Of all of the apologies about racial comments

I can really see this one. CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Congresswoman apologizes for ‘great white hope’ comment - Blogs from CNN.com

This one seems like a genuine saying that is not inherently about race--even though the original is. Am I wrong about that? Much different than Westmoreland calling Obama "uppity" and then claiming that he didn't mean it in a racial way.

Wednesday morning

First, RIP Ted Kennedy. I know many Americans hated this guy's guts, and most of those never forgave him for his younger days, but the man put together some credible years in the Senate working to make America better for those not fortunate enough to grow up in the Kennedy family. I certainly remember that in my younger days, the specter of a second President Kennedy was something conservatives feared. And perhaps, rightly so. But his body of work in the Senate, I think, will stand on its own.

Second, I still remain amazed that we are still debating the ethics of torture. And conservatives made the rounds on the media yesterday complaining about any investigation into these "legal" practices. Note to Obama. The precedent is clear. Whatever you do, just find a lawyer with absolutely no moral center (can't be that hard) and get him to write a memo for your OLC that says whatever nefarious thing you are about to do is legal. That will make it ok. The conservatives have said that, and, of course, the Obama administration is going along with it. And still being accused of undermining our security.

Sigh.

And speaking of the GOP, I think Steven Pearlstein has run out of patience with the party who now claims to defend medicare. Yeah, the same party who has pledged to kill Medicare on every possible chance. A friend of mine sent me an email yesterday saying that the latest economic news meant that now was a terrible time to reform healthcare because we just can't afford it. That sent me into a bit of a rage, as it is very hard to make that argument with a straight face when conservatives have never wanted to reform healthcare in the first place. Cost, then, is just the latest excuse.

Unfortunately, the party of the GOP has turned into a party of nothing. Seriously. They encourage their base to believe nonsense about reform--things that are demonstrably false. In two recent instances, (one with Senator Grassley) members of their town halls either bragged of being a "right wing terrorist" or told Grassley that he would "take a gun to Washington." In the first case, the "right wing terrorist" was called a great American. Grassley said nothing to someone who just threatened to take up arms against the country.

Country first, my ass.

And finally, a couple of items. One is the aforementioned recently released torture report that lays out what most of us already knew in rather scary detail. This is what we did to people in custody:

• Threats of execution, using semi-automatic handguns and power drills
• Threats to kill detainee and his children
• Threats to rape detainee's wife and children in front of him
• Restricting the detainee's carotid artery
• Hitting detainee with the butt end of a rifle
• Blowing smoke in detainee's face for five minutes
• Multiple instances of waterboarding detainees, of the type we prosecuted Japanese war criminals for using:
• Hanging detainee by their arms until interrogators thought their shoulders might be dislocated
• stepping on detainee's ankle shackles to cause severe bruising and pain
• choking detainee until they pass out
• dousing detainee with water on cold concrete floors in cold temperatures to induce hypothermia
• killing detainees through torture techniques, whether accidental or not
• putting detainee in a diaper for days

That's right. We killed people in custody. But let me just say this. I have no faith that conservatives will read that (or this next story about a Texas man who may have been wrongly executed) and feel anything except, "so?"

I think that has made me the saddest. The conservatism that taught me about right and wrong and morality--don't really care if we execute innocent people, and they certainly don't care if we torture people in the name of protecting us. I have had several recent conversations that drive that home.

It makes me sad.

The Last Abortion Doctor

As I have stated here several times, I am as uncomfortably pro-choice as I can be. That means, as far as I can tell, that I am like one hell of a lot of pro-choice people. Just found this essay on The Last Abortion Doctor at Esquire and could not stop reading. It isn't easy. But this is the last guy in the US who performs these late abortions, and this interview came right after George Tiller was gunned down in Wichita.

I had a conversation with an old friend on facebook. She started her attack on Obama with "not sure how a Christian can want to kill babies," and continued from there. She didn't mind torture as she knew people who had lost military members and they were "tortured" by their loss. She didn't mind wiretapping without warrants because she "wasn't doing anything wrong and just wanted to be kept safe."

I was struck by all of those uninformed statements. But her flip take on those who are pro-choice is in my head this morning. Reading this essay, with all of those women who struggle and are changed for the rest of their life by this decision, but in many cases are there because they have no other choice (read about the couple from Canada who arrived in Wichita only to find their doctor murdered in his church).

My old friend scares me. Unfortunately, she is not alone in her take on any of this. But I think she has not thought through many, if any, of these positions. Her Christianity is now more GOP than follower of Christ, or that is certainly how it feels. Her litany of problems with Obama certainly sounds like those coming from the RNC and Fox News. They are sound-bites rather than reflections of a principled position. She has very little concern for those uninsured, no concern for those innocents caught up in our anti-terror net, and not one clear thought on the constitutional protections she enjoys. Yet, I bet money she would tell me that America is a Christian nation.

We can do better than this. We can do better than to simplify complex issues into "killing babies." I doubt we will. But we can do better.

Why we need some healthcare reform now

Because of stories like this.

Guest post: The Leonard Peltier case

My good friend WIV (formerly known as Cold in Laramie) sent me this for the blog. As he knows more about this topic than I, it seems a perfect spot for a guest post:

On Friday, a United States court denied Chippewa Leonard Peltier parole. Peltier currently serves two life sentences for the 1977 murder of two FBI agents on the Pine Ridge Reservation. The deaths of the two FBI agents came in the wake of the American Indian Movement’s (AIM) occupation of Wounded Knee in 1973. AIM leaders came to South Dakota in order to protest the treatment Lakotas received from South Dakota law officials and the corrupt administration of Richard “Dick” Wilson. After AIM ended its 71-day shoot-out with FBI and tribal police officers, the Pine Ridge Reservation endured a four-year “civil war.” The supporters of AIM at Pine Ridge were in combat with tribal police officers, nicknamed the “GOON” squad, who were given assistance by the FBI. Drive-by shootings became common and many deaths have yet to be solved. The FBI provided the GOON squad with intelligence about AIM supporters at Pine Ridge and weaponry, including, according to one account, armor-piercing bullets. In June 1975, FBI agents chased a vehicle to the Jumping Bull ranch, a shootout occurred and the two FBI agents were shot at close range.

Peltier has become a cause célèbre in many circles. Peltier supporters argue that much of the FBI evidence used to convict Peltier was acquired through intimidation of witnesses, the courts did not consider the AIM-GOON violence in the trial, and many FBI officials still do not acknowledge the support they provided to the GOON squad. Opponents of Peltier’s parole, on the other hand, cite forensic evidence linking Peltier to the execution-style murder and that he has not shown significant remorse for the murder of the two agents. This was not the first time Peltier was up for parole (all denied of course). In 2000, rumors abounded that then-President Bill Clinton would pardon Peltier, however, forcefully lobbying by FBI officials helped to prevent this.

I am uncertain if Peltier is guilty and Peltier has sometimes been a troublesome prisoner. However, it seems very clear that Peltier did not receive a fair trial nor has the FBI demonstrated significant remorse for its role at Pine Ridge in the mid-1970s. From what I have read, there is enough reasonable doubt to question Peltier’s conviction. Yet, he remains in federal prison and will in all likelihood remain there until he passes on.

I hope this generates some discussion. It is a fascinating subject and case about which to read and debate.

Ah, the stupid.

Amd this really is stupid. Evidently, some people are outraged (OUTRAGED) that the First Lady is seen in shorts.

Put me on the record for saying that this particular First Lady is gorgeous and amazing. Her sense of style and decorum is impeccable in my book, so she can wear whatever she wants.

And people wonder why I have problems with the ways evangelicals talk about prayer

Are You There, God? It's Me, Charlie | TPMDC

Sigh.

Is this shades of Pat Robertson on the weather watch?

Perhaps the best take on the media's approach to healthcare that I have seen

From Michael Berube. CA, is essentially Berube, and here he "interviews" the entire American Mass Media, or AMM. My favorite part:

CA: Pardon me? People are threatening violence because a Democratic administration might be considering public health insurance? That’s not exciting, that’s lunacy. Why doesn’t anybody explain the “public option” to these nutcases?

