Blackwater Black Eye

Documents from 2005 have surfaced that demonstrate that the State Department knew of Blackwater's fraudulent accounting and billing practices -- looting the American taxpayer for millions of dollars -- yet continued to sign contracts with the firm for years to come. Just like her boss, Secretary of State Rice isn't fit to be a greeter at Wal-Mart.

21 December 2007

Huckabee: Evil for Jesus

It often seems that our most prominent Christian leaders in this country, and here I actually mean "Christian," turn out either to be snake oil salesmen or downright evil bastards. Republican Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee (R-AR) certainly proves the rule. Beyond the fact that he's wholly unprepared to be president, he's just a divisive, holier-than-thou a$$-hole. As an example, take a look at this article. This stuff is just scary!

19 December 2007

Democracy: Victory & Defeat

This week saw both victory and defeat for our democracy and its ideals. The victory came via the leadership of Senator Chris Dodd (D- CT). Senate Majority "Leader" Harry Reid (D-NV) brought two competing FISA bills to the floor. One from the Intelligence Committee provided for retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies for their cooperation with the Bush Administration while spying on Americans illegally for the last five years. The other from the Judiciary Committee provided no such immunity. Dodd made it clear that he would filibuster the Intelligence Committee bill, hopefully ensuring that it will never see the light of day. Reid blinked and pulled both bills until after the holiday break.

The victory may be short lived, however. For a filibuster to truly work, its main proponent will have to have support. He or she cannot talk and talk and talk forever. He must be spotted. Dodd may or may not get this support. One question that I have is whether it will come from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), and/or Senator Joe Biden (D-MD). All three professed their support for Dodd's cause, yet only he returned to Washington from the presidential campaign trail to actually lead. It would seem that on a matter of such importance to the nation -- and make no mistake, this issue goes to the very core of who we are as a people -- it would be a good showing of what sort of president one would make by doing the job for which one had already been elected... no? And on that note, it might behoove us all to take a harder, longer look at the presidentail ambitions of Chris Dodd.

The defeat for America, and it was a significant one, came at the hands of the FCC. By a vote of three (Republicans) to two (Democrats), the FCC changed the media ownership rules to allow both a television station and a newspaper within one media market to be owned by the same entity. This is something that has never been allowed before on any level. We already have far, far too much media consolidation in our country. It has only dumbed down our national discourse on basically all topics. It has provided for far fewer and less diverse voices being heard both nationally and locally. And, most insidiously, it has helped to ensure that the viewpoints expressed are filtered through the wants and needs of these (corporate) media owners and the political powers that be. Those wants and needs are, to be sure, far different from those of the people at large. A democracy cannot stand such a state for long. History has taught us this and America will prove no different. There was a reason that freedom of the press was put in the First Ammendment. We are just too stupid, too passive to remember it.

19 December 2007

The 'Huckabee Panic'

So starts a story by Steve Benen over at TPM:

It may be an exaggeration to say conservatives are having a major-league freak-out over the prospects of Mike Huckabee winning the Republican Party's presidential nomination, but only slightly.

...

It's pretty obvious why the left is frightened by the notion of a Huckabee presidency -- we've already seen the results of electing a nutty southern governor who doesn't know anything about policy, who runs on his charm, his evangelical religion, and his appeal to far-right activists -- but what's up the right's apoplexy?

The whole story is worth a read.

15 December 2007

Baseball & Steroids

Former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, hired by commissioner Bud Selig to examine the "Steroids Era," released his report today. It was damning to MLB, to the players' union, and certainly to the players themselves. All professional sports are facing a crisis when it comes to performance enhancing drugs, but perhaps none more so in the US than is MLB. It needs to clean up its house and the methods that it uses must be draconian in relation to the mamby-pamby nature of its rules heretofore. To me, the players and their deeds who are implicated in steroid use simply do not exist. They have been erased from history, erased from the record books. It is just sad.

For more on the report, see MSNBC and ESPN.

13 December 2007

FISA Filibuster Needed

From Will Easton of Working Assets on an imminent vote on the FISA bill that would give retroactive immunity to telecom companies who have, at the behest of the Bush Administration, trampled upon the Fourth Amendment rights of Americans.

We filibuster or we lose.

The White House does not often lose a fight that really matters. But public outrage and some smart organzing by liberal groups have so far prevented the Senate from granting a "get out of jail free" card to telecom companies who helped Bush spy illegally on Americans.

So far.

Why does Bush want amnesty for AT&T and Verizon? Retroactive immunity for the telecom companies would thwart telecom customer lawsuits that threaten to expose Bush's own violations of the original Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. If these lawsuits aren't allowed to go forward, we may never know the extent of the Bush administration's illegal efforts to spy on American citizens without the required warrants.

Time is short and we must act now.

The Bush administration is fighting back. This time, with a version of FISA that lets the telcos off the hook by making the federal government the defendant in pending cases instead of the telecom companies. We must act now before key democrats cave to the White House and approve this measure. A vote is expected as early as tomorrow.

Our best hope is a filibuster. Senator Dodd has pledged to filibuster any bill that gives amnesty to the telecom companies. But to prevail he needs 40 senators to support him. The choice is clear: our senators can stand with the constitution, or help Bush and his cronies cover up their lawbreaking

Tell your senators to support Senator Dodd and filibuster any FISA legislation that lets AT&T and Verizon off the hook.



This vote will happen as early as tomorrow, as stated, so let your Senators know that you oppose the measure and that it should be filibustered. You can use the form located here to do so.

12 December 2007

Matthew Shepard Act Blocked

An e-mail from Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, provides the details.

As I write this, I am filled with both deep disappointment and gratitude. I am disappointed because our fight for a hate crimes bill has been derailed, but grateful for the historic advances that we were able to achieve this year.

As you all know, we have made momentous advancements this year by moving the federal hate crimes legislation the closest it has ever been to becoming law. For the first time ever, in one year we were able to pass the fully-inclusive legislation through both chambers of Congress – a truly historic feat.

If you recall, the Matthew Shepard Act first passed the House of Representatives back in May as a stand-alone piece of legislation. It then moved to the Senate, where it passed 60 to 39 in September as an amendment to the Department of Defense Authorization bill. Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR) attached the Matthew Shepard Act to the Department of Defense Authorization bill because President Bush had announced that he would veto a free-standing hate crimes bill. By amending hate crimes to this larger bill, Senators Kennedy and Smith thought that we had a better chance of getting the president’s signature. After all, Bush would have to veto the entire piece of legislation – hate crimes AND programs for his war in Iraq – to reject hate crimes protections.

But in a frustrating move yesterday, during the very last legislative step – a conference committee working out the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill – we received word that the Matthew Shepard Act would be dropped from the final version of the bill. The hate crimes veto threat issued by the White House and organized opposition by House Republican Leadership cost significant numbers of votes on the right. Iraq-related provisions, which many progressive Democrats opposed, cost votes on the left. Moderate Democrats, many of whom voted for the hate crimes bill in May, did not want to test the President’s veto threat and risk a delay in increased pay for military personnel. All of these factors resulted in insufficient votes to secure passage of the bill with the hate crimes provision.

...


Despite the anger we all feel that we fell short so close to the finish line, we cannot lose sight of the fact that we did succeed in moving hate crimes legislation the closest it has ever been to hitting the President’s desk for signature. And rest assured, the Human Rights Campaign is not done fighting. We are not giving up on efforts to find another legislative vehicle, in the second half of this Congress, to move the Matthew Shepard Act. Yes, we made historic advancements, but we will not be satisfied until we get a President who will use his or her pen to enshrine into our federal law books that violence against the GLBT community will not be tolerated in this country.


