Jonathan Alter on the new FISA law

And speaking of enhanced power.

Talking Points Memo | : "I hate to sound melodramatic about it, but while everyone was at the beach or "The Simpsons Movie" on the first weekend in August, the U.S. government shredded the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, the one requiring court-approved "probable cause" before Americans can be searched or spied upon. This is not the feverish imagination of left-wing bloggers and the ACLU. It's the plain truth of where we've come as a country, at the behest of a president who has betrayed his oath to defend the Constitution and with the acquiescence of Democratic congressional leaders who know better. Historians will likely see this episode as a classic case of fear -- both physical and political -- trumping principle amid the ancient tension between personal freedom and national security. [...]

Democrats obtained a sunset clause that requires the whole thing to be reauthorized in six months. But real damage has been done. At a minimum, we have suspended the Fourth Amendment for the time being."

Emphasis mine.

Constitutional protections. We used to believe in them. We used to. Evidently, that is pre-9-11 thinking. Back before the terrorists had scared us into giving up basic civil liberties. Shame on Bush and Cheney. Shame on the Democrats for caving on this one. Shame on the entire Republican establishment for giving us this administration.

Kind of been my point all along

Comics and Editorial Cartoons: Mike Luckovich on Yahoo! News

Conservatives who excuse this expanse of centralized power have to convince me they wouldn't mind Hilary or another Democrat continuing that use of power. Hard to push those back into the box once you have let them out.

Fight cynicism by doing something good

If you want. Feministing alerted us to a tragic fire in Boston that destroyed a domestic violence shelter. If you choose, you can help here.

Religion in America

And it is contested, isn't it? As it always has been, but today's world seems particularly contentious and ambitious and something other than church (at least for me). Marty pointed to this story that breaks your heart:

"ARLINGTON, Texas - A megachurch canceled a memorial service for a Navy veteran 24 hours before it was to start because the deceased was gay.

Officials at the nondenominational High Point Church knew that Cecil Howard Sinclair was gay when they offered to host his service, said his sister, Kathleen Wright. But after his obituary listed his life partner as one of his survivors, she said, it was called off.

“It’s a slap in the face. It’s like, ’Oh, we’re sorry he died, but he’s gay so we can’t help you,”’ she said Friday."

And to a certain extent, I understand the dilemma the church faced. They have bought into a world view where homosexuality is the new evil--up with terrorism. After all, we would rather be attacked by terrorists than use gay translators in the military. Given how that has been framed, it is almost expected that a church would refuse to even hold a memorial service for a gay person. But it makes me sad.

But maybe not as sad as this story (H/t Mary) about a group within the Defense department, or at least endorsed by the Pentagon, that advances an apocalyptical view of the world and pushes that view on our soldiers. And those we are trying to democratize.

Baldwin became a right-wing, born-again Christian after the 9/11 attacks, and now is the star of Operation Straight Up (OSU), an evangelical entertainment troupe that actively proselytizes among active-duty members of the US military. As an official arm of the Defense Department's America Supports You program, OSU plans to mail copies of the controversial apocalyptic video game, Left Behind: Eternal Forces to soldiers serving in Iraq. OSU is also scheduled to embark on a "Military Crusade in Iraq" in the near future.

"We feel the forces of heaven have encouraged us to perform multiple crusades that will sweep through this war torn region," OSU declares on its website about its planned trip to Iraq. "We'll hold the only religious crusade of its size in the dangerous land of Iraq."

Good grief. Even George Bush learned that using the word "crusade" in this context was stupid. But I fear that these people use it knowing its meaning and intending to bring that message to an already turbulent and chaotic region. And sending copies of the Left Behind video game is just stupid. Yeah, let's just amp up the us v. them.

I recently had a conversation with a young person struggling with their faith. This person had been taught that either they believed in the literal and absolute innerant Bible or they were going to hell. Even now, this person felt forced to choose between Christianity (meaning fundamentalism) and being a non-Christian. I suggested there were alternatives, and that the bulk of Christians over time have not held such a fundamentalist line. But it is that tradition that gave us the Idaho representative misquoting the Bible to suggest that God was going to smite us for, well, religious freedom. And in the comments on that story, the faithful chimed in thanking their God for a Congressman who stood up for God.

But I don't think that is what he did. I don't think he made one thing better, just as I don't think sending Left Behind video games to anyone will make imrpove their lives, and I certainly don't think declaring a Christian Crusade in the Middle East will accomplish anything except get people killed.

Religion can do better. It has to.