AMM: With all due respect, Michael, that’s not really our job.

CA: ...

AMM: No, really. We’re not in the business of pushing some President’s agenda, unless it’s a war. We’re in the business of reporting what people say. And if some people say that Obama’s plan will feed your grandma to the wood chipper, and some people happen to disagree with that, then it’s our responsibility to report both sides fairly. That’s all part of democratic debate, and we’re proud to play our part!

CA: So, so you’re actually saying it’s your job to report complete falsehoods without challenging them?

AMM: That’s basic journalistic ethics, yes. Besides, even if it was our job to choose sides, which it isn’t, we’re just not well equipped to handle this kind of thing. Health care involves very serious policy issues and complicated stuff about money, and everyone knows math is hard and policy is boring. So we try to concentrate on what we do best.

But Obama is a fascist?

Tom Ridge on National Security After 9/11 admits that he

"was pushed to raise the security alert on the eve of President Bush's re-election, something he saw as politically motivated and worth resigning over."

Klein asks the pertinent question

"How can you sustain a democracy if one of the two major political parties has been overrun by nihilists? And another question: How can you maintain the illusion of journalistic impartiality when one of the political parties has jumped the shark?":

There are conservatives — Senator Lamar Alexander, Representative Mike Pence, among many others — who make their arguments based on facts. But they have been overwhelmed by nihilists and hypocrites more interested in destroying the opposition and gaining power than in the public weal. The philosophically supple party that existed as recently as George H.W. Bush's presidency has been obliterated. The party's putative intellectuals — people like the Weekly Standard's William Kristol — are prosaic tacticians who make precious few substantive arguments but oppose health-care reform mostly because passage would help Barack Obama's political prospects. In 1993, when the Clintons tried health-care reform, the Republican John Chafee offered a creative (in fact, superior) alternative — which Kristol quashed with his famous "Don't Help Clinton" fax to the troops. There is no Republican health-care alternative in 2009. The same people who rail against a government takeover of health care tried to enforce a government takeover of Terri Schiavo's end-of-life decisions. And when Palin floated the "death panel" canard, the number of prominent Republicans who rose up to call her out could be counted on one hand.

and

An argument can be made that this is nothing new. Dwight Eisenhower tiptoed around Joe McCarthy. Obama reminded an audience in Colorado that opponents of Social Security in the 1930s "said that everybody was going to have to wear dog tags and that this was a plot for the government to keep track of everybody ... These struggles have always boiled down to a contest between hope and fear." True enough. There was McCarthyism in the 1950s, the John Birch Society in the 1960s. But there was a difference in those times: the crazies were a faction — often a powerful faction — of the Republican Party, but they didn't run it. The neofascist Father Coughlin had a huge radio audience in the 1930s, but he didn't have the power to control and silence the elected leaders of the party that Limbaugh — who, if not the party's leader, is certainly the most powerful Republican extant — does now. Until recently, the Republican Party contained a strong moderate wing. It was a Republican, the lawyer Joseph Welch, who delivered the coup de grâce to Senator McCarthy when he said, "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?" Where is the Republican who would dare say that to Rush Limbaugh, who has compared the President of the United States to Adolf Hitler?

But I thought he was a fascist who wanted to take all our guns and kill our elderly?

White House Backs Right to Bear Arms, Even Outside Obama Events, if State Laws Allow - washingtonpost.com

As I noted yesterday, people who wore anti-Bush t-shirts were arrested, yet these same idiots simply nodded and agreed with that. Now, a President who agrees they have a right to carry a gun--even when it is done in such a stupid and irresponsible fashion--is called "fascist."

This is stupid beyond belief. Seriously.

The Health Care Stupid

Natalie has a nice rant on the current dialogue, if you can call it that.

It is really amazing stuff out there. Some dozen people bringing guns to Town Meetings or Obama speeches, and it is good to remember that they are doing this about expanding healthcare. There does not appear to be some groundswell of support for gun control, but merely to expand healthcare and to make sure all of us have some basic care and are not kicked off when we are sick.

But the dialogue is even worse than that. I am not linking to it, because I found it disturbing, but Youtube has a woman shouting "heil hitler" at a Las Vegas meeting when he defends national healthcare. Healthcare! He takes umbrage, and rightfully so, but how in the hell did healthcare become a Nazi thing?

I know where it comes from, but still don't understand the thought process. Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh have been flogging the Obama as Hitler meme for sometime. I think the problem is that socialism no longer scares people like it used to, so they are just calling him Hitler because that still works.

But I remember when MoveOn had a video that compared Bush to Hitler. Man, did people freak out over that! Including, a friend of mine, who still refers to Moveon as the organization that compared Bush to Hitler. Except they didn't. It was part of a contest and MoveOn yanked the video.

Jon Stewart had a funny bit about the wackaloons with guns which included a little sound clip from the Chris Matthews (I believe) show. Remember when a couple of anti-Bush people were turned away from a Bush rally for wearing anti-Bush t-shirts? T-shirts! Not guns. Fucking t-shirts. According to the clip, they were arrested when they refused to take the shirts off.

Hmm. Now public conservatives openly compare Obama to Hitler; over a dozen people brandish guns at rallies; and self-identified conservatives routinely compare Obama to Hitler and healthcare reform to the Nazi party. (I notice that my same friend has defended these town hall people as "legitimately angry" and has not expressed much outrage over the Hitler stuff.) Guns, evidently, are fine. T-shirts are dangerous. Shouting hate slogans is fine--now.

This is just insanity. Republicans are not responsible for all of this, make no mistake. But they are doing precious little to stop the misinformation and outright lies. A recent NBC poll shows that a shocking number of Americans believe the "death panel" nonsense. That is not good for our republic. As I have said repeatedly, there are legitimate points of disagreement, and very legitimate concerns about this reform package.

But conservatives are not talking about them. Town halls are filled with people who believe blatant falsehoods, and are willing to compare expanding healthcare with the Nazi regime.

The stupid. It burns so very much.

Twelve Carry Guns -- Including Assault Rifle -- Outside Obama Event | LiveWire

Twelve Carry Guns -- Including Assault Rifle -- Outside Obama Event | LiveWire

And this one is interesting too. I love how he says that "taxation is theft." That is a ridiculous argument only helped by the Republican mantra that taxation is evil.

Again, I respect the lawful ownership of guns. I am not just saying that. But you cannot expect me to look at these people bringing guns to Town Halls and Obama events and think that is a good thing. That is the threat of violence, and given the entire response toward Obama and the right wing insanity about him, this is playing with fire.

Uh, yikes

The rising popularity of imprecatory prayer and some instruction on how to do it.

A refresher on the stupid

As one of my own senators suggests that members of congress have earned the death threats coming from the idiots at town halls:

These people are threatening death and destruction because Obama is trying to expand health coverage.

That's it. That is what pushed these people over the edge.

Not, mind you, an administration promoting torture, or wiretapping without warrants, or lying to us to get us into a war.

Not an administration solely dedicated to helping the rich get richer.

None of those things got the wingnuts out in force. Nope. That came from an administration wanting to expand healthcare coverage and to make sure those same idiots don't get kicked off their healthcare coverage.

Sigh.

Holy Cow--God packing heat?

Kevin Powell: I guess the second commandment was just a suggestion. Among other things.

Ugh.

Especially in this current climate. All due respect to the responsible gun owners out there, and I know there are many, the current atmosphere of anger among the right, this scares the crap out of me. As I referenced in a conversation with someone else, the right wing populism has a discernibly more violent tinge to it, and we are seeing that. After 8 years of people hating Bush, I don't remember that hatred turning violent. Angry, yes, and even calling him the usual tyrant names. But I never thought the war protesters were going to go violent.

I have no such belief about the town hall crazies. And when the right wing combines a love of guns with a militant reading of Christianity, I get a little scared.

Anglican has some questions

And they seem like good ones to me:

"Some observations made of recent politics:
Liberals protest war, sometimes loudly, and are called traitors.
Conservatives protest health care, sometimes loudly, and are called patriots.
Those who benefit from the part of our system that is in fact socialized--i.e., Medicare and Medicaid--are fighting tooth and nail against extending a similar benefit to others.
Those opposing reform are putting their trust with the political party that opposed the creation of Medicare in the first place."