...

This was indeed a great opportunity to move American forward in this are of civil rights, putting us more in line with the enlightened world. That day will have to wait a little while longer. We need better, more conscientious leaders to move forward, especially such a leader in the White House.

7 December 2007

December Impeachment Reminder

Last August, I called for the impeachment of both President Bush and Vice President Cheney. At that time, I asked you to join me in writing letters to several members of the House of Representatives. I noted that I would continue to send such letters until such time as my call was heeded or these men left office. I have made good on my claim by again sending my letters. This is simply a reminder in the hope that you will do the same. For information on the entire matter, as well as sample letters and recipient contact information, see my original blog post here.

2 December 2007

Rudy's Shag Fund

Rudy Giuliani has had a tough week. One of the big hits to his campaign has been the revelation that he billed tens of thousands of dollars for security and other expenditures to little-known New York City agencies in an effort to keep his affair with then-paramour, now-wife a secret. (See my post A Giuliani Two-fer from 28 November.) He's responded this week by saying that it was a common practice throughout his mayorship and perfectly legal. However, it seems to only have occurred on trips for these trysts, not on other trips of a less "conjugal" nature. What is more, New York City officials have come out of the woodwork to say that Rudy is lying and that this is not how things would -- or should -- correctly be one in The Big Apple. Among them is NYC's police chief. Take a look.

30 November 2007

More Giuliani = Terrorism

More information is emerging on just how extensive the ties are between presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani and members of the government of Qatar, people who are known to have strong ties to al Qaeda. In the article linked above, a former CIA agent says the following of Rudy and the millions that he's made off of his Qatar contracts.

"We have a guy who could be president who's taking money from the same accounts that harbored terrorists," said Baer, the former CIA agent. "The general consensus is that [Sheikh Abdullah Bin Khalid al-Thani] protected Khalid Sheik Mohammed and that they tipped him off and he's still the interior minister.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks on the United States. Most of Rudy's links are with Sheikh Abdullah Bin Khalid al-Thani, who acted as his protector in the years leading up to the 9/11 attacks, a fact that has been long known... even during the years that Rudy was -- and is -- linked to al-Thani.

30 November 2007

Edit: I first noted this story in my post A Giuliani Two-fer from 28 November, which featured a link to the story-breaking article on this issue.

FISA Sentate Showdown

From Working Assets:

The bill to update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) continues to advance in the Senate, and now it has reached another critical juncture. Because the issue is so urgent -- the legislation will likely be voted on during the week of December 3rd -- we're sending faxes to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid asking him to act now to protect Americans' privacy rights.

In past weeks, the U.S. Senate has debated several specific provisions of the legislation. The Intelligence Committee passed a version that would grant retroactive amnesty to big telecom companies who colluded in Bush's illegal program to spy on Americans.

In response to citizen outcry, the Judiciary Committee passed a version that did not include the amnesty provisions. Now, Majority Leader Reid will decide which version gets put up for a final vote by the whole Senate. He has the power as Majority Leader to stand up for civil liberties and protect the constitutional privacy rights of all Americans -- or he could cave in to the White House's demands to let its telco cronies off the hook. [My bold.]

We must not become a nation that willingly, silently sacrifices our freedoms. They are the very foundation of our nation. Working assets has set up an easy-to-use form to tell Senator Reid not to include telecom immunity in the FISA bill. I urge you to make your wishes known today.

30 November 2007

He-said, She-said Journalism

As I've expressed before, conventional journalism in this country has lost its way. Instead of digging for facts to establish the veracity of a person's statement -- especially when it relates to a political position or topic -- journalists today will simply trot out another person from "the other side" to either provide an alternative viewpoint or to deny the original statement as being true. In other words, it becomes a game of he-said, she-said. This may -- or may not -- be proper journalistic procedure when the topic is one of political, religious, or other theory, but is never correct when the topic is a statement of fact. When this is the case, sure the reporter should get the story of/from the "other side" as well and report on it. Then, however, it is incumbent upon that reporter to actually dig for the facts and report which side is telling the truth.

We can see this malaise in our journalism today in recent stories regarding the right-wing smear campaign linking Barack Obama to supposedly anti-American Islamic persons/ideologies. (No less a paper than The Washington Post was at the root of that debacle, which is completely factually false.) So, too, have we seen that the vast majority of the mainstream media have given Rudy Giuliani a pass when he continually, repeatedly invokes incorrect statistics to paint a completely incorrect picture of his time as mayor of New York City. He and his campaign are built on a house of lying cards. (Ironically, the New York Times, which heretofore has been as big an enabler of Guiliani's cult of personality as any media outlet, has finally started targeting his false claims.)

Ultimately, our mainstream media has become an enabler for our corrupt political systems. As Glenn Greenwald put it for Salon.com:

It isn't actually that complicated. When a government official or candidate makes a factually false statement, the role of the reporter is not merely to pass it on, nor is it simply to note that "some" dispute the false statement. The role of the reporter is to state the actual facts, which means stating clearly when someone lies or otherwise makes a false statement.

It's staggering that this most elementary principle of journalism is not merely violated by so many of our establishment journalists, but is explicitly rejected by them. That's the principal reason why our political discourse is so infected with outright falsehoods. The media has largely abdicated their primary responsibility of stating basic facts.

Just as we need to work to right our political systems, by holding our government officials accountable for their corruption, we must hold our journalists accountable for the abandonment of their responsibilities to our society as well. True democracy can only be achieved through knowledge and truth being spread collectively throughout a society.

30 November 2007

4th Amendment End-Around

The Bush Administration is using telecommunications corporations in an effort to obtain information on American citizens without warrants, searches for information that would "otherwise" be against the Fourth Amendment if tackled directly by the government. Their argument for why they believe this is Constitutional fails on its face. If it is allowed to stand, the Fourth Amendment in this context will cease to have any meaning, providing no protection for us in our modern electronic world.

You can get the story here.

29 November 2007

Matthew Shepard Act at Risk

After months of work and its initial passage in both the House and the Senate, Senators on the far right are trying to derail the Matthew Shepard Act, preventing it from even getting to the President for signature or veto. (I first wrote about the Matthew Shepard Act here.) The HRC has set up an easy-to-use web form to express your support for the act in this crucial time. I urge you to make use of it and support the Constitutional -- and human -- rights of all Americans. The form can be found here.

28 November 2007

A Giuliani Two-fer

Two interesting articles out today about Rudy. The first details how he (illegally) used New York City money while mayor to both enable and cover up his affair with then-fling, now-wife Judith Nathan. The second details Rudy's hefty financial dealings with those who have (or had) direct ties with those who pulled off the events of 9/11 against the US. Now, it is pretty much common knowledge that Rudy is an amoral scumbag, so the former shouldn't really shock anyone. The latter, on the other hand, seems especially damning since Rudy is running on a 9/11-all-the-time platform. At least Rudy is an equal-opportunity scumbag.

28 November 2007

Lott Checks Out to Cash In

Yesterday, long-time Mississippi Senator Trent Lott resigned from the US senate. Now, don't get me wrong. Any government without Trent Lott is already better off. However, it bears mentioning exactly why Lott left government "service."

