This time, asking for illicit photos of an affair. Because Karl Rove is a scum bag. The same one continually hired and supported by our President Jesus.

Sigh.

On FISA, Bush is simply ratcheting things up:

Q: "On FISA -- I understand your position, but what I'm unclear about is whether you're doing something to break the deadlock? Do you see yourself engaging with the other side, compromising? Or where do we go from here?"

Bush: "How do you compromise on something like granting liability for a telecommunications company? You can't. If we do not give liability protection to those who are helping us, they won't help us. And if they don't help us, there will be no program. And if there's no program, America is more vulnerable.

The program is critical to keeping us safe, but he will let it lapse rather than expose the Telecoms. You tell me, who is he protecting? It sure as hell isn't me.

****

And this continual reminder that we are a torture nation:

Torture Watch
Dahlia Lithwick, writing in Slate, laments the desensitizing of the American people to government-sanctioned abuse of detainees -- but sees a possible antidote.

"Last week, a team of faculty and students from Seton Hall Law School -- the folks who've worked tirelessly for years to document the government's best evidence against the Guantanamo prisoners -- released a new report suggesting that the government has recorded all of the interrogations at Guantanamo. Using documents prepared by the government and obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, the team established that all of the 24,000 interrogations conducted at the camp since 2002 were taped. This jibes with reports from the detainees themselves, who came forward to dispute CIA Director Michael Hayden's claim last winter that the videotaping had been halted in 2002. . . .

"According to the Seton Hall report, many of these interrogations were clearly abusive. One government document reports that tapes would reflect detainee treatment so violent as to 'shake the camera in the interrogation room' and 'cause severe internal injury.' Another report depicts an interrogator 'positioning herself between a detainee and the camera in order to block her actions from view.'

"It's not clear anymore that the Bush administration has a uniform definition of torture. The new view seems to be that torture is what the president says it is, at the moment he must decide whether to torture. But if Americans could see the tapes of water-boarding and abusive interrogations while they still have the ability to be horrified, they may feel differently. The Seton Hall report quotes a former senior CIA official saying: '[I]t's a qualitatively different thing--seeing it versus reading about it.' That qualitative difference seems to have a brief shelf life. . . .

"If there really are thousands of hours of videotaped interrogations at Guantanamo, we should be clamoring to see them now, while they might still be able to horrify us. John Yoo and Steven Bradbury think that an interrogation method is torture only if it produces irrevocable damage. But long after the torture tapes are forgotten, what may be irrevocably damaged is our capacity for outrage."

Web apps that waste time

In the previous post, you see my "signature." Here is how I did it.

McCain and special interests

Talking Points Memo: by Joshua Micah Marshall | Oops ...

Rigged Trials at Gitmo

Rigged Trials at Gitmo: "'[Haynes] said these trials will be the Nuremberg of our time,' recalled Davis, referring to the Nazi tribunals in 1945, considered the model of procedural rights in the prosecution of war crimes. In response, Davis said he noted that at Nuremberg there had been some acquittals, which had lent great credibility to the proceedings.

'I said to him that if we come up short and there are some acquittals in our cases, it will at least validate the process,' Davis continued. 'At which point, [Haynes's] eyes got wide and he said, 'Wait a minute, we can't have acquittals. If we've been holding these guys for so long, how can we explain letting them get off? We can't have acquittals. We've got to have convictions.''"

This is the problem with lobbyists

In defense of the New York Times' takedown of John McCain. - By Jack Shafer - Slate Magazine. Shafer points out that McCain likes to bash the lobbyists as a political issue, but then surrounds himself with them.

Scores of lobbyists were invited to the Willard Hotel to feed his campaign treasury, but, as the paper reports, "McCain himself skipped the event, an act he later called 'cowardly.' " Here, McCain has it three ways: He throws the event, he skips it, he criticizes himself for not attending it. Will the real John McCain please stand up?

Yes, how is this "straight talk?"

And so on. The Times reports that the enemy of special interests, money in politics, earmarks, and lobbyists has staffed his presidential campaign with lobbyists and recently hired a lobbyist to run his Senate office. That particular lobbyist, Mark Buse, the paper reports, came to McCain's staff through the revolving door. Before he was a telecommunication industry lobbyist, Buse was the director of McCain's commerce committee staff.

When critics question McCain's integrity, his allies, such as McCain adviser and lobbyist Charles Black, say the man is beyond reproach. "Unless he gives you special treatment or takes legislative action against his own views, I don't think his personal and social relationships matter," Black told the Times.