Not a bigot

Remembering this earlier post about GOP bigotry, today we have Represenative Sali's spokesperson claiming that his boss isn't a bigot. You know, because when he said that a Hindu prayer would bring the wrath of God, he meant it in the best possible way.

Rudy and the truth

Evidently don't have a lot in common. Check out this
Village Voice article on Rudy's five lies about 9-11.

Interesting article

in The Atlantic this month on The Rove Presidency. The entire article is well worth the read as a study in arrogance. In this telling, Rove clearly preferred to bully people than work with them. Not only that, but he had/has a very elevated view of his own status--and according to this piece alienated Republican leaders by interrupting House and Senate leaders and called them by their first names as if he were an equal or superior.

But this little story tells us much about Rove, Bush and, I might add, people like Dick Armey and Bill Clinton.

Dick Armey, the House Republican majority leader when Bush took office (and no more a shrinking violet than DeLay), told me a story that captures the exquisite pettiness of most members of Congress and the arrogance that made Bush and Rove so inept at handling them. “For all the years he was president,” Armey told me, “Bill Clinton and I had a little thing we’d do where every time I went to the White House, I would take the little name tag they give you and pass it to the president, who, without saying a word, would sign and date it. Bill Clinton and I didn’t like each other. He said I was his least-favorite member of Congress. But he knew that when I left his office, the first schoolkid I came across would be given that card, and some kid who had come to Washington with his mama would go home with the president’s autograph. I think Clinton thought it was a nice thing to do for some kid, and he was happy to do it.” Armey said that when he went to his first meeting in the White House with President Bush, he explained the tradition with Clinton and asked the president if he would care to continue it. “Bush refused to sign the card. Rove, who was sitting across the table, said, ‘It would probably wind up on eBay,’” Armey continued. “Do I give a damn? No. But can you imagine refusing a simple request like that with an insult? It’s stupid. From the point of view of your own self-interest, it’s stupid. I was from Texas, and I was the majority leader. If my expectations of civility and collegiality were disappointed, what do you think it was like for the rest of the congressmen they dealt with? The Bush White House was tone-deaf to the normal courtesies of the office.”

Give the rest of it a read.

GOP bigotry rears its ugly head

And I would also note, a bit of Biblical illiteracy. But first, the
old fashion bigotry and American exceptionalism:

"We have not only a Hindu prayer being offered in the Senate, we have a Muslim member of the House of Representatives now, Keith Ellison from Minnesota. Those are changes — and they are not what was envisioned by the Founding Fathers,” asserts Sali.

Sali says America was built on Christian principles that were derived from scripture. He also says the only way the United States has been allowed to exist in a world that is so hostile to Christian principles is through “the protective hand of God.”

“You know, the Lord can cause the rain to fall on the just and the unjust alike,” says the Idaho Republican.

According to Congressman Sali, the only way the U.S. can continue to survive is under that protective hand of God. He states when a Hindu prayer is offered, “that’s a different god” and that it “creates problems for the longevity of this country.”"

The rain falling on just and unjust passage? That comes from Matthew AND IS IN THE CHAPTER COMMANDING US TO LOVE OUR FREAKING ENEMIES:

43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor[h] and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies[i] and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?

Sigh. And if you want a little more depression, follow the link and read some of the comments from the Bible-thumping drones.

Friday morning--updated

And feeling down a little this morning.

Once again, reading the news doesn't exactly help. As many of you know, the President held a press conference on his way out the door for vacation. Nevermind that he is the most vacationed President in history, and that given what his war is creating for some 160,000 troops, perhaps he could skip his vacation this year. Nevermind.

Some of his comments were actually reasonable. Suggesting (even though I thought he was an ass about it) that congressional earmarks are a problem to be solved before raising taxes for infrastructure projects is not a bad idea. After all, one of his own party is famous for things like the famous "bridge to nowhere."

But much of the rest was more proof that Bush is delusional. Or worse. When asked about accountability--and reminded that he made that a part of his campaign--and asked how that squared with commuting Scooter's sentence and still employing Al Gonzales, he responded in the way that only Bush could respond:

THE PRESIDENT: Lewis Libby was held accountable. He was declared guilty by a jury and he's paid a high price for it.

Al Gonzales -- implicit in your questions is that Al Gonzales did something wrong. I haven't seen Congress say he's done anything wrong. As a matter of fact, I believe, David, we're watching a political exercise. I mean, this is a man who has testified, he's sent thousands of papers up there. There's no proof of wrong. Why would I hold somebody accountable who has done nothing wrong? I mean, frankly, I think that's a typical Washington, D.C. assumption -- not to be accusatory, I know you're a kind, open-minded fellow, but you suggested holding the Attorney General accountable for something he did wrong.