A recently enacted law prohibits Senators who become lobbyists from lobbying their former colleagues for two years after leaving office unless they file as a lobbyist prior to an election year. As tepid a protection law as this is, it means that Lott would have been out a considerable amount of cash -- he will be in great demand as a lobbyist after all -- had he remained in the Senate, not just until his current term expires, but past January 19 of next year.

As repugnant as DC politicians-turned-lobbyists are in general, Lott is even worse. You may remember that during his last run for the Senate, he ran on a Hurricane Katrina platform, telling the citizens of Mississippi that he was only running again to see them through this hard time. He didn't want to run, but he just had to help rebuild the state. Blah, blah, blah. In case you've missed it, the only things being rebuilt in Mississippi are casinos, new and expensive condos, and oil/shipping centers. The people themselves have been royally and truly screwed.

Goodbye Trent Lott... bought-and-paid-for politician, racist, and all-around prick. Don't let the door hit you in the ass.

27 November 2007

McClellan's Publisher Takes a Mulligan

Yesterday, in a post titled Bush Knew of Plame Outing, I told of a new book by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan. An early excerpt from the book made it look very much like McClellan was implicating Bush in the outing of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame. As you might imagine, this was big news. Now, however, the publisher is backing away from this "claim." Yes, it tried to play the media and it won, but now the heat may just be too hot.

The truth, at least in so far as what is written in the book, is that McClellan may actually be trying to absolve the President himself in Plame-gate, saying that while the President did mislead him, he did so unknowingly. In other words, "he was a clueless as I was."

What McClellan will say about the other four men outlined in yesterday's release is currently unknown.

21 November 2007

Iraq: How Low Can We Go?

Once again proving that with the American military, it is so often true that two wrongs do make a right comes this from Spencer Ackerman at TPM.

Just in time for the holidays, there's a special place in Hell just waiting to be filled by some as-yet-unknown Pentagon bureaucrat. Apparently, thousands of wounded soldiers who served in Iraq are being asked to return part of their enlistment bonuses -- because their injuries prevented them from completing their tour.

After you return from throwing up, you can read more here.

20 November 2007

Bush Knew of Plame Outing

In his forthcoming book, former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan reveals that five of the top figures in the White House knew at the time that Administration officials were responsible for the -- illegal -- outing of covert CIA agent Valarie Plame. The five include the President, the Vice President, the Chief of Staff (Andrew Card), and presidential advisers Carl Rove and Lewis "Scooter" Libby. McClellan also makes it clear that it was Administration policy to mislead the American people on exactly what happened, going so far as to outright lie. In response to this bit of information from her predecessor, current White House Press Secretary Dana "Deer in the Headlights" Perino issued a "no comment."

20 November 2007

Buried Under Catalogs?

The holidays are fast approaching and that generally means that American households get buried under an even larger pile of shopping catalogs sent through the mail. Our household is just like this. We also follow the pattern of how the rest of America reacts to these catalogs. About 90-95% are not even opened, going straight into the recycle bin. (Most communities allow catalogs, along with magazines, to be recycled with newspaper, so please don't throw them away!) Of the remaining 5-10%, only 1.5% result in a purchase! That's right, companies are willing to spend so much on these catalogs -- and destroy so many trees in the process -- for only a 1.5% purchase return.

Now, however, there is an easy way for you and your family to stop the madness. The nonprofit CatalogChoice.org allows you to take your name off of mailing lists. It is fast and easy. Follow these three steps and you are on your way.

1. Rip off the address page of the catalog and recycle the rest.
2. Go to www.catalogchoice.org
3. Follow the simple steps of typing your name & customer numbers when asked for each catalog.

They will do all of the heavy lifting for you and trees -- not to mention your sanity -- will be saved.

19 November 2007

FCC: Screwing America!

The FCC -- actually only the Republican majority on the FCC -- is trying to screw America. It is set to make a monumental change in the way that information is distributed to the American people through our media. It is doing so over the objection of members of Congress and with little advanced warning to the American people.

The rule change that is being proposed would allow -- for the first time in American history -- newspapers and television stations within the same community to be owned by the same entity. In other words, The Denver Post could purchase the local ABC affiliate in Denver or vice versa.

We are already a nation that is far too reliant on information coming to us from far too news sources. Our telecommunications and media laws and regulations have already been weakened far too broadly and deeply. The vast majority of our news comes to us filtered through the eyes of the corporate lense, and corporate interests are just that... corporate, not public.

As citizens, and while we are still able, we must shout down form the mountain tops our steadfast refusal to have this putrescent change in our media rules enacted. To this end, I urge you to contact each of the members of the Federal Communications Commission. Send them a simple e-mail, CC'd to each member, indicating that America has seen enough consolidation of our news media and that we value as a democracy the undiluted voice of the truth more than the lining of corporate pockets.

You can find the e-mail addresses to the members of the FCC here. I would suggest an e-mail similar to the following.

To: Kevin J. Martin, FCC Chairman and all FCC Commissioners

It has come to my attention that the FCC soon plans to rewrite long-standing rules of news media ownership to allow an entity to own both a newspaper and a television station in one operating market. I stand firmly against such a move. The ownership of our news media is already far too focused in the hands of too few corporations. For a democracy to be truly healthy, its people must have access to the news of the day from as many and as varied sources as possible. This rule would advance us farther down the path away from this ideal.

I urge you not to undertake this measure. Thank you for your time.

John Q. Public
Anytown, NY

Act today... there truly isn't much time left.

For more information on this issue, see the following site at PBS. To see who owns the media outlets in your own communities, see this link.

19 November 2007

Senate Energy Bill

According to Working Assets, the current energy bill in the Senate, which originally had provisions for promoting clean energy and tougher fuel economy standards for vehicles, is in jeopardy. Working Assets writes the following:

According to our sources, the leaders in the Senate are negotiating a compromise energy bill. This compromise would sell out clean energy for wind and solar and include huge subsidies for ethanol and nuclear power. In exchange, we would get the promise of modest increases in automobile fuel efficiency standards, if environmentalists in the Senate can get a majority to stand up and hold the line.

This is unacceptable. And given the Senate's track record in the last few weeks, we have little confidence that the leadership will not cave to the Bush administration yet again.

Tell your senators (and we'll send a cc fax to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid) to oppose any compromise bill that:

• does not include standards or goals for the percentage of our energy portfolio that comes from renewable sources (renewable portfolio standards, or RPS) and does not include a critical tax incentive for producers of wind and solar power.

• provides for practically unlimited loan guarantees for private companies to build new nuclear power plants, with taxpayers on the hook for the risks involved.

• advances the Bush agenda with massive subsidies for corn-based ethanol -- which takes almost as much energy to produce as it yields, and drives up food prices in the process.

• placates oil companies and automakers with a weak fuel efficiency standard when heroic measures are needed to stop global warming.

The Senate needs to know that we are watching. Your messages can make a big difference right now. If our representatives in Congress hear from us in large numbers over the next few days, we may be able to convince them to vote against the leadership's back room deal.

You can find the form to make known your view on this legislation here.

10 November 2007

Why Kerik Matters

Greg Sargent reports today on his "Horse's Mouth" blog exactly why Rudy Giuliani's support of now-indicted Bernie Kerik undermines his entire campaign for the presidency. There are a host of reasons why Rudy is a joke, but Sargent is spot-on here.