This, of course, is hooey. What the lobbyist craves above all is access, and anything that provides that edge is coveted. In many cases, both lobbyists and their clients know the mission to change the mind of a member of Congress is hopeless. Often the point of the exercise is to be seen and heard by the member. If the lobbyist does not carry the day with the member, the client counts on the "relationship" to pay off in the next visit or the visit after that or the visit after that.

Getting inside the "red zone," to steal a metaphor from Washington Post reporter Jeffrey H. Birnbaum's feature about the tourism industry's recent lobbying efforts, is almost as good as a touchdown. Corruption, if that's the right word for it, arrives on the installment plan as a lobbyist moves closer and closer to a member.

Personally, I don't care about the affair or non-affair. As many have noted, it is rather ridiculous for McCain's wife to posture about "he would never do that to our family" after he did exactly that to his first wife. But the real issue is about allowing lobbyists access beyond the pale and how that access distorts the political process.

Cool recipe web app

I am just trying it now, but it allows you to create a shopping list from the recipe you are using, and I think allows you to post your own.

In defense of Michelle Obama

From my good friend Ubub comes this spectacular essay on the difference between love of country and pride in our country. Because, as this writer points out, one is not the same as the other. We love people around us who do things we are not proud of. And at the same time, there is much to be proud of in our country's history. Our Constitution. Our attempt to make humans equal before the law. Our ability to end slavery and segregation. Our efforts around the world helping disaster victims and the poor.

I take no pride in the illegal expulsion of the Cherokees from the eastern United States, in defiance of the Supreme Court and all human decency, though I do feel some pride in those who lined the road as theypassed and gave the Trail of Tears its name with their weeping. Where is the reason for pride in the near extermination of the bison as a means of starving the Lakota into submission? Unlike Michelle Malkin, I feel no pride in the internment of Japanese Americans, nor do I feel proud of the witchhunts of the First World War and the Cold War.

In my own time as a voting adult, I took no pride at our retreat from ending poverty, from our loss of will to protect the environment and the subordination of civil rights to narrow partisan advantage in the 1980s I took no pride in our willingness to coddle and enable the most fiendish blood-soaked dictatorships if they proclaimed themselves anti-Soviet.

In the 90s, I watched in angry, embarrassed shame as our political system ran amok. Where Barbara Jordan had expressed sorrowful indignation in impeaching a president for actively subverting the Constitution, I watched heedless hacks gleefully impeach another president for lying about a blowjob. (And actually, I didn't exactly crack out the red ink for my pride diary the day that lie under oath was admitted either.)

And today, I take no pride in in elections won through fear-mongering, no bid contracts to contributors and a great city still in ruins years after the storm.

And above all, today, here and now, I take no pride Abu Gharib or in an unjust war launched on a tide of fear. I feel no pride in Guantanamo, in the use of torture or in the convening of kangaroo courts so unjust that the chief judge and even the chief prosecutor have rebelled against them. And while I do not flinch from the ugly fact that war is sometimes necessary, unlike far too many on the right, I take no pride in body counts.

Michelle Obama speaks for many of us, I think, in that we want to be proud of the country we love. It is very hard in Bush land. But we want something better. Those who attack Michelle seem to prize the bumper sticker patriotism that is, quite frankly, not only the "last refuge of a scoundrel," but the easiest goddamn thing in the world. Flag waving is easy. Actual patriotism--which includes accountability and integrity--is much harder.

McCain's bad week

I really am probably like a lot of people in not knowing what to think about the NYT's story on McCain's relationship with a lobbyist in 2000. Josh Marshall suggests that there must be more to the story than is revealed in the NYT. I don't know. I read the Times piece and it is very speculative. As many have noted, the real issue is not the supposed sexual relationship, but the lobbyist angle. I think we will learn more in the next few days.

If you are interested in it, this New Republic article is a really interesting story about the story.

O'Reilly uses the "l" word

Is this racism? Bill O'Reilly responding to a caller who said that Michelle Obama is an angry "militant woman" actually tries to suggest that we need to find the facts. He says that he has some sympathy for Mrs. Obama and Bill Clinton in that every time they turn around, they are challenged by someone who is just waiting for them to say the wrong thing. Then he says this:

"That's wrong. And I don't want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there's evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels. If that's how she really feels -- that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, whatever -- then that's legit. We'll track it down."

I think it is very possible that O'Reilly just didn't think about how racist that sounds. "Lynch" has become a part of the language in a vague way, kind of the way we use the word "torture." So, as much as I dislike O'Reilly, this strikes me as less racist than some on the web are saying, and in fact compared to what O'Reilly has said in other contexts--like his response to eating in the Harlem restaurant.

