We REALLY need an open thread

Great evening, huh? Read More......

Read it and weep. THE memo. The REAL memo.

Read More......

I love when conservative bloggers make asses of themselves

Below is what the top conservatives (I've expanded it beyond bloggers since so many of those on the right made total asses of themselves) had to say about the now-proven-real Schiavo memo:

Tucker Carlson on Chris Matthews' show:

"Last week a memo surfaced, reportedly written by the Republican members of Congress explaining how to make hay with the Terri Schiavo case, the Talking Points Memo, Ah, I think within a week or two it will become clear that that memo was a forgery, possibly written by Democrats on the hill in an effort to discredit Republicans. Bloggers are saying that now and it sounds like they may be right."

The Washington Times: Story dated yesterday entitled "Was the Schiavo memo a fake?"

Sen. Robert F. Bennett, Utah Republican, said the issue "stinks" of a news fabrication similar to the one that engulfed CBS anchorman Dan Rather during the 2004 presidential campaign, after he reported that President Bush did not fulfill his duties while in the National Guard, citing documents that CBS later admitted could not be authenticated.

"I've never seen it, and nobody ever gave it to me," Mr. Bennett said of the purported Schiavo memo, adding: "As far as I'm concerned, it is an invention of the press."....

Sen. Trent Lott, Mississippi Republican and chairman of the rules committee, said yesterday that he would look into who, how and when the document was produced, although he is skeptical of the Democratic charges.

"We have not been able to find the source and I was on the floor the whole time until 10 o'clock that night and I never saw it," Mr. Lott said....

"Senator Martinez has never seen the memo and condemns its sentiments," spokeswoman Kerry Feehery said. "No one in our office has seen it, nor had anything to do with its creation."

Fred Barnes via the Washington Times (I think that's a two-fer):

"There wasn't a hint in these reports the memo could have any other source but Republicans. Yet there was no evidence it had come from Republicans. It was unsigned and had no letterhead or date. Nothing indicated it came from the Republican leadership or the House or Senate campaign committee or from the Republican National Committee or even from a stray Republican staffer," Mr. Barnes said.

"The only evidence was of a dirty trick -- and there wasn't much evidence of that. Powerline, the influential blog, found a version of the memo with typos cleaned up on left-wing Web sites.

"The only basis for blaming Republicans was the unsubstantiated allegation that the memo was spread among Republican senators. Yet no senator stepped forward and said, 'Yes, I got that memo.' Now consider what would have happened if a damning memo had been distributed to Democratic senators, saying the Schiavo issue could be used politically against Republicans. Would anyone in the mainstream media have jumped on it? I doubt it. Only right-wing bloggers would have.

"So rather than an example of aggressive reporting, the memo story turns out to be yet another instance of crude liberal bias, in this case against both Republicans and those who fought to have Schiavo's feeding tube restored. Naturally, the memo had a second life when the story was picked up by other news outlets, pundits, and columnists. How did ABC and others get wind of the memo in the first place? It came from 'Democratic aides,' according to the New York Times, who 'said it had been distributed to Senate Republicans.' Not exactly a disinterested source."

Newsmax:

In the midst of the buildup to the Palm Sunday congressional action to save Schiavo, the media were abuzz with a story about alleged "Republican talking points" in the case. The memo supposedly circulated on the Senate floor. The public was led to believe that Republicans were giddy at the prospect of using the tragedy as a political issue.

Here was the chance for the liberal media to publicize this and cause a backlash.

There was just one problem: Closer examination by The American Spectator, talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, The Weekly Standard, and Accuracy in Media (AIM) indicates that the memo is a fraud – a political dirty trick, if you will, specifically aimed at causing public revulsion at Republicans.

Rush Limbaugh (not a blogger, but I had to add this blowhard):

"Truth Detector: Supposed GOP Schiavo Memo Forged by Democrats."

Michelle Malkin:

I suspect that no one at the Post or ABC News still believes the amateurish, unsigned, misspelled memo was circulated by Republican Party leaders..... Will ABC News officials continue to stonewall, as Dan Rather et al. so famously did just a few months ago? Or will they come clean and promptly issue a correction? What about the Washington Post, which strongly implied in this article that Republicans were responsible for the memo? And what about all the other pundits, from Chris Matthews to Cynthia Tucker, who stated explicitly that Republicans distributed the memo--a statement that an anonymous ABC News official now says ABC News never reported? You would think the MSM learned something from RatherGate. Apparently not.

