UPDATE: Kagan confirmed, 63-37

CNN's got the goods. Read More......

Eric Boehlert thinks the Tea Party movement has collapsed

Eric Boehlert:

Optimistic organizers, who boasted that their website had attracted 2 million hits during the run-up to the big rally, predicted a crowd of 3,000-4,000 people for the Philadelphia event. And they had every reason to be confident. After all, right-wing celebrity Andrew Breitbart, fresh off his Shirley Sherrod star turn, was scheduled to speak at the event, which was held on a gorgeous summer day in downtown Philadelphia on Independence Mall, where throngs of tourists would already be milling around. So it made sense, as Talking Points Memo reported, that organizers had 1,500 bottles of water on ice to hand out for the throngs who descended on the rally to cheer the Tea Party message.

But how many people actually showed up last Saturday for the national Tea Party rally? One local report put the number at 300. That's right, 300, or less than one-tenth of the expected turnout. In fact, it's possible more people showed up in Philadelphia last week to commemorate the opening of the new Apple computer store than showed up at the nationally promoted Tea Party rally featuring Andrew Breitbart.

Memo to the media: The Tea Party movement has collapsed.

And its collapse means it's time for the press to rethink the way it covers the political equivalent of the Pet Rock, a fad that appears to be in its waning days of popularity.

Read More......

'The president does oppose same-sex marriage but he supports equality for gay and lesbian couples' - Axelrod to MSNBC

Wanna try that again?



Axelrod's point, if you watch the video, is that the President is for "separate but equal" benefits for gay couples. Putting aside the obvious horror of that statement, we can't get "equal" benefits because of DOMA. That would be the law that the President routinely defends in court against our civl rights challenges, and the law about which the President has done nothing to get repealed, even though he promised to repeatedly during the campaign.

This is the key quote from Axelrod:

The president opposed Proposition 8 at the time. He felt that it was divisive. He felt that it was mean-spirited, and he opposed it at the time. So we reiterated that position yesterday. The president does oppose same-sex marriage, but he supports equality for gay and lesbian couples, and benefits and other issues, and that has been effectuated in federal agencies under his control. He's supports civil unions, and that's been his position throughout. So nothing has changed.

Actually, a lot has changed. And, Obama's position has to change. Please sign our open letter to President Obama asking him to come out in support of full marriage equality. It's time for Obama to get on the right side of history. And, we have to let him know that's where he needs to be. We won't accept separate, but equal. Read More......

Dems continue to press Rs on whether they'll join new Teabagger caucus

Great idea.

Democrats began a push Thursday to press Republican congressmen and candidates to say whether or not they will join the newly-formed House Tea Party Caucus.

The effort, headed by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is a follow-up to their effort last week tying Republican candidates to the Tea Party movement, which they say is too extreme and out of touch with the goals of mainstream Americans. Last week, the Democrats launched a "Tea Party Contract with America," riffing off the 1994 document put out by Republicans which helped them win back the House.

Read More......

'WikiLeaks: The National-Security State Strikes Back'

Scott Horton at Harpers has been following the push-back by the government against WikiLeaks. He correctly says (my emphasis):

WikiLeaks’ disclosure of the 91,000 U.S. government documents that it labels the “Afghan War Diary” raises a number of vital issues. . . . But quite apart from their contents, the WikiLeaks documents are a test for America’s voracious national-security state. Its response to them gives us a sense of how it intends to fight perceived threats to secrecy.

The WikiLeaks "Afghan War Diary" page is here. The document collection itself is here. Our own initial coverage of the WikiLeaks story is here and here.

Horton identifies three areas of response:

1. An information war against WikiLeaks
2. An attempt to make an example of the leaker
3. An attempt to destroy WikiLeaks, and perhaps even Julian Assange

About the first, you're probably aware of the scare-tactic assault — demonize WikiLeaks as somehow anti–American and anti–American interests, and claim the leaks made soldiers and Afghans unsafe. This meme should get good media play. As Horton points out:

Much of the American media, which filled the airwaves with bogus claims about WMDs in Iraq, can be counted on to view WikiLeaks as an adversary rather than an ally.