But actually what strikes me as more troubling than his casual use of this word is the fact that if Michelle Obama is not blindly proud of her country, she is an enemy. If she thinks we are a "flawed nation" or "bad country" then she should be badmouthed--according to O'Reilly. And his caller's use of the word "militant" to describe Obama is more racism still.

Amazing. Most Americans admit that racism is bad. But if someone was, perhaps, angry about that racism, that would make them militant?

The "cult leader" theme

Balkinization has a post from a few days ago about this idea of the "cult of the personality" that is worth the read. I have also noticed in more than few areas the theme that Obama is some kind of cult leader--that his appeal to crowds is "creepy."

Is that a fair characterization about Obama or is it simply a way to frame him out of the mainstream? Or is it just another way to say that he is an empty suit?

I would suggest that Obama is far from a cult leader and also far from an empty suit. He taught constitutional law for 10 years. And I would suggest that he is far more than a good speaker. Hilzoy has this post from 2006:

But I do follow legislation, at least on some issues, and I have been surprised by how often Senator Obama turns up, sponsoring or co-sponsoring really good legislation on some topic that isn't wildly sexy, but does matter. His bills tend to have the following features: they are good and thoughtful bills that try to solve real problems; they are in general not terribly flashy; and they tend to focus on achieving solutions acceptable to all concerned, not by compromising on principle, but by genuinely trying to craft a solution that everyone can get behind.

Sully has a list of thoughtful policy speeches here. Slate's John Dickerson talks about Obama sitting in a health-care forum and demonstrating a depth of knowledge about the details of the issues.

I am already tired of the right, but the fact that anyone from that side would have criticism of our candidates is ridiculous after the last 8 years. We have had to listen to the dumbest speeches with everything dumbed down to "they hate us for our freedom" or "childrens do learn." Perhaps Obama's appeal is simply the ability to communicate in complete sentences and discuss ideas with some depth? Not only did Bush give us the stupid speeches and butchered English language, but we had people "amening" Bush's speeches and talking about what a Godly man he is. And that nonsense continued after preemptive wars, torture, and violations of the constitution. If you want to talk about cultish figures, Bush was that at one point, and still is for some members on the right.

Now that we have a couple of speakers who can command an audience and actually engage people--we are two steps away from Jonestown Kool Aid. That is frankly ridiculous.

Fun with student evals

This is one that I really don't want to send out as proof of my teaching ability.

"learnt alot"

And that was in the section marked "specific strong points of the course."

Holes in the border wall you say?

According to this story in the The Texas Observer, the proposed wall will not be built over sections of country club resort land and a huge ranch owned by a big Bush "Pioneer" fundraiser.

I know politics is corrupt, but isn't the point of the wall to create some kind of barrier? This article suggests that some people will have their homes and land ruined by the fence, while others in the same section will not.

Nice.

Supreme Court tells Democracy to buzz off

Essentially, any way:

"The Supreme Court has essentially ratified the Bush Administration position that no one has standing to sue for having their electronic communications monitored illegally, i,e., without a warrant, unless they can show that their communications were in fact monitored -- which is classified information that the Bush Administration refuses to divulge.

You can't sue us unless we tell you that we were breaking the law, and we can't tell you that."

Can you say "deluded?"

Evidently, our President was asked about the economy:

"Bush: …and I’m convinced fifty years from now people will look back and say, Thank God there were those that were willing to sacrifice.

Curry: But you’re saying you’re going to have to carry that burden. Some Americans believe that they feel they’re carrying the burden because of this economy.

Bush: Yeah, well…

Curry: They say we’re suffering because of this.

Bush: I don’t agree with that.

Curry: You don’t agree with that? It has nothing do with the economy, the war, the spending on the war?

Bush: I don’t think so. I think actually the spending in the war might help with jobs.

Curry: Oh, yeah?

Bush: Yeah, because we’re buying equipment, and people are working. I think this economy is down because we built too many houses (Curry: hmmmmm) and the economy is adjusting. On the other hand we’re just about to kick out 157 billion dollars to our taxpayers……what would have been had we abandoned Iraq when times were tough and let those soldiers die in vain.."

Not so fast, flu

I really did feel lousy yesterday, but after dinner and more hydration, I felt pretty good late last night. I slept well and feel congested this morning, but not flu-ish. Who knows? Perhaps that obsessive hand-washing really is paying off.

Well, still keeping my finger's crossed.