I like his walk through his socialized reality as well. I had a recent conversation on Facebook with an idiot (sorry, but true) who said that government is always abusive and that it rarely does anything good. I wish there were a way to instantly remove all the contributions of government from his life. I really do.

The stupid. It burns so very much.

What is prayer?

I have no clue. A good friend of ours was just recently badly injured in a bicycle accident. According to the initial reports from his daughter, they came very close to losing him. Scary stuff.

In the updates and comments (on FB) there has been a steady discussion about prayer requests and offers for prayers and offers for prayers on specific aspects of this crisis. I understand that as a reflection of concern, and as an expression of caring.

What I don't understand is the "we can get a bunch of people who don't know him to pray for him" thing. Again, concern is a great thing, but I don't get the theology of the matter. Doesn't it imply that the God they are praying to has to be convinced into doing something good? God, on his own, won't heal anyone unless people request it? What kind of God is that?

Not only that, but the numbers and quality of the people praying seems to supposedly matter. If someone is more advanced as a Christian, do their prayers matter more? Or if we can get a bunch of people praying on this particular issue, will God respond as long as there are more than 10 people praying? Perhaps more than 20? Perhaps fewer if enough of them are suitably "mature in their faith?"

I don't get the theology here at all.

Healther Skelter - Obama Death Panel Debate | The Daily Show | Comedy Central

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Healther Skelter - Obama Death Panel Debate
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Spinal Tap Performance

Chris Hayes has the answers

Your Questions About Health Care Reform Answered:

"3) I heard the proposals currently under consideration provide seniors with option of free counseling sessions under Medicare, where they can discuss a living will and end-of-life care.
That's a huge misconception. The bills require all senior citizens (who are non union members) be euthanized on their 70th birthday. Under section 278(c)ii all last rites will be performed by Jeremiah Wright using a Q'uran."

This is my point on government too

Though Publius said it better. When people think of government programs and dependency, they think about welfare and poor people:

"That's why you hear stories of people saying, "Keep government out of my Medicare."

But that's just one example. Life is full of invisible examples of government benefits we never think about. The free market didn't bring about the weekend, or clean air. It didn't create universal education, and neither did it provide universal health care for the elderly. It didn't desegregate our schools. It couldn't save the banking system -- there was a series of interventions that kept it from collapsing and got it back on its feet.

But all these things quickly fade into the background like an invisible platform.

That's why I sometimes wish life had a show/hide function similar to the one in Word that shows or hides formatting. We could click it, and reveal all the ways that political choices have improved our lives.

Of course, government isn't always good -- see, e.g., sugar subsidies, spectrum regulation. And markets do many things very, very well. But the demagoguery that the idea of government is receiving in the health coverage debate is completely undeserved.

I made this point to a guy on FB who kept calling government abusive. What is also interesting is that some of the people who refer to government as evil and abusive have been the most forgiving of torture and wiretapping. Which suggests to me that this is not about some kind of political principle, but about branding and partisan loyalty. And that is, perhaps, the most disturbing part of this "debate." Those people going to the town halls are angry because they have been told to be angry.

And this tying the anti-health care reform to race

And an interesting connection worth considering.

Bush's faith/zeal

We have to acknowledge that this story sounds a bit on the strange side. Not, mind you, that Bush believed this stuff, but that he would think it would convince a French leader to join him. But, according to a recent book, Chirac confirms that Bush told him that they had to fight the Iraq war to stave off something out of the Left Behind series:

"Stranger still are new accounts emerging from France describing how former president Jacques Chirac was utterly baffled by a 2003 telephone conversation in which Bush reportedly invoked fanatical Old Testament prophecy – including the Earth-ending battle with forces of evil, Gog and Magog – in his arguments to enlist France in the Coalition of the Willing.

'This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people's enemies before a New Age begins,' Bush said to Chirac, according to Thomas Romer, a University of Lausanne theology professor who was later approached by French officials anxious to understand the biblical reference. Romer first revealed his account in a 2007 article for the university review, Allez savoir, which passed largely unnoticed.

Chirac, in a new book by French journalist Jean-Claude Maurice, is quoted as confirming the surreal conversation, saying he was stupefied by Bush's reference to biblical prophecy and 'wondered how someone could be so superficial and fanatical in their beliefs.'"

I know there are many who share Bush's alleged beliefs here, but the thought that a world leader would send his people to war based on a contested reading of an ancient prophecy is mind boggling.

More on healthcare and an irresponsible opposition

Steven Pearlstein - Steven Pearlstein: Republicans Propagating Falsehoods in Attacks on Health-Care Reform - washingtonpost.com:

"By poisoning the political well, they've given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They've become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems.

There are lots of valid criticisms that can be made against the health reform plans moving through Congress -- I've made a few myself. But there is no credible way to look at what has been proposed by the president or any congressional committee and conclude that these will result in a government takeover of the health-care system. That is a flat-out lie whose only purpose is to scare the public and stop political conversation."

Same, and even worse, can be said about Sarah Palin claiming that Obama will create some kind of "death panel" to decide who lives and who dies. If we want to talk about the legitimate issues around the public option and reform in general, that is fine. But republicans are not doing that.

More on stupidity

The kind of stupidity that at least one of our commenters seems to buy. Hunter, from the DailyKos is right about this one. When Republicans can claim that Democratic healthcare will mean killing a disabled child, then there is nothing factual about their opposition. And nothing responsible, either.

Seriously? I mean, come the flying monkey hell on. How is it that this hollow-headed dimwit doesn't get run out of town for statements like that? Obama's going to come murder her son?

The whole Republican party can absolutely make stuff up, no question about it, 100% lies, no factual basis whatsoever, outrageous, known false stuff about euthanasia and "death panels" and denying care to people that are no longer "productive", stuff that's right out of the most venomous propaganda playbooks around, weird-assed, depraved, paranoid stuff that would be perfectly at home in a Henry Ford tract about the secret methods of the evil Jews or the like -- and not a goddamned news outlet on the planet is making a story out of the fact that these supposed leaders of their party are gleefully lying through their teeth about all of it, or that the "teabaggers" carrying these selfsame lies into public meetings aren't just angry Americans with a different point of view, but people spreading known, 100%-goddamn-freaking-false-and-false-from-the-very-first-time-it-was-uttered bullshit, and intentionally doing it so loud that they hope nobody can possibly shout them down.

There's no "he-said, she-said" on a statement like "Obama's coming to murder my handicapped child."

Palin is not a genuine person, and has no genuine interest in good governance or good public policy. And neither, as fara as I can tell, do anyone from the Republican leadership. All they seem intent on doing is getting idiots to post stupid things on liberal blogs and go shout at their congressional representatives.

The indecency of Palin and Bachman

And if you are quoting from Bachman, that is enough to show that you are in the wackaloon territory, rather than the area of legitimate conversation about this important issue. I would say "shame" to Sarah Palin, but it is increasingly obvious that she has none. More here.

Light blogging for a while

Off to a music camp. Back in a few days. Talk about healthcare reform while I am gone. One of my conservative friends claims that Obama is "ramming" healthcare down the American people's throat. Discuss.

Deep thought for the day

Why is it that we have not had a Republican ex-President out negotiating for hostages or trying to bring peace to a region?

Sigh

Conservative Christianity, evidently, means that "history" is what you want it to be. Facts and historical scholarship be damned.

And this guy was and is a major candidate for President for the Republican party. The fact that he is vastly more qualified than the former governor of Alaska only reiterates the ridiculous anti-intellectual place that is the modern Republican party.

Interesting: man took his wife's last name

I took my wife's last name - The Globe and Mail

I know an awful lot of people where both just kept their last names. I actually like that, though I understand it can be confusing if there are children involved. But one of the things the patrilineal naming system often does is reduce that matrilineal influence.