9 November 2007

Giuliani & Pat Robertson

Unless you live under a rock, you are aware of the fact that one of the craziest people alive, Pat Robertson, has endorsed Rudy Giuliani for president. Such an endorsement should preclude anyone from that or any other position of power... even county dog catcher. This is especially true in Rudy's case, however, for he has staken his claim -- falsely -- on 9/11 and his "expert leadership and knowledge" is such that another such day will be averted only by him.

Robertson, you may remember, is on record as proclaiming that the events of 9/11 were America's fault for its "Godlessness." Our sinful gay-loving, abortion-permitting culture, if you will, was at the root of his belief that we got what we deserved. His views haven't changed and indeed remain today on his web site. Now, one would think that the then-mayor of the city most heavily involved in the events of 9/11 would object to such a mindset, no? Instead, when brought to his attention by the press, Rudy just laughed them off and indicated that Robertson had been misinterpreted. Remember, these views are still posted on Robertson's own web site. I'd say that Rudy doesn't think that we are can read. Of course, since the press isn't doing its job, maybe he wouldn't be far from the truth! (The press is always soft on Rudy, btw.) What is more is that there is history in Rudy's past that would indicate that he'd decline the endorsement.

Soon after 9/11 Rudy very publicly turned down $10M from a Saudi Prince, Alwaleed bin Talal, after the prince offered the aid money to the people of New York with the words that America "must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack." Greg Sargent at TPM notes that [i]n response, Rudy rejected the money because of the prince's suggestion that the U.S. was in any way remotely responsible for the disaster, saying:

"I entirely reject that statement," Giuliani said. "There is no moral equivalent for this [terrorist] act. There is no justification for it. The people who did it lost any right to ask for justification for it when they slaughtered 4,000 or 5,000 innocent people."

Again, Sargent: The rejection of the Saudi prince's $10 million is a big point of pride for Rudy, something he currently brings up as proof of his anti-terrorism zeal.

Why then, would Rudy repudiate this foreign prince for admonishing the US for some of its policies when he embraces a man who outright blamed the attacks on us? Well, its classic Rudy. It was easy for him to play tough when the $10M was for other people, even the people he was entrusted to serve. Robertson's endorsement, on the other hand, directly benefits him politically. Rudy is nothing if not "me first, me only." As Sagrent put it...

There are two morals to this tale. The first: Rudy will turn away $10 million in relief for other people from someone who sort of blamed America for 9/11 if it gives him a chance to do a bit of garden variety political grandstanding and get big tabloid headlines. But he'll overlook such comments if it will allow him to help himself politically, as the Robertson endorsement does.

The second moral: If an Arab sort of blames America for 9/11, it's despicable. If a Christian fundamentalist/extremist does it, it's not a problem at all.

What is even more surprising is that Rudy has recently blasted one of his rivals for the Republican nomination for president, Ron Paul, for saying something similar to what that Saudi prince said. (See Rudy's words here.) Paul has said that we need to look at our policies and how they affect the world around us. While in no way excusing the events of 9/11 -- who could?!? -- he is saying that we as a nation must realize that we don't live in a bubble and that our actions do have consequences, consequences that include hardening the beliefs of nutball zealots. Again, this boils down to political expediency for Rudy. Castigate Paul, bear hug Robertson. Once again, for Rudy it is only "me first, me only."

8 November 2007

ENDA Passes the House

For the past several months, I've been calling on you to write both you Senators and Congressmen in support of ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Thank you to those of you who followed through on this request. As a result of the calls for support by fair-minded Americans everywhere, ENDA has passed the House. As written, the bill will only offer employment protections to gay, lesbian, and bisexual people. Protections for those who are transgendered were stripped from the legislation. One day, I am confident that those protection will rightly exist.

Now, we must look to the Senate for enacting these protections. Thereafter, President Bush will surely be a hurdle, but the fight must be brought to him. Justice demands it.

8 November 2007

More Rudy, More Torture

James Lambert over at TPM has the following information from a former Giuliani aide regarding Rudy and torture.

Rudy Giuliani has been embellishing his record on torture and "intensive questioning," says former New York City director of emergency management and frequent Giuliani critic Jerry Hauer in a conversation with the Huffington Post.

"If Rudy is suggesting in any way that they used torture or aggressive interrogation in New York City then he is absolutely unfit to be president," Hauer said, "because torture in a local jurisdiction is, first of all, illegal. Secondly, it is inhumane. It is not something that is done at the local level."

In an interview over the weekend, Rudy implied that he employed "intensive questioning" as Mayor in order to fight the mafia. Hauer is rejecting those claims outright, saying: "That would have been absolutely disgraceful and a downright violation of everybody's constitutional liberties... even when they caught the terrorists that were going to blow up the subways [in August 1997], obviously there was interrogation but I never heard of anything involving aggressive techniques."

Rudy has truly left the building.

6 November 2007

Last Minute Mukasey Info

Lawyers for the only former "ghost detainee" still in US custody want the Senate to hear what has happened to their client while in the hands of the CIA before the vote on whether Michael Mukasey will become our next Attorney General. This seems most relevant since Mukasey won't admit that the technique known as "waterboarding" is torture (see previous blog entries, including 2 November 2007). You can find an entire article on this by Spencer Ackerman over at TPM. Here are excerpts.

There isn't much time before tomorrow's vote on attorney general-designee and torture agnostic Michael Mukasey. But lawyers from the only former CIA "ghost detainee" still in U.S. custody want the Senate to know what the consequences of a torture regimen are before they give Mukasey their stamp of approval. In a letter written November 1st, they requested a meeting with key Senators, but the letter was only cleared today for release by U.S. authorities.

Two lawyers for the Center for Constitutional Rights, Gita Gutierrez and J. Wells Dixon, recently returned from a two-week meeting with their client, Majid Khan, at Guantanamo Bay, where he's been detained since last September. Before he was taken to Guantanamo, Khan spent three years in an off-the-books detention facility run by or in cooperation with the CIA. Neither the Red Cross nor anyone outside a select few U.S. national security officials knew Khan's whereabouts. Since President Bush's 2006 decision to transfer 14 so-called "black site" detainees to Guantanamo, Khan is the first ghost detainee to meet with an attorney.

...

A letter drafted by the two attorneys on November 1st -- containing absolutely no information about interrogation techniques -- to six U.S. Senators was just cleared for release today by Justice Department and CIA officials. In it, Gutierrez and Dixon plea for a closed-door meeting with Pat Leahy (D-VT), Arlen Specter (R-PA), John McCain (R-AZ), Jim Webb (D-VA) and Khan's home-state senators, Democrats Barbara Mikulski and Ben Cardin. The letter -- which you can read here -- implores the Senators to meet with the attorneys and "consider our client's experiences in CIA secret detention while exercising your own constitutionally mandated oversight responsibilities."

Those responsibilities take on a new salience with Mukasey's nomination. While CCR isn't getting its hopes up that Senators will pencil in a last-minute meeting with Gutierrez -- who's still in Washington reviewing her notes at a secure facility in town -- it does want to make sure that lawmakers hear what's been done to Khan, even if they can't describe the interrogation regimen to their constituents. "We want to meet with them no matter what, but we do want to meet before the Mukasey vote, because it applies to that issue," says a CCR attorney. "But it also applies to issues of secret detentions and interrogations" that go beyond Mukasey.

Dixon will be in Washington tomorrow morning in preparation for a possible meeting.