And as a matter of fact, I would hope Congress would become more prone to deliver pieces of legislation that matter, as opposed to being the investigative body. I mean, there have been over 600 different hearings and, yet, they're struggling with getting appropriations bills to my desk.

Q If I could follow -- sorry. Given the decision to commute the sentence of Libby and given the performance of Iraqi leaders, is it fair for people to ask questions about your commitment to accountability?

THE PRESIDENT: I would hope people would say that I am deliberate in my decision-making; I think about all aspects of the decisions I make; and I'm a fair person.

Bush is the only person who thinks that Gonzales has done nothing wrong and one of the minority who actually thinks that Scooter actually paid much of a cost at all. Who can forget the check he wrote to pay his fine--casually. But I am sure the probation is just eating at him.

As for Gonzales, seriously. Who could watch that man testify, lie, repeat, and think he did a good job outside his mother? Gonzales is an idiot and a liar and willing to do whatever Bush asks him to do. Sigh.

Of course, as Eugene Robinson suggests:

"At least now maybe people will understand what I've been saying for months, which is that Bush doesn't care what anybody else thinks.

You really have to wonder how his mind works. If it does.

But my favorite part was this followup question on interrogation techniques:

"Q Red Cross report? THE PRESIDENT: I haven't seen it. We don't torture."

Did you get that? We don't torture. Except we do. And have and do. The VP himself said that waterboarding was a "no brainer." And the Red Cross report? Yeah, it isn't good:

"Congressional and other Washington sources familiar with the report said that it harshly criticized the C.I.A.’s practices. One of the sources said that the Red Cross described the agency’s detention and interrogation methods as tantamount to torture, and declared that American officials responsible for the abusive treatment could have committed serious crimes. The source said the report warned that these officials may have committed “grave breaches” of the Geneva Conventions, and may have violated the U.S. Torture Act, which Congress passed in 1994. The conclusions of the Red Cross, which is known for its credibility and caution, could have potentially devastating legal ramifications."

But as long as the President says we don't, I am convinced. Nevermind.

Update NPR newsblog caught this little gem in the New Yorker article on the Red Cross report describing some of the interrogation techniques and their origin:

"It starts with isolation. Then they eliminate the prisoners' ability to forecast the future -- when their next meal is, when they can go to the bathroom. It creates dread and dependency. It was the K.G.B. model. But the K.G.B. used it to get people who had turned against the state to confess falsely. The K.G.B. wasn't after intelligence."

I guess why the hell not. Bush and Cheney have turned America into a country that uses former Soviet Gulags to hide prisoners. Why not use the interrogation techniques of the KGB. That won't undermine our moral standing in the world, will it?

Nevermind!

Heh

A New Anglican's Journey: (hint, hint)

Busy again

This last week has been tough, and both SOF and I have tried to work through our grief with some physical labor. Really amazing how much that helps.

My latest project, which I am scrambling to complete before the semester starts, is to restore the garden pond in my backyard.

I should have taken pictures earlier, because this thing was nearly completely covered with vines and weeds. I cleared it away to reveal the potential of this pond.



Last week, I rented a pump and emptied as much of the fetid water that had accumulated over this wet spring.



Yesterday, I rented a little machine called a Groundhog (I think) to run a trench for the electrical. Wrestling with this beast has me quite sore today, but in a short hour or so of work, this machine allowed me to dig a trench some 14 inches deep over 60 feet.



Streak kept a watchful eye on me while I worked.



And then retired to the deck to oversee the entire operation.



Meanwhile, Abbie thought that my digging meant she should do some of her own.



Dirty nose dog.

Today, I am quite sore and tired, but it was a successful afternoon. I now await the electricians to complete the power connection and once the pond dries, will work to repair some cracks in the concrete walls. Then we fill it and add the waterfall. After it works for a while, we are looking to add fish.

Couple of videos

Of music I am listening to now.

First, Gomez (thanks Ubub) and this really delightful song. Not perhaps their best, but right now, I am just enjoying nice lyrics and melodies. Sue me.

Next, Brandi Carlile. Love how she sings and this song has all the good hooks.

And this song from Spoon's latest that is so intoxicating, Zalm called it (I think) "crack you can clap to."