I like Jon Alter

Alter: Our Heath-Care System Is Just Fine As Is! | Newsweek Voices - Jonathan Alter | Newsweek.com

And how could the supporters of these reform bills believe in anything as stupid as a "public option"? Do they really believe that the health-insurance cartel deserves a little competition to keep them honest? Back in the day, they had a word for competition. A bad word. They called it capitalism. FedEx versus the U.S. Postal Service, CNN versus PBS—just because it's government-backed doesn't mean you can't compete against it. If they believed in capitalism, the insurance companies would join the fray and compete.

I really do love how many people love competition in the market place until they absolutely do not. If government plans are so bad, then how bad would that make the private companies that can't compete with them?

Ultimately, as I told a friend in email, I am stunned that we seem to still be allowing the people who don't think we need healthcare reform to dictate healthcare reform policy. As I suggested to him, it seems analogous to allowing those who think that humans have made no contribution to climate change decide how we respond to climate change.

More fun with Republicans and polls

According to a new poll, only 42% of Republicans believe Obama is an American citizen, and if you break that down by region, you find the "birthers" predominately in the American South.

Onion strikes again

Cambridge Cop Accidentally Arrests Henry Louis Gates Again During White House Meeting | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

Heh.

Perhaps a glimpse into the cause of our financial problems

From a recent poll, we learned that Americans don't want more taxes or cuts in services to address the deficit--which other polls show are causing concern with Obama's policies.

"Fifty-six percent of respondents said that they were not willing to pay more in taxes in order to reduce the deficit, and nearly as many said they were not willing for the government to provide fewer services in areas such as health care, education and defense spending."

Linkins reminds us of the great Simpsons immigration episode where Homer complains about taxes. Too bad he doesn't quote from the scene when the townspeople, who had just demanded more services, march to the Mayor's office to complain about taxes:

"The mob is back, yelling 'Down with taxes! Down with taxes!'

Quimby: Are those morons getting dumber or just louder?
Assistant: [checks his clipboard] Dumber, sir."

And I can't quite pass on the opportunity to point out that the Republicans have made their entire political philosophy out of bashing taxes and government. Hard to get the American people to some level of responsible government when one of the major parties constantly not only bashes everything to do with government and taxes, but essentially keeps assuring people that we can cut taxes and everything will be rosy. Better, even.

Sigh.

Are Republicans irony impaired?

Or maybe it is me. But it strikes me as funny when someone like David Vitter talks about "conservative values."

"I'm on the side of conservatives getting back to core conservative values," said Mr. Vitter, Louisiana Republican and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee

No word on if those Conservative values explicitly include hookers.

In all seriousness, this is what the conservative church created by making their deep, and personal faith a political commodity. They then get people like this idiot masquerading as a "family values" person. Actually, it has brought them a lot of idiots. Voinovich isn't wrong. The south and the religious right has turned the Republican party into the party of the brainless.

Tort reform revisited

I was struck by our discussion on tort reform a few weeks ago and surprised that Steve didn't think tort reform would actually effect medical costs. A lesson in assumptions, I guess. I really had just assumed that medical malpractice was a big reason our healthcare costs were so high. Steve's comments that even in states that limited litigation, the costs didn't change struck a chord. And today, I listened to NPR on health care questions and heard Julie Rovner say that malpractice constitutes 1% of healthcare costs. Yikes. Obviously not a big chunk of costs at all.

Interesting argument

That I am sure Steve will not like. :) But I am curious what you all think about E.J. Dionne's argument that Republicans want concealed guns everywhere except their own workplace:

"Isn't it time to dismantle the metal detectors, send the guards at the doors away and allow Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights by being free to carry their firearms into the nation's Capitol?"

Speaking of Idiot America

We need go no further than the right wing birthers.

I want this book

And I love Charlie Pierce on Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me. Amazon.com: Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free (9780767926140): Charles P. Pierce: Books:

"Question: Is there a specific turning point where, as a country, we moved away from prizing experience to trusting the gut over intellect?
Charles P. Pierce: I don't know if there's one point that you can point to and say, “This is when it happened.” The conflict between intellectual expertise and reflexive emotion—often characterized as “good old common sense,” when it is neither common nor sense—has been endemic to American culture and politics since the beginning. I do think that my profession, journalism, went off the tracks when it accepted as axiomatic the notion that “Perception is reality.” No. Perception is perception and reality is reality, and if the former doesn't conform to the latter, then it’s the journalist's job to hammer and hammer the reality until the perception conforms to it. That's how “intelligent design” gets treated as “science” simply because a lot of people believe in it."

I think he has a point. Several points, actually, but this one is spot on. Once you bought into the idea that "perception is reality" it allows you to report idiocy as the equivalent of something smart and testable. It allows spin to function as news.

Back--with some thoughts on race and Cheney's perverse view of the Constitution

We just had a great week with SOF's sister and family as the first guests to try out our new guest room and extra bathroom. The bathroom still lacks a mirror and some cabinetry, but other than that received rave reviews. Same for the new room, even though at the end of the A/C run and lacking any external shade, was cool enough for our guests. Thankfully, they were here during the cool week of July, and not the 105 week!

But we had a great time. Played a little guitar, ate some great food, and enjoyed some lively conversation.

*****

But I am back and resting up--and reading through the news. Couple of items caught my eye, and they deserve some attention. First was the arrest of Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates, and the subsequent furor from Obama's characterization of the arrest as the Cambridge cops acting "stupidly." Obama then acted presidential (imo) and admitted to using language that didn't help the situation and even calling the arresting officer. It really does sound like Gates over-reacted--though it is perhaps understandable after returning from overseas to be accused of breaking into your own house. It also sounds like the cop over-reacted and placed a man in cuffs who uses a cane. I am with Tapped's Adam Serwer on this, however, in arguing that white America is still not ready to talk about race.

All of this, mind you, during a week when a Florida neurosurgeon and healthcare reform opponent sent around an email depicting Obama as a Witch Doctor with a bone through his nose. To which, the Tea Bagger movement offered their unflinching support, and refuses to see the racism in their opposition to Obama. Or when MSNBC continues to put on Pat Buchanan after he argues that this country was built by white people, and that blacks were only discriminated against. What is more, he is sure that only whites died on D-Day or at Vicksburg. Or just a week past Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn saying "you would have some splaining to do" to our Puerto-Rican born Supreme Court nominee. And let's not forget, btw, the raging racism of the "birther" movement that claims that Obama is not American and therefore not their legitimate President--something aided and abetted by Liz Cheney and Lou Dobbs, and echoed by Republican House members.

This goes back to another point, the one where most Americans (white) seem to think that racism is dead, or only relegated to the extreme Klan members. I have seen this in discussions myself, where racism is defined very narrowly and very extremely, and individuals who still use racial stereotypes and admit they wouldn't be happy if their child dated someone of color--at the same time asserting that they are not racist or that there is nothing wrong with what they said. When racism is limited to those who burn crosses and shout the n-word, a lot of us (me included) get let off the hook for our own racism. I am a fan of Ta-Nehisi Coates and find him thoughtful on race issues. Like here:

"Again, I think this makes sense, if you believe racism to be the province of societal pariahs, not people who hawk their wares on MSNBC. But if you believe that we live with it every day, that the worst part of racism is how it hides in the hearts of otherwise decent people, than this is rather puzzling. If you've had friends who've looked you in the eye, and said something racist, you may feel differently."

We have made a lot of progress in this country on race issues. But when every other week a Republican sends out a racist picture of Obama and still thinks it isn't racist--I wonder.

*****

Point two, and also very critical was the recent NY Times report on discussions inside the Bush administration about using the military against even American citizens. Greenwald weighs in and links to the original memo. Scary stuff. Yoo recommends, and evidently Cheney and Addington completely agreed, that during a time of war, the President had the discretion to use the military inside the country even to round up people who might be American citizens. His reasoning, and also his justification for getting around the Posse Commitatus Act of 1878, was that this would be using the military for military purposes rather than law enforcement. Further, Yoo said that both the First and Fourth amendments could be set aside during such situations.

As I read the memo, the constant refrain of the President's discretion jumped out, and that discretion was not bound by congress or the courts. It is, as I read it, a recipe for tyranny, and truly unbelievable. Credit, I must say, goes to Condi Rice and others who spoke out against this, and ultimately to George Bush for not allowing Cheney to further shred the constitution. Shame on him for allowing the conversation to even occur.