After all, WikiLeaks is an adversary of the captive corporate media, by doing the job that the traditionals fail to do — tell the truth about these wars.

About the second, we've covered the leaker's fate here. Horton adds:

Private Bradley Manning, a young enlisted man from Potomac, Maryland, [has been] arrested and detained in Kuwait. He appears to have been denied access to independent counsel and held incommunicado outside the country. Reports also indicate that criminal investigators are looking to identify individuals who may have facilitated his leak. . . . [I]t seems hard to see how Manning can mount a meaningful legal defense. [T]he heavy-handed tactics which are being applied against him are mystifying displays of asymmetrical legal warfare.

It looks like students at MIT are being investigated as well.

And finally, about destroying WikiLeaks:

But the major target surely is WikiLeaks itself, and on this score the goal of the national-security state is unambiguous. WikiLeaks must be destroyed. Indeed, as I noted in March, long before these leaks, the Army Counterintelligence Center had prepared a 32-page secret plan to destroy WikiLeaks. The memo notes that the American intelligence community has valuable allies in the struggle against WikiLeaks—China, North Korea, Russia, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. It recommended emulating the tactics used by these tyrannical states.

Emulating the Chinese, Russians and North Koreans; ah, the ties that bind. There's a Huffington Post report that WikiLeaks volunteers are already being targeted for "special attention" when they travel.

And what about Julian Assange, WikiLeaks founder? Well, if this were a novel, he's a stain on the pavement by page 204. Horton again:

Julian Assange may himself be a even more serious target. How might the United States deal with Assange? Marc Thiessen, a Republican publicist and torture apologist with close ties to former CIA Director Hayden, argues that Assange is a non-American who lives outside the country and therefore apparently has no legal rights. He advocates kidnapping and hints at still more violent conduct.

I don’t think the Obama Administration will use a drone to murder Assange, but some in the intelligence community will be arguing for use of some of the “black arts” that were a staple of covert operations in the Bush era. . . . [E]fforts to kidnap him are almost certainly being spun at this very moment.

Yikes. Julian, don't eat the sushi; it's that new polonium fish!

Read the whole piece, and if you're really interested, follow the links. This continues to be a major story.

GP Read More......

TSA is saving some of those body image scan pics they said they wouldn't save

But don't worry, they're only saving the 35,000 pictures that supposedly don't show anything - they won't save the really scary photos, like the one above (they say) - but why are they saving any of them at all, when they said they wouldn't? And why did it take a Freedom of Information Act request to find out that they were breaking their own promise, if they're not up to anything nefarious?

(Here's Chris' earlier post on why body scanners don't even work anyway.) Read More......

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Good morning. And, I mean that. It is a good morning. Winning is so much better, especially when the win is equality.

Judge Walker's decision was amazing. And, it sets us on a path to the Supreme Court, via the Ninth Circuit. I feel like we're in the best possible legal hands with David Boies and Ted Olson.

The President is in Chicago today. He's doing an event at the Ford Motor Company Chicago Assembly Plant to talk about how his administration saved the auto industry. And, the Obama administration did indeed do that.

One of the President's aides (anonymously) got the news out last night that Obama does not support marriage equality. The White House spokespeople are doing contortions to say that Obama supports the Prop. 8 decision but doesn't support marriage equality. Prop. 8 is about marriage. Here's the thing: Obama has to get on the right side of history. Besides the Prop. 8 case, don't forget that DOMA was found unconstitutional by a federal court judge in Massachusetts. Over the next couple months, the Obama administration will have to decide if it wants to appeal those decisions. In other words, the Obama Department of Justice will have to argue that DOMA is constitutional. I really don't think that's where Obama wants to be heading into his reelection. But, who knows with that team of political geniuses he has working for him, that may be just what they want.

Please sign our open letter to President Obama asking him to come out in support of full marriage equality. It's time for Obama to get on the right side of history. And, we have to let him know that's where he needs to be.

Yesterday, Nate Silver said via Twitter:

In 30 years time, the fact that the Barack Obama was opposed to gay marriage is going to look really silly.

I'd make one edit. I'd say "in 3 years time."