5 November 2007

Giuliani: World Leader!

One of Rudy Giuliani's favorite pastimes in the campaign is to paint himself as being -- much -- larger than he really is. More plainly, he has tried to transform his role as mayor of New York into being the equivalent of being the president, the Director of the FBI, the Director of the CIA, the Director of FEMA, the Secretary of Defense, and the President of the Girls Scouts of America... all rolled into one. The saddest part is that lots of Americans believe this load of bull and that the mainstream media is going right along with it. (Sad, but not surprising.) Josh Marshall at TPM has a wonderful, short overview of this today at TPM. It uses a new Giuliani campaign flier for New Hampshire as its starting point. The piece is titled Commander-in-Chief NYC and can be found here. The flier can be seen here.

5 November 2007

Giuliani and the Mob

The NY Times has an interesting article today on the ties between Rudi Giuliani and Bernard Kerik. Kerik, you may recall, was a former New Jersey jail warden and one-time front-runner for the post of Director of Homeland Security. He is also a mobster or, to be more accurate, is a high-level lacky for the mob. The ties between the former mayor of New York and Kerik are strong. Indeed, it was Giuliani who recommended Kerik -- remember, the mobster -- to the Bush Administration for the directorship. There are a million reasons why Giuliani has no reason even to run for president, much less win. This seems like a good one though. The article is titled Loyal to Kerik, Giuliani Missed Warning Signs. This article was reported by Russ Buettner, Michael Powell, and William K. Rashbaum and was written by Mr. Powell.

3 November 2007

Edit: MSNBC.com also now has a link to this article. You can find it here.

John Dean on Mukasey

Former Nixon White House Counsel John Dean released a statement today, as two Democratic Senators took leave of their senses and gave a pass to torture carried out on behalf of the citizens of the the US, regarding the nomination -- and now likely confirmation -- of Judge Mukasey as the next Attorney General. Dean knows a bit about presidential abuse of power, of course, and is hardly some "mad lefty." The statement was released through TPM.

A Last Thought Before the Senate Judiciary Committee Confirms Judge Mukasey

By John W. Dean

As the Senate Democrats complete another sad concession to President Bush, and confirms a nominee who refuses to declare “water-boarding” torture, allow me to offer a brief historical reminder: the Senate Judiciary Committee has conspicuously forgotten that there are direct situational and historical parallels with Judge Mukasey’s nomination to be Attorney General and that of President Richard Nixon nominating Elliot Richardson to be Attorney General during Watergate.

Nixon’s Attorney General had been removed (and was later prosecuted for lying to Congress) – a situation not unlike Alberto Gonzales’s leaving the job under such a cloud. Nixon was under deep suspicion of covering up the true facts relating to the bungled break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate, not to mention widespread rumors that he had engaged in abuses of power and corrupt campaign practices. Today, Bush is under even deeper suspicion for activities far more serious than anything Nixon engaged in for there is evidence Bush has abused the laws of war, violated treaties, and ordered (or approved) the use of torture and political renditions, which are war crimes.

Since Judge Mukasey’s situation is not unlike that facing Elliot Richardson when he was appointed Attorney General during Watergate, why should not the Senate Judiciary Committee similarly make it a quid pro quo for his confirmation that he appoint a special prosecutor to investigate war crimes? Richardson was only confirmed when he agreed to appoint a special prosecutor, which, of course, he did. And when Nixon fired that prosecutor, Archibald Cox, it lead to his impeachment.

Before the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee completely cave-in to Bush, at minimum they should demand that Judge Mukasey appoint a special prosecutor to investigate if war crimes have been committed. If Mukasey refuses he should be rejected. This, indeed, should be a pre-condition to anyone filling the post of Attorney General under Bush.

If the Democrats in the Senate refuse to demand any such requirement, it will be act that should send chills down the spine of every thinking American.

2 November 2007

November Impeachment Reminder

In August, I called for the impeachment of both President Bush and Vice President Cheney. At that time, I asked you to join me in writing letters to several members of the House of Representatives. I noted that I would continue to send such letters until such time as my call was heeded or these men left office. I have made good on my claim by again sending my letters. This is simply a reminder in the hope that you will do the same. For information on the entire matter, as well as sample letters and recipient contact information, see my original blog post here.

1 November 2007

Blackwater Immunity

I've been covering the civilian-massacre story involving the international security company Blackwater International for months. Its latest, stomach-turning twist is that all of the Blackwater employees who took part in the incident were granted limited immunity by the State Department to further its "investigation" soon after the shootings came to light. With their own statements out of the way, evidentiarily speaking, there is little hope that justice will now be meted out. What is more, the revelation of the immunity has once again revealed the Bush Administration to be grossly incompetent, with the right hand not knowing the work of the left.

The immunity deal was granted in the immediate aftermath of the shooting by State Department officials in Iraq who were under intense pressure to quickly explain what happened in the face of allegations by Iraqi officials that the contractors murdered civilians in cold blood.

News of the immunity deal caught State Department officials in Washington off guard.

"If anyone gave such immunity it was done so without consulting senior leadership at State," a senior State Department official initially told ABC News.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack would not comment directly on the immunity given to the security guards, but said Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is determined to hold anybody guilty of wrongdoing accountable.

It is hard to take Secretary Rice seriously on anything now -- does anyone else feel the need to demand to see her Standford degree? -- but I especially feel little confidence in her ability to "hold anybody guilty of wrongdoing accountable" when she can't even govern her own department in such a sensitive matter.

30 October 2007

Of TV, Bees, and Iran

Recently, I noted two PBS programs that I thought readers might find of interest. Both were indeed well done and each was enjoyable.

The first was last week's Frontline program titled Showdown with Iran, blogged on 23 October. Two things of special note emerged from it. First, like many -- indeed most -- other nations in the world, after the events of 9/11, the people of Iran reached out in sympathy and anger at what had happened. There were candlelight marches through Iranian streets denouncing the attacks. What is more, the high clerics of Iran denounced them as well. We -- and here I say "we" by way of the Bush Administration -- squandered all of the goodwill of the world. Here was a Muslim nation, of long-term enmity, reaching out to us and we slapped them back down hard... and all because of the stupid fixation on Iraq. The second item of note in this Frontline program was how very many right wing hawks, including many former members of the Bush White House, are against attacking Iran in the near future. Some rule such an attack out outright. However, all of the others echoed the same point. Namely, that Iran is nowhere near having the capability of actually producing a nuclear weapon and that violently eradicating that capability should only be used as a last resort, meaning years down the road. They all agreed, furthermore, that it should be a decision for the next president, whomever he or she might be.

The second program was this weeks Nature titled Silence of the Bees, originally blogged on 26 October. This one was great... and bleak. It cannot be overstated how much harm is being done to this insect, nor how much said harm can -- and very likely will -- do to us. Most likely, we've yet again brought this peril on ourselves. Our arrogance and self-involvement seemingly know no bounds.

Silence of the Bees premiered last Sunday, but local PBS offiliates often rerun it several times during the week. Again, it is worth your time. Check the link to pursue local listings in your area.

PS: This is totally off topic for this post, but I'm not sure that I'll get to further posts today. In case you were unaware, the Vice President has taken another hunting vacation. So far, he hasn't shot anyone in the face -- or anywhere else as far as I know -- but he did use the services of a hunting club that is still displaying the Confederate flag. Arrogance and stupidity, all wrapped into such a tidy little troll-like package! Very convenient.