And can we finally dispense with the nonsense that Dick Cheney and David Addington are just good Americans doing what they thought was right for America?

Jimmy Carter leaves the SBC

Because of the issue of gender inequality, a similar reason for my own move:

"So my decision to sever my ties with the Southern Baptist Convention, after six decades, was painful and difficult. It was, however, an unavoidable decision when the convention's leaders, quoting a few carefully selected Bible verses and claiming that Eve was created second to Adam and was responsible for original sin, ordained that women must be 'subservient' to their husbands and prohibited from serving as deacons, pastors or chaplains in the military service.

This view that women are somehow inferior to men is not restricted to one religion or belief. Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths. Nor, tragically, does its influence stop at the walls of the church, mosque, synagogue or temple. This discrimination, unjustifiably attributed to a Higher Authority, has provided a reason or excuse for the deprivation of women's equal rights across the world for centuries.

At its most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities."

David Barton is back

And has decided, with his great "historical" knowledge, that civil rights leaders are not very important. The dude has a bachelors from Oral Roberts in "religious education" but in far right conservative circles (Mike Huckabee, for example), that makes him a professional historian.

This is what anti-intellectualism gets you.

Palin and victimization

A pretty dead-on take on Poor, Persecuted Sarah Palin - WSJ.com

You are NOT a Bible Character

Finally. Someone articulates this in the way I have been unable. I am so utterly annoyed at how people appropriate people from the Bible to justify whatever personal bias or flaw they might have. When Mark Sanford invoked King David, my thought was, "but you are not King David," even though I was unable to explain that. Unfortunately, these kinds of references often serve as coded (or not so coded) messages to the faithful--and unfortunately, the faithful often does not think this stuff through. And as a historian, I was heartened to see someone point out how bad theology often resulted in real tragedy in American history:

"There is a long history of just such usage. The pilgrim fathers who came to America read their situation into the Bible (or the Bible into their situation) with the result that white pilgrims were seen as fulfilling the role of the Israelites in this, the Promised Land, while native Americans were cast in the role of Canaanites. Thus generations of Joshuas arose feeling Biblically justified in the genocide of America’s native population. Some of that Biblical reading continues to echo in the popular imagination to this day. It was Bad theology in the 17th century and it is bad theology today. Stated in a fundamental way: you are not a Bible character."

Sanford's arrogance is, unfortunately, not rare in evangelical circles. Palin tried to compare herself to Esther (since evidently Esther was also proud of her ignorance?), and Tom Delay once compared his experience to that of Christ.

If Bill Clinton did that, the evangelicals would freak out. If Obama did it, their heads would asplode. But somehow, when one of their own does it, they just nod along.

Sigh

I am rather stunned at how many people I know who cling to the idea of the GOP being more moral. Evidently lip service to abortion is all you need to do. Because the party of moral values evidently includes Promise Keepers who get their parents to pay off their mistresses. Well, mistress, anyway.

And Peggy Noonan is often wrong, but when she thinks Sarah Palin is an idiot, perhaps the Reagan adoring GOP should wake up.

"She makes the Republican Party look inclusive." She makes the party look stupid, a party of the easily manipulated.

"She shows our ingenuous interest in all classes." She shows your cynicism.

"Now she can prepare herself for higher office by studying up, reading in, boning up on the issues." Mrs. Palin's supporters have been ordering her to spend the next two years reflecting and pondering. But she is a ponder-free zone. She can memorize the names of the presidents of Pakistan, but she is not going to be able to know how to think about Pakistan. Why do her supporters not see this? Maybe they think "not thoughtful" is a working-class trope!

"The media did her in." Her lack of any appropriate modesty did her in. Actually, it's arguable that membership in the self-esteem generation harmed her. For 30 years the self-esteem movement told the young they're perfect in every way. It's yielding something new in history: an entire generation with no proper sense of inadequacy.

"Turning to others means the media won!" No, it means they lose. What the mainstream media wants is not to kill her but to keep her story going forever. She hurts, as they say, the Republican brand, with her mess and her rhetorical jabberwocky and her careless causing of division. Really, she is the most careless sower of discord since George W. Bush, who fractured the party and the movement that made him. Why wouldn't the media want to keep that going?

Sarah Palin the Marion Barry of the right?

At least one person thinks so.

GOP Follies continue

One of my big complaints with the GOP over the last 20 years has been their blatant attack on government as evil. That has led, as I have argued, to a patently destructive policy from Republicans. Their offer to public policy is to remove government oversight, regulation, and services--even if there is nothing left to take the place except extreme pain. If they had a goal of "good governance" instead of "government is the problem" (thanks Reagan) then I could disagree, but disagree respectfully. But they don't. I know some republicans do, and some of them read here. But the leadership of the Republican party has no interest in good governing. Not one bit.

A good example comes from Texas, who has as Governor, a man who used to be widely regarded as one of the dopiest ones. Sanford and Palin have moved him right off the radar, but good old Rick "Secession might be the answer" Perry is still out there as a wackaloon. He is now thinking of nominating a woman who hates Public Education as chair of the state's school board. Ok, so she hates public education and thinks it should be abolished because it is a "tool of perversion" (I am guessing she is not pro-gay) and she advocates a rigidly Christian approach to governing. A graduate of Pat Robertson's "law school," (remember the legal brilliance of Monica Goodling) she believes that only those who "desiring to govern have a sincere knowledge and appreciation for the Word of God in order to rightly govern.” Oh, and she warned her fellow nutjobs before the last election that Obama was plotting with terrorists to attack Americans.

And Rick Perry wants her in charge of education in Texas. And I am supposed to respect this party at all?

Perhaps the best explanation of Palin so far

Why Sarah Palin really quit us. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine:

"Once you understand that Palin's only actual message is the importance of loving and understanding Palin, it becomes easier to understand why she quit. The more Palin tries to explain herself, the more we all fail to get her. Every time she goes off script, she makes less sense. No wonder she didn't want to do debate prep or be coached by the McCain communications team. Instead of thanking those who packaged, explained, and spun her, Palin resents them. And because she believes she has been crystal clear all along, she's come to resent us, too. The enduring political lesson of Sarah Palin may simply be that for most of her political career she's been lost in translation, without fully appreciating that only in translation was she ever, briefly found."

The entire column is pretty good.

Oh. Good. God. This is your GOP?

New poll from USAToday suggests that Palin's incoherent resignation makes her more popular among Republicans:

"When it comes to a potential presidential run, the USA TODAY poll displays both Palin's strength in the Republican base and her weakness among the swing voters who usually decide national elections. Republicans by 71%-27% say they would be likely to vote for her if she ran for president in 2012, while independents by 51%-44% would not."

Hmm. She writes a resignation speech worthy of an angry high school breakup letter--quits her job because being Governor of Alaska is too hard when people inquire into her ethics--and is in full throat about the mean, mean, media who asks her questions and refuses to swoon when she flutters her eyes and says "you betcha." And the Republicans like her MORE THAN EVER.

And I am supposed to take this party seriously?

NRA Christianity

I really understand the value of the second amendment (though wonder why the Mike Huckabees and other seem to think holding on to their Glock 9 will allow them to stop the government from forcing them to do, well, anything), and really understand Steve's point about safe gun ownership and responsible gun owners. But I don't understand the deification of guns in the Christian community, and this pastor scares the crap out of me, if for no other reason that the conflation of American Exceptionalism, Christianity and guns:

"'As a Christian, I believe, and as an American this country was founded on the deep-seated belief in God and firearms -- without which we wouldn't be here today,'"

I also understand liking and respecting guns. I have no interest in hunting any more, but have no problem with those who do. I don't, however, understand those (including an unnamed friend and or relative) who sought to stock up on ammunition when Obama took office.

Palin quits as Governor to spend more time outside of Alaska?

I have to say, she did pull off quite a coups. News delivered Friday afternoon before a holiday weekend is usually a way to kill a story. I doubt that Palin announcing she was stepping down was intended to do that, or will do that. I also have to say that I was completely surprised. Seems like a very weird thing to do from this very weird politician. Is she quitting to prepare for future runs? How do you run for a bigger office (Senate, or President) when you couldn't even finish one term as Governor, and quit that job? Is she leaving to avoid some kind of ethics scandal? Given her penchant for lying, I don't believe anything she said in her resignation speech.