Arab-American Christian on American Evangelicals

Deanna Murshed addresses something that has always bothered me:

"I've gotta admit, it hasn't been easy being a Christian Arab-American, much less in the evangelical church. How many times can you explain that Jesus wasn't baptized in the Rio Grande, that there are tens of thousands of indigenous Palestinian Christians still living in the Holy Land, and that loving Jewish people and 'blessing Israel' (as is oft cited from scripture) doesn't mean giving the modern (and mind you, secular) nation-state of Israel a carte blanche on foreign policy or grant it some sort of biblical immunity from criticism? For too long, such criticism has been deemed by my fellow American evangelical brothers and sisters as not only unbiblical but sometimes even -- yes, anti-semitic. (Notwithstanding the fact that Arabs are also Semites), the idea that Palestinians had any right to any part of the Holy Land has long been considered anathema by too many of my American kinfolk."

She notes the letter from progressive evangelicals to Bush advocating a two-state solution.

Republicans

Watching Tim Russert this morning and feeling the need to write him an angry letter. On 08 candidates, he remarked that we needed to know more about these people before electing them, and used GWB as one of those people. Yet Russert interviewed Candidate Bush and lobbed softballs to him. Now, Russert talks about that as if he had nothing to do with the obfuscation and poor reporting.

Interesting polling data came up, however. Seems like the public is starting to see the Republicans as not very trustworthy:

"Many of the issues being discussed by the presidential candidates — including the war in Iraq, health care, education and immigration — would be better handled by the Democratic Party, according to the poll’s respondents. And among issues traditionally known to be strong points for Republicans, such as the deficit, taxes and protecting America’s interests on trade matters, the Democrats now hold an advantage."

This is reaping the harvest of BushCo, and I have no sympathy for hardline Republicans. Many of us suggested this guy was absolutely incompetent and corrupt--but you knew better. On moral values, the Republicans still lead, though only by 5 points. How they have a 5 point lead amazes me. What amazes me even more, however, is that the public still gives Republicans the advantage on "promoting a strong military." After Walter Reed, backdoor draft, 15 month extensions, refusing to give our troops adequate time between active duty, cutting research on brain injuries, pushing PTSD soldiers back into duty, etc., etc., how the hell do you give the Republican Party an edge on the Military? After 6 years of absolute control, is our military stronger than it was under Clinton?

No.

Abstinence Only Plans Ineffective...And Detrimental?

SOF and I spent the day doing grief through mindless yardwork. During my mowing session, I recalled my experience in California in the 80s where I led backpacking trips for a SBC camp in California's Sierra Nevada Mountains. The camp was deep in the woods and that summer was dry and hot. I remember the fear that a major fire would sweep through and we would be done. Narrow gravel road+tinder dry conditions=bad outcome.

Luckily, we never experienced the fire that we feared. And we had an elder fire fighter who volunteered at the camp with his family. I liked him. He had great stories and during one scare, we all accompanied him to ostensibly fight a small fire close to camp. We had no training and no real skills. It could have been a disaster.

I remember a camp full of youth at the height of that fire concern. The camp leaders voiced the concern that kids might sneak off into the woods to smoke and start the dreaded fire. I suggested that we make the sand vollyball court--right next to the little river--our smoking area. The old firefighter had a coniption. That would be condoning sin. I suggested that we could save potential lives. He said that it would be condoning sin. I objected. But I was 22. He wasn't. I still don't remember where the camp leadership was on this, but I suspect fervently wishing they didn't have to make a choice and fervently hoping that nothing bad would happen. We did nothing and fortunately nothing happened. But I thought then, and think now, that was stupid policy.

I am reminded of that experience whenever I read about abstinence only programs. It seems like the height of avoidance AS policy, ignoring evidence, human behavior, hormones, scientific evidence on birth control, etc in favor of some idealized view of human sexuality. It's like parents saying to their kids, "don't drink and drive, but if you do, don't use the seat belts and don't you dare call us or someone you trust." Better that they experience the worst possible outcome rather than have the tools to address human error--even if it is their own. But this is the nature of our abstinence only program--something Ubub clearly identified as ideologically driven, not something there for its effectiveness.

Thought Theater: Abstinence Only Plans Ineffective...And Detrimental?: "Note that the study compared young people in abstinence only programs against similar aged individuals who were receiving no sex education. In other words, children enrolled in abstinence plans were as vulnerable to sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy as their counterparts receiving no counseling whatsoever.

Essentially, the abstinence plans simply consume large sums of government funding with no measurable benefit...except to assuage the moral judgments of certain religiously inclined individuals. That sounds to me to be the equivalent of utilizing the state to impose religious beliefs...a scenario which I would equate with a clear violation of the separation of church and state."