30 October 2007

Southwick Confirmed

Earlier, I had asked you to contact your Senators and ask them to vote against the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the Federal bench. Most recently, this call came on October 23rd. I regret to inform you that Southwick was confirmed by the Senate and will take up his life-time position in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The HRC had been leading the charge against the nomination. You can see the organization's reaction here.

29 October 2007

Rudy as King

Josh Marshall over at TPM did a piece today on a bit of history that had slipped my mind. You, however, may remember that after 9/11, when the Rudy Giuliani was scheduled to leave office due to his final term expiring, he attempted to stay in office beyond that date. As Marshall puts it:

To remind everyone, not long after 9/11, as Rudy's term of office was coming to an end, he suggested and briefly pushed for being allowed to remain in office past his term on the argument that in the aftermath of 9/11 his leadership was indispensable and that the new mayor would perhaps have a period of apprenticeship under Rudy to come up to speed on running the city.

What it all comes down to is that I'm not sure there's any example of an elected official simply trying to extend his term of office beyond the legally-sanctioned period on the basis of an alleged emergency simply on the argument that he's indispensable, as Rudy did just after 9/11.

I remember thinking at the time that that was the moment when post-9/11 Rudy really jumped the now-proverbial shark. Rudy, you remember, had been set to leave office a pretty unpopular mayor. He'd just had cancer, dropped out of the senate race, was in the midst of an acrimonious divorce. 9/11, for once the phrase makes sense, changed everything. People who'd never liked him credited him for inspiring leadership in the hours and days after 9/11. But he just couldn't bow out with grace. He had to try to stay in office longer. Even in his moment of greatest triumph, he couldn't resist being who he was.

Marshall had searched for other similar examples of this type of action in American history. While there were examples that patently didn't fit this mold, this was the only one involving an election that no one contested and that everyone thought was above board. To see links to the other, non-conforming examples, follow the links above.

29 October 2007

Silence of the Bees

This weekend's edition of Nature on PBS is titled Silence of the Bees and focuses on Colony Collapse Disorder and its implications both for bees and for humans. It generally first airs on Sunday evenings and you can check the link for local listings. And if you are watching the World Series -- go Rockies! -- tape this and watch it later. Enjoy.

26 October 2007

Rudy Guiliani on Torture

On October 16th, I did a small piece on Mitt Romney and torture. Now, comes this gem from Rudy Guiliani describing the tactic known as "waterboarding."

"I'm not sure it is, either," said Rudy. "It depends on how it's done. It depends on the circumstances. It depends on who does it."

And as for the media, Rudy said they've exaggerated the nature of waterboarding.

"Sometimes they describe it accurately. Sometimes they exaggerate it," Rudy said. "So I'd have to see what they really are doing, not the way some of these liberal newspapers have exaggerated it."

Beyond simple common sense and human decency, I'm going with John McCain on this one. He believes that the advocacy of torture by the United States in any form will only put our soldiers in greater danger. McCain may have lost credibility on most issues over the past two years, but on this point, he is THE MAN. Don't %$#@ with THE MAN.

25 October 2007

WoW on NPR

Anyone who knows me well -- hell, anyone who has pretty much just met me! -- knows that I'm a giant geek. Actually, I'm the Darth Vader of geeks. One of the prime examples of this is that I love video games, which for me means PC games. Massive Multi-player On-line games have been my addiction since 1999. I first played EverQuest for the better part of five years. Now, I've played World of Warcraft for three. I loved EQ and even still dream about playing it (for some reason, I'm almost always running around the Greater Faydark). That said -- and within the bounds of reason I'm thankful to point out -- I'm obsessed with WoW.

I have played WoW almost from the start with the same group of people in what is called a "guild." I'm one of its leaders and I take that role very seriously. Strange among my friends who play, I do not play with my wife, nor do have have any close RL (real life) friends who play with me. Indeed, it is for these RL friends that I'm writing this post, since they all think I'm nuts. Of course, that is only in part due to my need to be a dragon-slaying dwarf, but still.

NPR recently had a nice little piece on WoW. It is a good introduction for those who don't play. Enjoy... and always remember to pick up enough arrows before leaving Ironforge!

23 October 2007

Frontline: Iranian Confrontation

I have previously noted that the Bush Administration seems to be moving in the direction of an armed conflict with Iran. While we lack -- completely -- the forces for a ground campaign against this country, thanks to the Administration's complete cluster-$%#@ in Iraq, bombing their nuclear facilities remains an option. Granted, it would be a horrible, horrible mistake, but that is word "go" to Cheney and Company.

What could be worse for our position within the Islamic/Arabic worlds than to attack another Islamic nation? Iran will be a nuclear state one day. We cannot prevent that. Moreover, it looks like Russia is siding with Iran on these issues, adding to the possible repercussions that will be with us for a long time to come.

Anywho, Frontline will be airing a special, Showdown with Iran, on these issues tonight. No doubt, it will be worth watching.

23 October 2007

FCC & Media Controls

The FCC is once again trying to give away America's airwaves, which are the property of the People. A campaign within the FCC is underway to allow even greater ownership of our broadcasting spectrum by fewer and fewer giant telecommunications companies. This will place further burdens on smaller broadcasters and diminish competition. It will lead to higher prices for consumers and less artistic and scientific innovation within the world of broadcast media. The organization Stop Big Media has created a form to allow you to express your displeasure with these efforts within the FCC to your Members of Congress. You can find the form here.

23 October 2007

Block Southwick Nomination

Back on August 15th, I asked you to contact your Senators and express your disapproval for the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the Federal bench. Now, the nomination is getting closer to a possible final vote and I again ask you to make your views known. The HRC has a form to easily allow you to make your views against Southwick's nomination known. You can find the form here.

23 October 2007

Dumbledore Gay!

Okay, while I often thought that Harry was too whiny and that in many instances it was Hermione who was the real hero, I am a fan of the Harry Potter series of books. This bit of news from Potter author J.K. Rowling just seals the deal. Hogwart's Headmaster Dumbledore is... gay! Well, of course, he is. Just look at the parties he threw, the tables he set, the clothes that he wore! :-)

In other news, look for horrible knee-jerk reactions from the right.

22 October 2007

CIA v. Plame

I've been out of town with my wife for almost a week, but I'm back now and I'm sure that there will be information, not to mention muck, to post. First up is a piece from counter-terrorism agent and intelligence instructor Larry Johnson over at the TPM Cafe. The piece details the CIA's -- read: the Bush Administration's -- attempts to silence Valerie Plame over her pre-2002 years of work at the agency. Her work began for the CIA in 1985 and her career was distinguished. Revelation of its facts -- and we are not talking about its classified facts! -- would be an embarrassment for the president and those who boot-licked for him in this matter. I'm going to quote the whole, short piece because it is worth a read.

Four years and three months after waking up on a Sunday morning and learning that her career as a clandestine intelligence officer was over because of a stupid column by Robert Novak, Valerie Plame Wilson finally gets to meet the public and tell some of her story.

Sunday night she appears on 60 Minutes, and kicks off a book tour that will start Monday morning on the Today Show and include stops at Larry King Live and the Daily Show. Unfortunately, Val cannot be totally forthcoming. I am not talking about revealing sources or methods that would compromise intelligence operations. She is a solid professional and would never entertain such nonsense. But the CIA succeeded in getting a Federal judge to block Val from admitting that she started working with the CIA in September of 1985.