Actually, we have no clue. But I suspect we will find out in the upcoming months. Any thoughts?

Evangelical paradoxes

I saw this on natalie's narrative, but for some reason, was unable to post my comment. (I assume user error on my part). But she points to the paradox between the evangelical approach to redemption v. the conservative one.

I also thought that this seems like a really interesting comparison for Sanford to make. Invoking humility, while then comparing himself to a Biblical patriarch is a pretty neat trick.

I think, btw, that Sanford is, at some level, self-destructing his political career on purpose. But he may not be aware of that, and so can't stop using the conservative evangelical speak that got him this far.

Palin's sense of self

From a profile in vanityfair.com:

"More than once in my travels in Alaska, people brought up, without prompting, the question of Palin’s extravagant self-regard. Several told me, independently of one another, that they had consulted the definition of “narcissistic personality disorder” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders—“a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy”—and thought it fit her perfectly. When Trig was born, Palin wrote an e-mail letter to friends and relatives, describing the belated news of her pregnancy and detailing Trig’s condition; she wrote the e-mail not in her own name but in God’s, and signed it “Trig’s Creator, Your Heavenly Father.”"

Wow. Just wow.

Reading the rest right now.

Hmm--unfortunate spelling strikes again

I have nothing against home-schoolers playing football too, though I am a bit weirded out by this coach who instructs a kid to “block as if you’re blocking for God.”" God needs a pulling guard?

But this picture is just unfortunate--especially if you are trying to stress academics. The Lord loves football too.

I love NPR, but their Fox reporting has to end

I heard part of this exchange the other day and found myself yelling at the radio. this exchange the other day:

"This morning Inskeep was at it again in a chat with Juan Williams. After Williams claimed 'what the government's doing may in fact drive up the cost of health care' and touted a CBO report alleging that the Dem/Obama plan would 'cause some people to lose their insurance' - Inskeep played a clip of the Sebelius interview in which she calls the potential for single-payer insurance a 'draconian scenario.' He then asks Williams, 'Has the White House found any effective way to prove a negative here; to say this is not going to become creeping socialism?'"

During the same interview, Williams also talked about the declining poll numbers for Obama, but seemed to completely ignore the recent NYT poll that shows pretty solid public support for the "public plan." In fact, many other sources are commenting on the fact that Republican leaders are completely out of touch with their Republican followers on issues such as healthcare. But you won't hear about that on Fox and when two of the NPR "commentators" also "comment" at Fox, then you get the picture. And Cokie Roberts? I used to like her, but wonder when she joined the O'Reilly club. I have not heard her give balanced analysis in years.

Why Mark Sanford matters

Leighton made the point in the comments that the GOP wants to make this about sex, rather than the real issue of how he abandoned his job and his state. And I think that cannot be ignored. He didn't tell his staff where he was. He didn't tell his LT Governor where he was. He might not be the head of the free world (though he clearly wanted to be before this), but he has obligations as the head of SC, and sometimes those executives have to make decisions immediately in the event of a natural disaster or some similar issue.

And that actually leads me to this point about "family values" and the faux Christianity that has permeated the Republican party. (Sanford's fellow SC Republican colleague Bob Inglis thinks this is an opportunity to ‘Lose Stinking Rot of Self-Righteousness’ ). And I think that would be a great step. But Leighton's comment brought to mind the real problem I see with the current GOP. Their governing principle is that "government is evil." What positive policies can you provide with that principle? Very few, I would suggest, and that has encouraged the GOP to make themselves popular with the Bible Belt.

But Sanford is a great example of that. Yes, he is a hypocrite about "values," but he is very representative of the destructive approach to government. He preferred to take no stimulus money even when he has schools in disrepair. And, as Leighton pointed out, he put his personal life above his responsibilities as Governor.

If the GOP wants my respect (not my vote, mind you, but at least my grudging respect) they have to articulate policy goals that are not inherently destructive. And they have to stop this mindless appeal to family values. Of course, Christian conservatives created this mess too, by making their personal faith another political card to be bought and sold and spun.

Unfortunately, as we saw last fall with the response to Palin, and the increasing radicalism and dilution of the GOP, I don't see any of that happening anytime soon. Neither the Christian right nor the GOP seem ready to learn that lesson.

21 Years!

Today is our 21st anniversary. As I joked on Facebook, our marriage is now old enough to drink. It is hard to believe that we have been together so long, and harder still to believe that she puts up with me after all these years.

So here is to SOF! Happy Anniversary, sweetie.

Another conservative for family values for other people

Turns out that SC governor Mark Sanford wasn't hiking the Appalachian trail, after all. And his wife wasn't lying when she said she didn't know where he was. He was in Argentina supposedly breaking up with his girlfriend.

Look, I am not an idiot. I know this kind of thing happens. It doesn't make it right, but it is part of the human experience. What bugs me the most is the hypocrisy of the right wing. When the Clinton or Edwards affair came to light, the right wing was absolutely merciless. Including, of course, good people like Mark Sanford. Newt Gingrich criticized Clinton's affair even as he had an affair. Promise Keeper John Ensign had an affair with his staffer's wife. All of these people love to play the family values card, but when those values are broken by Democrats, the knives come out and phrases like "if he can't be truthful to his wife, how can I trust him in office." When Republicans are caught doing it (heterosexually, of course), then Republicans call for tolerance and forgiveness.

I am all for that. Let this family manage this trauma. Those young boys and wife are not props for political gain. But maybe discover some compassion for others, and save the self-righteousness. Eh, Sally Kern?

On Iran and the conservative response

From Iranian filmmaker Kouross Esmaeli on John McCain's lack of credibility:

"KOUROSS ESMAELI: What is interesting about the criticisms that are coming from the right is that it’s been coming primarily from Senator John McCain. The Iranians know Senator John McCain as the man who sang “Bomb, bomb Iran” during the elections of last year. The man holds no credibility as far as supporting Iranians or seeming like he’s got the best interests of the Iranians at heart. And that, for Iranians and for this issue, that discredits him altogether and discredits this whole attack on President Obama.

President Obama’s stand, I think, has been the most sensible, and it’s amazing that the President of the United States is taking such a sensible stand. And that—everyone I’ve talked to in Iran has said the same thing, that we do not need any symbol of Western, especially American, interference in Iran’s internal politics."

And this from Joe Klein:

McCain, who spent the entire 2008 election making misleading statements about the nature of the Iranian government (I wonder if he still thinks Ahmadinejad is more powerful than the Supreme Leader), has been at the forefront of this. It is very unseemly. I have yet to hear what possible good it would do for the President of the United States to encourage the protesters, except to give the Iranian regime a better excuse for killing more of them. McCain's bleatings are either for domestic political consumption or self-satisfaction, a form of hip-shooting onanism that demonstrates why he would have been a foreign policy disaster had he been elected.
To put it as simply as possible, McCain--and his cohorts--are trying to score political points against the President in the midst of an international crisis. It is the sort of behavior that Republicans routinely call "unpatriotic" when Democrats are doing it. I would never question John McCain's patriotism, no matter how misguided his sense of the country's best interests sometimes seems. His behavior has nothing to do with love of country; it has everything to do with love of self.
Again, the crucial fact about the protesters is this: they may hate the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad regime--who wouldn't?--but that doesn't make them particular fans of the United States. I have yet to meet an Iranian who does not believe that the United States gave poison gas to Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, gas which injured thousands upon thousands of Iranian men, who still live, incapacitated, in the shadows of that society. (Indeed, the attention Ahmadinejad has paid to the Iran-Iraq war veterans and their families is a major source of his extensive support among the Iranian working class.)

What a disaster McCain would have been on foreign policy, and what in the hell has happened to Republicans over the last 12-18 years? Where are the muted and calm voices? What is it with this blustering "grab a big stick and whack them hard or you don't love America" approach to dealing with others?

Monday morning

Hey. Remodel moving right along, and we are hoping to have tile installed by the end of the week. That means finalizing electrical and plumbing fixture purchases in the next few days.