Sure glad we are spending millions on a completely useless program.

The study goes on to demonstrate that money spent on sex education, which includes providing young people the knowledge to protect themselves from pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, is very effective. Therefore, every dollar spent on an abstinence program reduces the money that can be spent on sex education; thereby increasing the rate of STD's and the number of pregnancies.

Nice. I am curious. What do you call a policy that has results completely opposite intent? A war against terror that increases terrorists? Anti-pregnancy/STD program that increases disease, pregnancy, and abortions?

That old firefighter was willing to risk all of us dying in a horrible fire rather than possibly allow kids who were going to smoke, to smoke in relative safety. No fan of teen smoking, I sincerely hope that kids make better choices. But we weren't going to stop the teen smokers there. Not that he cared about that. His idealized sense of their behavior was his guide--not reality.

No wonder conservatives distrust government.

Mondale on Cheney

Faithful Progressive: Former Vice President Walter Mondale: Cheney Has Gone Too Far: "I’ve never seen a former member of the House of Representatives demonstrate such contempt for Congress - even when it was controlled by his own party. His insistence on invoking executive privilege to block virtually every congressional request for information has been stupefying - it’s almost as if he denies the legitimacy of an equal branch of government. Nor does he exhibit much respect for public opinion, which amounts to indifference toward being held accountable by the people who elected him."

Cheney is a disgrace to our country and our system. And the man who has given him this unprecedented power and allowed him to flaunt public opinion and congressional oversight is even worse.

This IS unbelievable

Anglican has a post on a couple of new license plates available to Oklahomans that are supposed to...fight terrorism?

This is conservatism?

Natalie is equally annoyed at the anti-tax movement:

"It's events like this that make me so angry at the Republican philosophy of government. Sure, everyone wants to get rid of waste and ridiculous spending in our government, but whittling the system down so much that it cannot protect and serve us is stupid. Do those on the right not realize how much we rely on this shared system we have? Schools, roads, fire, police, food inspection, and more VERY important things! It's almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy: if you cut off funding so that you cripple government services, of COURSE they will do a poor job. Slacktivist notes that Minnesota's Republican governor vetoed a transportation package earlier this year, based on his promise to avoid any new taxes:"

Rick Perlstein calls this "your government on conservatism," and also reminds us that not everyone was fooled:

"When Howard Dean ran for president, he said George Bush's federal tax cuts were a mirage--that every dollar states and municipalities could not get from the federal government for essential services they would have to raise on their own. They would actually turn out to be a tax hike--if, that is, states and municipalities were able to summon the political will to raise taxes at all. Some have had a hard time doing that.

And now the bill is coming due. The ground is opening up beneath our feet, swallowing people and machines."

Seriously. I am so tired of the anti-tax mantra. It is almost like a homeowner refusing to do basic maintenance on their house. Needs a new roof? Nope, that is boring. Instead, I will buy a new stadium, or invade someone. I heard Tucker Carlson suggest that privatizing was the answer. That seems to be the Republican vision of an infrastructure that only those with money can use.

For people who lament and romanticize small town life, Republicans seem particularly bad at community.

Bridge Collapse

I am sure everyone knows about the Minnesota bridge collapse last night. Our thoughts and prayers go out to those involved and those who have lost.

I also think this is time to restart the conversation about community and shared experience. This is not intended to blame particular people, but I really do think there has been far too much individualism in our public debate and less about shared values. This is a great example. It costs money to build and maintain these structures that benefit us all. We can all pay for them. We build communities that we all use, and that should be the watchword of our political dialogue. Too often, and unfortunately almost constantly from the conservative side, has been a call for individualism and the sense that any tax is bad.

On a related point, btw, I saw Kathleen Kennedy Townsend on Colber the other night and she made a really good point about Christianity being about community. Of course, many of us have talked about it that way, but she pointed out that the Lord's Prayer does not go "my father" but "our father," and "our transgressions" and "deliver us."

Perhaps I am biased because I feel like I have been leaning on my community this last week. We are all in this together.

Hey

Just a brief update. We are doing better tonight. Today was rough, but mixed in with the crying jags were moments of routine and normalcy. SOF said yesterday that she felt like her insides had been wrung out, and today they felt a little less so. I concur.

Everyone has been so damn nice. All the emails and comments, and a couple of surprise phone calls. One from my oldest brother was very nice last night, and tonight, a friend from the DC area called after reading about Alafair on the blog.

Thanks. This community of friends--cyber and other--is a good thing.