Have at it...

(And, Happy Birthday, Rita Sudbay -- that's my mother.) Read More......

2nd cloned cow accidentally enters UK food chain

I know they claim it's safe. I still find it creepy. Read More......

More on that Mosque in NYC

Peter Beinart let the ADL have it.

For a long time now, the ADL seems to have assumed that it could exempt Israel from the principles in its charter and yet remain just as faithful to that charter inside the United States. But now the chickens are coming back home to America to roost. The ADL’s rationale for opposing the Ground Zero mosque is that “building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain—unnecessarily—and that is not right.” Huh? What if white victims of African-American crime protested the building of a black church in their neighborhood? Or gentile victims of Bernie Madoff protested the building of a synagogue? Would the ADL for one second suggest that sensitivity toward people victimized by members of a certain religion or race justifies discriminating against other, completely innocent, members of that religion or race? Of course not. But when it comes to Muslims, the standards are different. They are different in Israel, and now, it is clear, they are different in the United States, too.

Indifference to the rights and dignity of Palestinians is a cancer eating away at the moral pretensions of the American Jewish establishment. Last Friday, in the case of the ADL, we learned just how far that cancer has spread.

And Mayor Bloomberg isn't too pleased either:

The government has no right whatsoever to deny that right - and if it were tried, the courts would almost certainly strike it down as a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Whatever you may think of the proposed mosque and community center, lost in the heat of the debate has been a basic question - should government attempt to deny private citizens the right to build a house of worship on private property based on their particular religion? That may happen in other countries, but we should never allow it to happen here. This nation was founded on the principle that the government must never choose between religions, or favor one over another.

The World Trade Center Site will forever hold a special place in our City, in our hearts. But we would be untrue to the best part of ourselves - and who we are as New Yorkers and Americans - if we said 'no' to a mosque in Lower Manhattan.

Let us not forget that Muslims were among those murdered on 9/11 and that our Muslim neighbors grieved with us as New Yorkers and as Americans. We would betray our values - and play into our enemies' hands - if we were to treat Muslims differently than anyone else. In fact, to cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists - and we should not stand for that.

Read More......

Suicide rate in Greece doubled over the last year; might be economic crisis

Digital Journal:

According to Klimaka, an organization that runs a helpline in Greece for people considering suicide, recent months have seen the suicide rate go up from 1 person a day in 2009 to more than 2 per day this year.

According to Violatzis, writes Kathmerini, many of the victims are “men who are no longer earning enough money to provide for their families and feel they no longer have a role to play – people who are going through an identity crisis,” though he also admits suicide is often a multifaceted problem that cannot be explained by merely pointing to the present economic situation.

Read More......

WH aide: Obama doesn't support marriage equality

One more cross-posted Prop. 8 post because we got the answer to the question of whether the President supports the Prop. 8 decision. Not really.

Earlier today, a White House spokesperson provided a tepid statement earlier today to Kerry Eleveld:

“The President has spoken out in opposition to Proposition 8 because it is divisive and discriminatory. He will continue to promote equality for LGBT Americans.”

Clearly, we have different definitions of what LGBT equality means. For LGBT Americans, it means full equality. For Obama, it means separate, but equal:

Nevertheless, Obama has also publicly opposed same-sex marriage, and a White House aide said the president’s position has not changed.

“He supports civil unions, doesn’t personally support gay marriage though he supports repealing the Defense of Marriage Act, and has opposed divisive and discriminatory initiatives like Prop. 8 in other states,” said the official, who asked not to be named.

That might have worked in 2008. It won't work in 2012.

And, this "White House aide" spoke anonymously. Can some reporter, maybe at the briefing, get this on-the-record?

If Obama wants to "promote equality for LGBT Americans," he can support full equality, not "separate, but equal" civil unions. That's so 2008. And, it has to change.

Please sign our open letter to President Obama asking him to come out in support of full marriage equality. It's time for Obama to get on the right side of history. And, we have to let him know that's where he needs to be. Read More......

Woman called 911 repeatedly looking for a date

I hadn't heard about this story. Consider this your very weird break from politics. Read More......