___


Couple of news items caught my eye this morning. Last week, Greg (at the Parish) caught this item regarding Thomas Kinkade. Evidently, the self-proclaimed "Painter of Light" has some very shady business practices. Reading about Kinkade reminded me of a situation SOF and I ran into with some very religious business people. They merged their business philosophy with their Christian faith--which sounds fine, until you realized they weren't quite clear about those two different sides. Their response to others around them tended to vacillate between Christian ministry and hard-nosed business decision. Reminded me of the saying about baseball and management--"when you say it is a game, they say it is just business. When you say it is business, they say, "hey, it is just a game." In the case with our religious friends, it was "when you say it is a business, they call it a ministry, but when you need to get paid for that overtime, they call it a ministry."

Wasn't that they were bad people, in any way of thinking. But they weren't clear about their motives. I am more and more convinced that most Christians (especially of the evangelical type) over-simplify their religious faith and actually just assume that those "in relationship" with God will automatically learn about morality and ethics. A spiritual osmosis, as it were. But it does not work that way, and the most recent debate about torture is the best example. Ethics and morality, I am more and more convinced, require an open conversation and dialogue. These issues have to be introduce and framed, or most people will not even really consider them. Many I have seen understand the basics of "not stealing" and not "sleeping with the neighbor's wife." But they haven't really examined how their Christian faith might translate into business ethics, and they certainly haven't grappled with how their Christian faith might not be in line with American patriotism or capitalism.

Which, to switch topics ever so slightly, might explain how so many churches have adopted the advertising and marketing gimmicks to attract people to their churches. In this case, evidently parking some Nascar racing cars outside the church, which Greg makes funnier than I thought possible.

_____

Lord knows Peggy Noonan annoys me quite frequently, as she did when she said of torture and the Bush people that somethings in life needed to remain "mysterious." But she is correct here when she points out the silly nature of the McCain/Republican criticism of Obama on Iran.

_____

Speaking of Republicans, I had an interesting conversation (or at least began one) last week on the issue of tort reform and health care. I am coming around, at least in principle, to the idea that we need to do something to protect against some of these lawsuits as they are contributing to the rising cost of care. But I don't understand the Republican impulse to both rein in lawsuits, and also deregulate industry. How can you say to the American people that they shouldn't be able to sue the manufacturer of some item, but they shouldn't expect some reasoned oversight and regulation of that same item? I could understand one or the other, but both?

It, added to the mantra from the right about health care, make me very suspicious that Republicans (talking about those in Congress, not everyone in the country) care really only about corporate profits.

____

Ok. Enough of that. My contractor just lent me his Sawzall and I am going to use it on a stubborn overflow pipe in my garden pond. Heh.

Later.

SCOTUS rules that man has no right to post-conviction evidence

Even though the man offers to pay for the testing, and it could conclusively prove his guilt or innocence.

Perhaps someone can explain this to me, because as it is, it simply looks like conservative justices don't give a rat's ass if a state or the feds convict an innocent man.

Friday home improvement and political revulsion

The remodel is going well. Yesterday, our builder cut the access into the new rooms and hung the door. The Solatube guy installed two such devices--one in our new bathroom and one in our living room area.

From Progress

Today we install the big window, which will be really cool. Our builder will continue to finish the sheetrock taping and SOF and I will try to pick out some of the fixtures we need for electrical and plumbing.


----


On the political front, I continue to be completely frustrated with Republicans. No offense intended to those reading here, but I am increasingly convinced that most of Republican thought is predicated on myths. The myth of self-reliance and small government. And the myth of Republican wisdom on matters military and foreign policy. How else did we end up with torturers and Republican defenders of those torturers?

And as Larsion notes, Republican leadership is completely out of ideas, and has demonstrated that with their blustering on the Iranian issue:

"All of this comes back to the problem of Republican denial about why they lost power. They are supremely confident about their views on national security and foreign policy, and they cannot conceive that a majority of the country would reject them because of the policies they advocated and enacted. Worse still, they remain wedded to the hectoring, moralistic and aggressive approach of the last administration, in which sanctions and condemnation are the only “soft” tools they understand. They are so wedded to this approach that that they think this is not only the best kind of foreign policy, but that anything other than this is fecklessness and surrender."

On self-reliance and small government, the conservative desire to crush health care reform moves forward with the killing of the "public option." Republicans seem to be so wedded to their mythology of small government and their own autonomy, that they have no connection to those without health insurance or who have lost their homes and life savings to a catastrophic illness. I have spoken to those completely unwilling to push forward on reform if it means any cost to them--regardless of if that meant those 40 million might now be covered. After all, if no one is helping Republicans, then why should they help others? It isn't as if their faith asks them to do anything about it.

Oh wait.

Conservatives and Republicans have a strong history and legitimate philosophical backing. The leadership of this party are now miles from both and completely unaware how far they have drifted from any legitimate conservative thought. And with each day they demonstrate that they have devolved to a defender of corporate power, and an enabler of religious anti-intellectual and radical thought.

And yet another GOP racist joke

And another fake apology. Or in this case, the mistake was not sending out the email, it was sending it to the wrong people.

Quick blog post

As I am shopping online for a pedestal sink and getting ready for Wilco tonight!

Sarah Palin just refuses to go away. Her right, of course, but she seems to be lessening her appeal rather than the opposite. I didn't hear the Letterman joke about her daughter, but it did sound tasteless and out of bounds. I like him, but like all good comedians, he will push the boundaries. This one went over the line, and Palin is correct to respond. But when you see her willingness to use her own children and family for her own political future, her outrage seems just more of the same political grandstanding. Saw this quote about her from Ta-Nehisi Coates that sums her up for me:

"Sarah Palin is in tenacious possession of a small mind."

Not just this, but just about everything she speaks to. Raging against socialism as she brags about redistributing oil revenues to Alaskan residents. Or saying that the cause of climate change doesn't matter, or that we should have the "Under God" phrase in the Pledge because it was "good enough for the Founders." She has generally reflected a lack of curiosity about the world around her, and yet John McCain thought she was good enough to put that close to the Presidency.

-----

Now, back to work on the house.

GOP activist says escaped gorilla was "ancestor" of Michelle Obama

Post racial? I guess not. And why do they "apologize" the same way?

We spoke with DePass over the phone Friday night. He said, "I am as sorry as I can be if I offended anyone. The comment was clearly in jest."

Moron. Not apologizing for calling the First Lady a gorilla. Apologizing if any of us were offended by it.

More on the right wing's hate problem

Eugene Robinson on the right's overreaction to the Homeland Security memo:

"And it wasn't just the Sean Hannitys, Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks of the world who pretended to be outraged. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele accused the administration of trying 'to segment out Americans who dissent from this administration, to segment out conservatives in this country who have a different philosophy or view from this administration, and labeling them as terrorists.' Steele seems to have decided that telling the truth isn't nearly as important as the high-temperature exercise known as 'firing up the base.'

The thing is, though, that words have consequences.

There's profit for the pundits, and perhaps personal advantage for some politicians, in calling President Obama a 'socialist' and calling Judge Sonia Sotomayor a 'racist Latina' and claiming that Democrats want to 'take away your guns' -- in creating and nurturing a sense of grievance among those inclined to be aggrieved. But what about those who might not understand that it's all just political theater?"

The thing is, the idiot right doesn't care. And the idiot right includes Hannity and Limbaugh, and the Coulter's of the world. They don't care. Add Sarah Palin to this list. Remember how she seemed to get a rush from pushing those crowds to a frenzy? Even McCain seemed troubled when he ran into it on the campaign, but Palin never seems to make that connection. I used to dislike her intensely, but assumed she was at least smart and capable. Her most recent interviews and posturing suggests that she is every bit as dumb and as unconscionable as Hannity and Limbaugh.

No, that right doesn't care. As I have been saying for years on this blog, it is time for the grownup Republicans and grownup conservatives to stand up against these people and kick them to the curb. Denounce Hannity and Limbaugh and Glen Beck for the hatred they spew. Do it, and reclaim the legitimate place on the stage where we debate legitimate arguments about Obama's health care proposals and government philosophy.