I think it may be catching me

Probably the other way around. But I am dragging around today and not feeling well. May be some light blogging ahead.

White House lies about FISA again

Ok, a couple of quick political notes. The White House continues to lie about FISA even though Mike McConnell admitted that the entire issue was about protecting the telecoms--not protecting us. Here is hoping that the Democrats in the House have more spine than those in the Senate.

****

Second, the Huck refuses to bow out. Can someone explain to me how staying in the race and making McCain spend more money and do more campaigning is helping make Huckabee a viable VP candidate?

This week's music releases

Couple of interesting new cds this week. I think ubub has more knowledge about the Mountain Goats, but there is a lot of buzz about their new album. Mike Doughty has a new one as well, as does Alison Moorer. I like her ok, but wonder if her husband (Steve Earle) has helped her select a little better material. Any others I should look for? Gary Louris has a solo album. I loved his work with the Jayhawks, so that might be worth a listen. And Paul Thorn? Wow. We saw him play a little stage in Austin and that guy put on a great show. Former professional boxer and great story teller.

Anyway. Off to the yoga. SOF is feeling better this morning though pretty tired. I am (knock on the wood) still feeling ok. Hope you are all doing well this Monday morning.

Ruhro, The Protect America Act expired--Please Panic now--Updated

Because that is exactly what your President wants you to do. Glenn Greenwald nails another of the "President's bizarre propaganda dramas" where Bush and his loyal drones in Congress tell us that the expiration of this law makes us unsafe.

All of the right-wing war cheerleaders who will be rendered sleepless as of midnight tonight, petrified that the Muslims who normally lurk menacingly on their corners will now be free to spring attacks since we now live under FISA (1978-8/2007) rather than the PAA (8/2007-2/2008),

That's right. We are so very unsafe because we are now under the previous law and not under this questionable PAA. Does that mean that Bush can't go after terrorists? Not really:

"(Um, no: every order now in place stays in place for a year, and any time the government wants to target someone new, all they have to do is get a warrant from the incredibly compliant FISA court.)

And say that it really did make us unsafe? Greenwald again points to the source of that insecurity:

There is one reason, and one reason only, that the Protect America Act expired. Its name is "George W. Bush." That is who refused to agree to the Democrats' offer to extend the law by 21 days (or longer), then repeatedly threatened to veto any such extension ("US President George W. Bush on Wednesday vowed to veto another temporary extension of a domestic spying law"), then directed the always-obedient House Republicans to vote unanimously against the extension, which they (needless to say) did. This vital-to-our-safety piece of legislation expired only because George W. Bush repeatedly blocked its extension. It's just that simple.

And why? Because of telecom immunity. Corporations who "may have helped" the government spy on its own citizens need a break from trial lawyers. Or something. But clearly, that is far more important than anything else to the Bush man.

But the very best take on this (so far) is Mark Fiore's animated cartoon: The Spies Who Love You! Hilarious and dead on balls accurate.

Updated: Publius at Obsidian Wings has a very interesting take on this recent fight and suggests that while the 2002 war authorization demoralized and harmed the Democrats, it did more harm to the GOP, and that bill is coming due.

"In short, the GOP learned too much from its 2002 victory. Rather than seeing 2002 as a one-time victory based on unique historical circumstances, they’ve come to see it as a universal recipe for electoral success. In their minds, they can win by taking any national security issue on which the Dems are divided and embrace the policy that maximizes executive authority (or more precisely, Bush’s authority – I’m sure they’ll all transform into squawking Hayeks if Obama or Clinton win)."

Rainy, dreary, and the flu

Apologies for the troll these last few days. While I always enjoy the initial battle, there is nothing really to learn and I see all my regular commenters disappear. I should learn from those who refuse to feed trolls. Maybe when I mature.

But now I get rid of the troll only to find the flu. Or something. No, not me (knock on wood) but SOF is achey and coughy (technical medical terms). She really is doing well today and just doesn't feel well more than she feels awful. I keep telling her I am a doctor and she should listen to me. She reminds me that I am not the kind of doctor one listens to. She isn't very respectful when she is sick. Accurate, of course, but not terribly respectful.

I kid. She is great and I am making home-made chicken soup for her. Little trick--if you want to make good chicken stock at home (I find the canned stuff dreary and unappetizing), buy a pack or two of wings and throw them in a kettle with some water to simmer for 5 or 6 hours. I usually freeze chicken carcasses too, so I have those to throw in. It is perfect to have simmering on the stove while it is cold and rainy. Nothing like that aroma to make the house smell like home.