It is as if Rod Serling has returned from the dead with a 21st Century version of the Twilight Zone. The CIA won the initial round in Federal Court and insists Valerie cannot acknowledge working at the CIA prior to February 2002. Because of a pending appeal in her freedom of speech case against the CIA, she cannot say anything about joining the CIA in September of 1985 fresh out of college. She cannot say anything about her initial impression of her Career Trainee classmates–such as Jim Marcinkowski, Brent Cavan, Mike “the Griz” Grimaldi, Precious Flower, and mois. She is proscribed from telling you about wandering the forests of Camp Peary learning land navigation and she certainly will not, at least for now, be able to tell you about being taken hostage and subjected to torture for two days.

Valerie especially cannot tell you about her first tour overseas as a case officer. Ironically, her first boss overseas–Fred Rustmann–has gone on the record and tried early on in this scandal to argue that she was not a NOC (i.e., Non Official Cover officer). But Fred, who was forced out of the CIA and into early retirement because of misdeeds overseas, was not around long enough to learn that after her first tour Val was given the opportunity to become a NOC.

Not only did she get the opportunity. She took full advantage of it and embarked on a career that would change her life in ways she never imagined. She walked away from diplomatic cover and was left naked of the protection normally accorded to diplomats. She had to rely on her wits and tradecraft, and did so successfully for many years, until betrayed by the Bush Administration. But she cannot tell you about that period. At least not now.

Her publisher, Simon and Schuster, came up with a nifty idea to tell the story of the period of service Valerie cannot talk about. They hired Laura Rozen and she interviewed people like me, who served with Valerie. Laura does a great job but it is still a second best solution.

Come Monday you can read for yourself the legal documents surrounding Valerie’s case. They will be posted at www.fairgameplame.com.

We do know this one key thing with certainty–Valerie was not some low level, desk jockey, secretary taking up space and using oxygen at the CIA. The CIA does not prevent such people from telling their story. Nope. Valerie’s very existence as a CIA operative is deemed by the CIA to be so sensitive a topic that she can say nothing about activities prior to February 2002. But she can admit that in February 2002 she was a senior covert operations officer involved in projects that went to the heart of the President’s highest priority–finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Valerie’s identity and ability to carry out that mission during a time of war were compromised by Dick Cheney, Sccoter Libby, Ari Fleischer, and Karl Rove. Their actions were both treasonous and cowardly. Yet the person being penalized and compelled to sacrifice her constitutional right of free speech is Valerie Plame Wilson. The good news is that the American people will finally get to meet the classy, smart lady I served with at the CIA. She achieved her aspiration to be good intelligence officer and still found balance in her life to be a good wife and a good mother. She lost her career and her ability to help support her family. As a nation we have been deprived of her service because of the pettiness and stupidity of the Bush Administration. A successful book tour will be small recompense for the loss Val has experienced. But let’s hope its enough to ensure that Val, Joe, and the kids have a happy, long life.

22 October 2007

Mitt Romney & Torture

In case you missed it, Mitt Romney has just placed Retired General James "Spider" Marks as that national security advisor to his campaign. Marks, for those of you who may not be aware, famously said on CNN that [1] he'd use torture on terrorist even if it was against the law; and [2] he'd do so even though he was of the opinion that torture is poor at getting credible information from its victims.

Looks like another win for the Romney camp and mankind. Sheesh.

16 October 2007

Cheney Documentary

Frontline on PBS is presenting a documentary on Vice President Cheney and his career-long crusade to advance unilateral executive authority. Titled Cheney's Law, it is set to debut on Tuesday night, October 16. Check your local listings for the time in your area.

15 October 2007

Gore: Memory Lane

I brought up the fact yesterday that Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize really forces one to take a moment and visualize where we might be as a nation -- as a planet -- if Gore had become president in 2000. Conservative pundits are in a lather about the award, primarily it has been noted, because Gore's success highlights, in a singular way, Bush's absolute failure.

From Jonathon Chait at the LA Times:

You might wonder why they care so much -- Gore, after all, is obviously not going to run for president, and even some conservatives now concede that global warming is real. The answer is that Gore's triumph is a measure of George W. Bush's disrepute.

Indeed, in the political culture, Gore's role is as a negative indicator of the president's standing. For all the talk of a "new Al Gore," there's nothing new about the man. His public reputation is almost entirely a function of Bush's. [...]

The defensiveness of Gore's critics comes because he is the ultimate rebuke to Bush. Gore, obviously, is the great historic counter-factual, the man who would have been president if Florida had a functioning ballot system. More than that, he is the anti-Bush. He is intellectual and introverted, while Bush is simplistic and backslapping.

From Bob Herbert at the NY Times:

Mr. Bush came to mind because, for all of the obvious vulnerabilities he exhibited in 2000, it was not him but Mr. Gore who was mocked unmercifully by the national media. And the mockery had nothing to do with the former vice president's positions on important policy issues. He was mocked because of his personality.

In the race for the highest office in the land, we showed the collective maturity of 3-year-olds.

Mr. Gore was taken to task for his taste in clothing and for such grievous offenses as sighing or, allegedly, rolling his eyes. It was a given that at a barbecue everyone would rush to be with his opponent.

We've paid a heavy price. The president who got such high marks as a barbecue companion doesn't seem to know up from down. He's hurled the nation into a ruinous war that has cost countless lives and spawned a whole new generation of terrorists. He continues to sit idly by as a historic American city, New Orleans, remains wounded and on its knees. He's blithely steered the nation into a bottomless pit of debt.

America got what it deserved in Bush... twice. Let's hope that we collectively have learned our lesson.

13 October 2007

Gore Gets Nobel Prize

Former Vice President Al Gore, in conjunction with the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has won this years Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to spread awareness about global warming. Perhaps best known in the field for his Academy Award winning film An Inconvenient Truth, Gore has been a champion in this arena since the 1980s. Gore pledge to donate his entire cash prize from the award to the Alliance for Climate Protection. Gore had the following to say upon learning of his win.

I am deeply honored to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. This award is even more meaningful because I have the honor of sharing it with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change--the world’s pre-eminent scientific body devoted to improving our understanding of the climate crisis--a group whose members have worked tirelessly and selflessly for many years. We face a true planetary emergency. The climate crisis is not a political issue, it is a moral and spiritual challenge to all of humanity. It is also our greatest opportunity to lift global consciousness to a higher level.

My wife, Tipper, and I will donate 100 percent of the proceeds of the award to the Alliance for Climate Protection, a bipartisan non-profit organization that is devoted to changing public opinion in the U.S. and around the world about the urgency of solving the climate crisis.

It is impossible to ponder Gore's winning of this award without also evaluating the state of our nation under President Bush, the man who stole the presidency from Gore in the 2000 election. Josh Marshall at TPM wrote on this subject and I have highlighted a bit of text from his piece.

First, before any other yapping and commentary, a big congratulations to Al Gore.

There are several layers of irony and poetic justice wrapped into this honor. The first is that the greatest step for world peace would simply have been for Gore not to have had the presidency stolen from him in November 2000. By every just measure, Gore won the presidency in 2000 only to have George W. Bush steal it from him with the critical assistance of the US Supreme Court. It's worth taking a few moments today to consider where the country and world would be without that original sin of this corrupt presidency.