The right's problem

Is that the mainstream Republican party uses very similar language with the far extreme right--the people who are now putting their violent talk into action. Here is a good piece by Joan Walsh on this topic. (H/t Anglican).

More from Shepard Smith on crazies emailing him at Fox

And interesting what he doesn't say--that his colleagues at Fox (Hannity and O'Reilly) are part of this right wing echo chamber. And that even Chris Wallace continues the "Obama as socialist" meme.

Wow, that Homeland Security Report was ridiculous, wasn't it?

Or maybe it wasn't. Today, a crazed right winger famous in the white supremacy world opened fire in the Holocaust museum. Sure glad that there isn't a real problem of right wing violence in this country--just less than a week or so (I have lost track) of George Tiller's murder in Kansas. Before that, we had multiple shootings by people waving around conservative propaganda. Yeah, I know, these individual people are responsible for their crimes, but the entire right wing establishment has contributed to this. Right wingers comparing abortion to the Holocaust, to say nothing of the wingnuts from Limbaugh to O'Reilly who daily stoke the flames of anti-other fear. God knows I hate to link to anything with Fox News, but here is Shep Smith showing himself yet again as the only sane person over there.

____


And apropos of, well, I guess, idiot conservatism, this from Palin land. She first brags about her state's ability to spread oil revenues to the individual residents, and then complains about Obama leading us toward socialism. Is she just really, really dumb? Or is this something else?

Terrorism works--at least on abortion clinics

God knows that I am not happy with abortion, but ultimately, I believe that decision has to be made by a woman in control of her own body. And whatever we think of it, you should not be able to shut down a clinic by murdering the doctor. Bitch Ph.D. has a very nice post on this subject, and for those interested, Sullivan has been running a lot of reader stories on every side of the abortion debate. I understand that Bill O'Reilly has been comparing this murder to the murder of the Army recruiter--a truly tragic and awful event as well. But as many have noted, the main difference is that the man who murdered Dr. Tiller is getting encouraging notes from around the country cheering his terrorism.

Suspect in abortion doctor death warns of violence - washingtonpost.com

Shouldn't we be waterboarding him to find out what else he knows? Or is that just reserved for non-white extremists?

Sunday notes

Perhaps, one of the reasons that the Republicans are in trouble can be found here.

____


Evidently, Sarah Palin is out there again railing against taxes and government control. Here is a good indicator of the reality of Alaska, but it also applies to a lot of other "red" states who love to complain about high taxes but actually take in more federal dollars then they contribute.



____




Here is a thought. I think one of the toughest jobs in Washington has to be as communications secretary for Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe. I called Senator Inhofe's Washington office the other day as well, and was told by the nice young woman who answered the phone that the Senator had been misquoted. Evidently, he was not misquoted. He still thinks that it is not clear which side our American President prefers. You know, whether Obama sides with the terrorists or the American troops.

Sigh. What an idiot.

____


I am not sure how to describe this phenomenon, but it seems to me that a lot of American woes go directly to them being convinced of the exact opposite. So convinced of their own moral superiority, they cannot imagine enacting the very same torture policy of some third world dictator. Or, so convinced of their democratic superiority, it never dawns on them that their own elections might need monitoring. Ezra Klein notes a problem of stagnant wages and increasing wages. In my conversations with people, most don't seem to think that wages have stagnated, and focus only on federal income taxes as the source of their woes, even as the cost of government is simply shifted into other areas. Anyway, as Klein notes, that disconnect may be the reason we are still moving slow on health care reform:

"That slumping line isn't normally called wages-minus-health-premiums. It's called wages. And most workers think stagnant wages mean their employer is paying them less. They don't know that the main reason for stagnant wages is that their wage increases are going to pay for their health insurance premiums. If they did -- if they realized that compensation is pretty much a zero-sum endeavor and their employers don't so much buy them health insurance as garnish their wages to pay for their health insurance -- you'd probably see a lot more general anger at rising health care costs."

Wiley Drake is back on the crazy

I started to write this post and the line "back on the crazy" came up as a former post title, so I went with it. But "crazy" kind of implies eccentric or kooky. This guy is much worse than that, as he shows when he says that he is praying for the President to die. Yep, another of his imprecatory prayers. At times, I wonder if God regrets that so many of his followers seem stuck in the OT vengeful God, and seem to have missed the entire message of Jesus. Not that I know exactly what that entire message is, but I am pretty sure that it isn't Wiley Drake.

Oh, and if that isn't bad enough, Drake says that he thinks that the Obama camp had Tiller killed to undermine the pro-life movement. Oh sure, he is glad the doctor is dead and had prayed for him to die too, but he thinks that the admin did it to further the pro-choice agenda.

As BB said when he sent this to me, "WTF?"

I have to say that I hate the entire Cheney family

Liz Cheney Restates Iraq-9/11 Link Her Father Disavowed, Chides Mitchell For Disagreeing

Clinton and Obama in Cairo

I like this picture.

Sullivan's take on Obama's Cairo speech

The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

Jon Stewart on Dick Cheney

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Dick (Uncut)
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Economic Crisis

Abortion wars

The murder of George Tiller has sparked a new debate about the abortion issue. Perhaps timely, I don't know. Fred at slacktivist has a great post on this which I recommend as a must read. It includes the video of Frank Schaeffer on the Rachel Maddow show talking about the fact that words have consequences, and the words he and others used in the 70s and 80s are partly responsible for this kind of violence.



As we discussed in the comments, this is not a first amendment issue. Randall Terry has the right to gloat over the death of this doctor, just as we have the right to be appalled and to find him contemptible. But Shaeffer and slacktivist make the same point--that once you have elevated the rhetoric on abortion to compare it to the Nazi Holocaust, and those who support it as the equivalent to Hitler, you know full well that some nutjob is going to take that to an extreme. You have taken the subtlety out of it. There is no more nuance or gray area--abortion becomes pure evil and you stand for pure good.

I didn't realize that our slacktivist writer came from that background (though his running series on the Left Behind books should have tipped me). I knew that Frank Schaeffer's late father was the Dr. Francis Shaeffer who helped radicalize the right, and even justified violence in response to Roe. Perhaps this post caught me at a tired moment this week, but I was reminded of my own small role in the religious right. Not really on the abortion debate--for whatever reason, that issue was not front and center in the churches of my youth--but in the presentation of absolute certainty. I just remember asserting absolute certainty on issues like homosexuality or abortion. It is interesting to read these other authors who came out of that kind of experience. At some point, that certainty became less understandable to me. For Fred, it was the realization that those mouthing the language of the holocaust either didn't mean any of it, or all of it. For me, it was driving through the poorest parts of Houston, and reading about failed attempts to provide decent pre and post natal care to the poor. No protestors. No religious right up in arms about the infant mortality rate of a developing nation. That was it for me.

I hope we can find someway to talk to each other. We are ill served by the public face of religion these days, and even less well served by the way the religious right has radicalized one of our two parties. We all want fewer unwanted children. We would hope for none. We all want that. Comparing abortion to the Holocaust isn't helping anyone except Randall Terry and the crazies.

A glimpse of how oversight worked under Bush's SEC

In Cox Years at the SEC, Policies Undercut Enforcement Efforts. And it isn't good.

Back. Bleary-eyed, and avoiding grading, but back

Week three of intersession starts today. On the remodel, the framing will be inspected this week, and we might do heat and air, electrical, and even start insulation and dry wall. Or not. Who the hell knows?

*****

There was a lot in the news last week. I hope to catch up on some of it. Some was stupid--like some conservatives complaining about how Sonia Sotomayor pronounced her name, or that she actually likes Puerto Rican food. In fact, the Sotomayor nomination appears to be a real problem for the Republicans. They cannot figure out how to respond, and we even have Senator Cornyn telling Newt, et al., that calling Sotomayor a racist is inappropriate. Newt, of course, responded with more claims that Sotmayor is a racist.

But this morning, I was reminded of the news of an abortion doctor, shot down in church. Shot as he was serving as an usher in church. They now have a suspect in custody, but one of the reasons we have this kind of domestic terrorism is the rhetoric of abortion as murder.

Shot in church.

Sigh.