But back to the day. I should be doing more than I am. There is work to do, and I don't really want to do that. So, instead, I attended a song-writing clinic at the same place where I take lessons. That was cool. Very cool to listen to how people write songs. Hell, it was just fascinating listening to the music theory and the knowledge from some of these guys.

Coming from a writing background, I am very attuned to how people approach writing text, but it was amazing how many parallels there were for the songwriters. Letting stuff age or simmer to see how it looked with fresh eyes, or even the very real need of turning off that critical part of your brain when you are trying to get some ideas down. Anyway, it was cool. I want to write some songs--mostly to see if I can do it. No guarantee that I will share them with anyone (if I succeed) but I want to see if I can write a good song.

****

Speaking of music, I am rather curious about this coming year, and a little pessimistic. I really didn't realize just how amazing last year was for music until I started listing the artists and albums that came out last year (I have a 2007 playlist in Itunes that is pretty damn solid). Several that are in that category of me purchasing on Music Tuesday without listening or reading about. Wilco, Ryan Adams, Arcade Fire, New Pornographers, Ted Leo, Steve Earle, and even the Shins. Add a few new ones, or relative newcomers (to me)--The National, Andrew Bird, Feist, Pela, Okkervil River, The Weakerthans, and the Great Lake Swimmers--and you have a hell of a musical year. And that isn't even conclusive. Radiohead's album is great, and I am really enjoying the latest Iron and Wine. And the Alison Krauss/Robert Plant effort is growing on me by the day. After my songwriting session, I could not stop listening to their "Please Read the Letter." You can grab that single here (number 21). Great melody and harmony. And I am going to have to work out the chord progression because it is also stuck in my head.

That was last year. This coming year has me a little concerned. So far, I have downloaded the new Evangelicals album (not bad) and have heard a few tracks from Sia's new effort. Kathleen Edwards has a new album coming out in March that I will purchase immediately. I hear rumors of a new Hold Steady album, but don't know if that is for this year or next. No new Wilco, I am sure. Dammit. Sure, Ryan Adams might put out another album, but his stuff is hit and miss. I hear Alejandro is working on a new album and that would be great. But what else is coming this year? Will 2008 be the down cycle in music?

I demand answers. The political season will suck--of that I am sure. But I expect music to take me away from all that. Perhaps I can get Congress to investigate....

Ok, back to the soup.

where have we heard this before?

The Connecticut Post Online - Lieberman says some waterboarding OK: "'We are at war,' Lieberman said. 'I know enough from public statements made by Osama bin Laden and others as well as classified information I see to know the terrorists are actively planning, plotting to attack us again. I want our government to be able to gather information again within both the law and Geneva Convention.'"

And someone said this:

17Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord.

20On the contrary:
"If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." 21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Of course, that translation leaves out the common addendum suggested by some of our evangelical friends:

Unless your enemies are really bad. Then be as evil to them as you think they are to you. Verily.

More on the SBC and sex abuse

Again, h/t to the Bootlegger for the in-depth story on Ms. Vasquez battle to get the SBC to address sexual abuse in the convention. Let me say that growing up in the SBC, I never saw or experienced anything like this. I remember, however, conversations with some Baptist friends in the early 90s when the Catholic pedophile scandal was just coming to light. They were rather dismissive of the Catholics and, it seemed to me, suggested that it was all about the Catholic church. I think SOF suggested that it could happen in the Baptists as well, and that was just seen as ridiculous. That really makes this interesting:

"In his book Pedophiles and Priests, Pennsylvania State University professor Philip Jenkins determined that between .2 and 1.7 percent of Catholic priests are pedophiles. Among Protestant clergy—a group in which Southern Baptists are the largest denomination—that figure, according to the book, ranges from 2 to 3 percent.

And in a 1993 survey by the Journal of Pastoral Care, 14 percent of Southern Baptist ministers admitted to engaging in “inappropriate sexual behavior,” and a whopping 70 percent said they knew a minister who had had such contact with a parishioner."

Wow. Very interesting numbers.

And while these kinds of issues are so traumatic and tragic for those abused, the SBC's response here has not been helpful (imo).

Once she finally mustered the courage to share her story, she’s received a myriad of uncaring responses from Baptist leaders. At this point, they’ve become quite predictable: Put it in God’s hands. You will feel better if you let it go. Nothing can be done anyway. It’s in the past.

“It’s not in the past,” Vasquez says. “He’s still out there, and he’s still in the position to hurt someone.”

That kind of magical thinking is not helpful. I am not saying that God cannot assist in the healing, but this "turn it over to God" sounds more like denial than anything else.