And yet this is a fitting bookend, with Gore receiving this accolade while the sitting president grows daily an object of greater disapproval, disapprobation and collective shame. And let's not discount another benefit: watching the rump of the American right detail the liberal bias of the Nobel Committee and at this point I guess the entire world. Fox News vs. the world.

And not to forget what this award is about even more than Gore. If half of what we think we know about global warming is true, people will look back fifty years from now on the claims that "War on Terror" was the defining challenge of this century and see it as a very sick, sad joke -- which rather sums up the Bush presidency.

But more than thinking only of what might have been, where can we go from here?

Congratulations to Mr. Gore.

12 October 2007

Iraq War Funding

Ninety members of the House Democratic caucus sent a letter to the president indicating that they will vote "no" for any new funding of the Iraq war except funding specifically to be used for troop withdrawal. This is fully a third of the Democrats in the House and would force the hand of the leadership to take their wishes into account in crafting legislation on the issue. It may not get the job done, but it's a significant start. Here is the text of the letter.

The Honorable George W. Bush
President
United States of America
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

Seventy House Members wrote in July to inform you that they will only support appropriating additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq during Fiscal Year 2008 and beyond for the protection and safe redeployment of our troops out of Iraq before you leave office.

Now you are requesting an additional $45 billion to sustain your escalation of U.S. military operations in Iraq through next April, on top of the $145 billion you requested for military operations during FY08 in Iraq and Afghanistan. Accordingly, even more of us are writing anew to underscore our opposition to appropriating any additional funds for U.S. military operations in Iraq other than a time-bound, safe redeployment as stipulated above.

More than 3,742 of our brave soldiers have died in Iraq. More than 27,000 have been seriously wounded. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed or injured in the hostilities and more than 4 million have been displaced from their homes. Furthermore, this conflict has degenerated into a sectarian civil war and U.S. taxpayers have paid more than $500 billion, despite assurances that you and your key advisors gave our nation at the time you ordered the invasion in March, 2003 that this military intervention would cost far less and be paid from Iraqi oil revenues.

We agree with a clear and growing majority of the American people who are opposed to continued, open-ended U.S. military operations in Iraq, and believe it is unwise and unacceptable for you to continue to unilaterally impose these staggering costs and the soaring debt on Americans currently and for generations to come.

Sincerely,

Co-signers: Murphy (CT), Jackson, Brown (FL), Thompson (MS), Watt, Meeks, Loebsack, Weiner, Kucinich, DeFazio, Farr, Waxman, Thompson (CA), Lee, Woolsey, Waters, Watson, Frank, Conyers, Filner, Rush, Towns, Clay, Wynn, Delahunt, Holmes-Norton, Butterfield, Solis, Maloney, Nadler, Honda, Cohen, Hare, Napolitano, Hastings, McGovern, Kaptur, Schakowsky, Carson, Linda Sanchez, Grijalva, Olver, Jackson-Lee, McDermott, Markey, Fattah, Pallone, Hinojosa, Stark, Scott (VA), Moran, McCollum, Oberstar, DeGette, Tauscher, Holt, Hinchey, Pastor, Davis (IL), Hall, Velazquez, Rangel, Hodes, Blumenauer, Lynch, Artur Davis, Johnson (GA), Payne, Cleaver, Lewis, Clarke, Abercrombie, Moore(WI), Ellison, Baldwin, Christensen, Scott (GA), Paul, Gutierrez, Welch, Capps, Rothman, Cummings, Tierney, Doggett, Eshoo, and Tubbs-Jones.

If your Member of the House isn't on the list -- and mine sadly was not -- I urge you to write your Congressperson and express your displeasure at the absence of their name. I merely included the letter in my e-mail and told him that he should have been a signatory. You can find contact information for your Member of the House here.

10 October 2007

FISA: Democratic Cowards, P. 3

I noted yesterday how Democrats are rolling over and playing dead on the new FISA legislation before both the House and Senate. They are helping the Bush Administration continue to gut the Constitution... and I simply can't figure out why. Their core base doesn't want them to do it. Moreover, if they would simply frame their case for the public as it should be, I don't think that the public at large would oppose what the more liberal wing of the Democratic party wants incorporated into the bills. Unfortunately, we have -- basically uniformly -- cowards running Congress. To wit, Rep. John Conyers, who heads the House Judiciary Committee, had the following to say about the RESTORE bill at its mark-up hearing, answering both the left and the right:

To those who would claim that this bill is weak on terrorism, I would say that protecting the civil rights and liberties of Americans does not show our weakness, but our strength. What the terrorists fear most is our constitution and our values, and that is what this bill protects.

To those who say that the bill is too weak on civil liberties, I say that if you trust an independent court and have faith in congressional oversight, those liberties will not be jeopardized. That is the premise our democracy was founded on, and that is exactly what this bill does.

The thing of it is that he is right on both counts in the main. We need to protect our Constitution or America simply isn't worth defending. Moreover, Congressional oversight is a big part of that defense, or at least it should be. Unfortunately, it isn't at this time, and having Rep. Conyers simply say that it is doesn't magically make it so. And as a side note, the terrorists -- by and large I think -- don't think of America in Constitutional terms. It makes for a good sound bite, but truly, they have other issues that are far more about them than about us.

10 October 2007

FISA: Democratic Cowards, P. 2

I tried to think of a better way to say this than did David Kurtz at TPM, but couldn't.

Everything you need to know about the Democrats' rolling over on FISA is contained in the bill's name: Responsible Electronic Surveillance That is Overseen, Reviewed and Effective Act of 2007, a.k.a, the RESTORE Act.

It's is so painfully obvious when the Democrats are playing someone else's game, right down to the propagandistic title.

For additional details and analysis on the legislation as it currently stands, see this link. For a summary of the current House bill, see this link. This just in, John Conyers is a spineless tool.

9 October 2007

Tops for Thompson

Fred Thompson announced today that Vice Presidential daughter Liz Cheney -- no, not the gay one, silly! -- and former Senator George Allen (R-VA) would take the roles of co-chairs of his campaign. I don't know much about Cheney other than she's (presumably) not gay and has worked for the Bush Administration. Allen, of course, is the racist of 2006 election "macaca" fame.

Cheney and Allen immediately took the reins of power by announcing that they'd be fielding press questions after tomorrow night's Republican debate... then later announcing that no, in fact, they would not. Really, though, would you want Allen speaking for you?

Nice work, Fred!

8 October 2007

Appendix: We Love You, Baby!

After decades of believing that the appendix is a useless organ, a study has revealed that it may not be so useless after all. From the AP:

Some scientists think they have figured out the real job of the troublesome and seemingly useless appendix: It produces and protects good germs for your gut.

That's the theory from surgeons and immunologists at Duke University Medical School, published online in a scientific journal this week.

...

The function of the appendix seems related to the massive amount of bacteria populating the human digestive system, according to the study in the Journal of Theoretical Biology. There are more bacteria than human cells in the typical body. Most of it is good and helps digest food.

But sometimes the flora of bacteria in the intestines die or are purged. Diseases such as cholera or amoebic dysentery would clear the gut of useful bacteria. The appendix's job is to reboot the digestive system in that case.

The appendix “acts as a good safe house for bacteria,” said Duke surgery professor Bill Parker, a study co-author. Its location - just below the normal one-way flow of food and germs in the large intestine in a sort of gut cul-de-sac - helps support the theory, he said.

I absolutely love that we are still learning stuff like this!

8 October 2007