Follow-up to Target and MN Forward story

As a follow-up our earlier piece about Target and MN Backward MN Forward using the Citizens United decision to fund hard-right Minnesotan Tom Emmer in the governer's race, we have these updates.

1. From Steve Perry at Politics in Minnesota, an item from their most recent subscription newsletter, Politics in Minnesota: The Weekly Report (no link, emphasis mine):

Boom times for MN Forward: The new corporate campaign spending vehicle raised about $460,000 by the July 6 preliminary report deadline. Since then it has more than doubled its receipts, which now total $1.1 million. And according to 24-hour reports filed with the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board (CFPD), $320,000 of that sum has come in since Monday of last week. . . . So far, MN Forward has spent $195,000 on TV ads backing Republican Tom Emmer. . . .

Target blowback: Target Corp. has taken heat from employees and consumers since the public disclosure of its role as a founding funder of MN Forward. But so far the negative publicity hasn't extended any further. Another prominent Minnesota retailer, Best Buy, has drawn little public attention.

The Best Buy info is new. Elsewhere in the report we learn that Emmer seems to be getting a ton of hidden help:

Republican Tom Emmer has yet to spend his first dime on TV, yet by mid-July he had been the subject of about $900,000 worth of television spots by third-party groups.

2. About the TPM report that MN Backward MN Forward was going to give to Dems as well, Mr. Perry says by email that this is not likely, though Target execs might have done so. A public show of atonement, says my corporate-cynical self; must control appearances — can't lose sales.

3. About "pharmacy conscience" as one of Emmer's "beliefs" — it seems Target has similar corporate views. Here's Wikipedia, sourced from the Minneapolis Star Tribune, November 11, 2005:

In 2005, Planned Parenthood protested Target policy involving a conscience clause that allows pharmacists to refuse to dispense the emergency contraceptive, Plan B Levonorgestrel, based on religious beliefs, as long as the employee ensures that the prescription is filled by another pharmacist in a timely manner. . . . [C]ritics feel this policy fails to uphold the pharmacist's duty of care.

Anti-woman as well. Our thanks to an alert Minnesota reader for the tip.

Bottom line — it seems there are three entwined issues here, all of which are easily acted on:

Tom Emmer. A real throwback, and the Republican candidate for governor. His defeat is doable, but progressives need to put shoulder to wheel in an off-year election. In 2002, Repub Pawlenty defeated DFL Roger Moe 44%–36%, with former Dem Tim Penny taking 16% as a third-party candidate. In 2006, Pawlenty won again, but by less than 1% in another race with a spoiler third-party candidate.

This time, both DFL primary candidates lead Emmer by 5%. Not a walkaway, but not razor-thin. With effort, he can be beaten.

Target. They're singing their corporate song: "Please love us, Mr and Ms Gay Person, we've always loved you, and that Emmer stuff, well, someone goofed, is all. Please?" Next will come the commercials with real humans pretending to be caring Target faces, along with an MN Forward–induced PR campaign about (gasp) jobs, and the march is on to "forgive" them.

But remember — there's a history here. Anti-woman in 2005, anti-gay today, and implicitly pro–faux-religion (or whatever you call it when well-funded revenge freaks claim to speak for God). Don't let the repair-ads and implied threat of job-loss throw you. Join and support the boycotts.

MN Forward. This case remains a major test of the Citizens United waters, with Target and Best Buy (don't forget them) major early testees; and it's not over. I guarantee that nationally, RW corps are using Minnesota to figure out how to make Citizens United work without triggering a back-lash. My suggestion: lash back, hard and now.

By the way, the Politics in Minnesota website is a great place to start if you want to get info about Minnesota elections and campaign financing.

Sorry for the length, but this is both important and not simple, so I wanted to bottom-line it as well as give the data.

GP Read More......

Married three times, Newt doesn't like the Prop. 8 decision

It would be hysterical if it weren't so hypocritical. I posted his statement here. And, mocked it there, too. Newt thinks marriage should be the union of one man and three consecutive women. Read More......

Army probing McChrystal staff over Rolling Stone interview

Some good news from McClatchy. Read More......