Powerline blog:

We have written extensively about the fake "talking points memo" on the Schaivo case that ABC News and the Washington Post publicized, beginning on March 18. We have pointed out, most comprehensively in the Weekly Standard, that there is no reason whatsoever to believe that the memo originated with the Republicans, and considerable reason to think it may be a Democratic dirty trick....

There is a story here, if our media wanted to pursue it. The memo in question is a pathetic piece of work. Any competent person could look at it and see that it is not a product of the Republican leadership. It is on a blank piece of paper; no letterhead, no signature, no identification. Anyone in the world could have typed it. It is incompetently produced: it gets the Senate bill number wrong, misspells Terri Schiavo's name, and is full of typographical errors. The only people reported to have distributed it (by the New York Times) were Democratic staffers. And--most fundamentally--it is absurd to think that the Republican leadership would produce a "talking points" memo discussing what great politics the Schiavo case was for Republicans. Those aren't talking points; not for Republicans, anyway. The memo benefited the only party that it could possibly have benefited: the Democrats.

If there were investigative reporters working for the Washington Post, ABC, the New York Times, or any other major news organization, they might want to try to find out where the memo came from. Circumstantially, it seems extremely likely that it was produced by Democrats as a political dirty trick. But such investigation seems to be beyond the capability--more important, beyond the ambition--of our mainstream press. Only bloggers look critically at documents that cast disrepute on Republicans. Mainstream reporters accept them uncritically, at face value, no matter how inept they may be. Why is this?

Sunday morning, I'll be on Howard Kurtz's CNN television program, "Reliable Sources," to discuss the "talking points memo." It will be interesting to see whether Kurtz tries to defend his paper's handling of the issue.

UPDATE: A reader points out that the Post's original story on the fake memo, which went out, apparently, on March 19, also included this paragraph:

Republican officials declared, in a memo that was supposed to be seen only by senators, that they believe the Schiavo case "is a great political issue" that could pay dividends with Christian conservatives, whose support is essential in midterm elections such as those coming up in 2006.

Someone at the Post swallowed the fake memo hook, line, and sinker--Mike Allen, I assume. Someone else at the Post apparently realized that the paper lacked facts to back up its accusations. I've written Allen to see what he has to say about these events.

Accuracy in Media:

Accuracy in Media today questioned the authenticity of the much-publicized "GOP Talking Points" memo on the Terri Schiavo case. The document has been seized upon by ABC news, the Washington Post, CBS News and other media to accuse Republicans of having partisan motives in trying to save Terri Schiavo. Cliff Kincaid, editor of AIM, said that the major media should explain how they verified the document and why they believe it is authentic. He said evidence suggests that the memo may have been manufactured as part of an effort to make Republicans look bad.....

The Martinez March 8 release had been posted on the web site of the Traditional Values Coalition, where it could have been easily copied and then altered. James Lafferty, a consultant to the group, believes that a liberal political operative took parts of the Martinez release, added the political references, and then pawned it off to the media as an official GOP Senate document. "I see it as a dirty trick," Lafferty told AIM.... "Shame on the media" for reporting the dubious memo, said Lafferty. "Unless they've got another source they haven't told us about, what they've reported is unquestioning acceptance of a piece of paper. As CBS learned recently, you cannot trust a piece of paper without verifying what's on it."

Read More......

Sen. Martinez ADMITS his aide wrote Schiavo memo!!!!!!!!!!!!

UPDATE: The Washington Post story on this is now up.

Eat that, you God damn lying conservative bloggers, FOX News and Rush Limbaugh.

From AP via Raw Story:

A one-page unsigned memo that became part of the debate preceding Congress' vote ordering a federal court review of the Terri Schiavo case originated in Florida Republican Sen. Mel Martinez' office, Martinez said Wednesday.

The memo — first reported by ABC News on March 18 and by The Washington Post and The Associated Press two days later — said the fight over removing Schiavo's feeding tube "is a great political issue ... and a tough issue for Democrats."....

[Martinez] said Harkin had called him earlier Wednesday to say he believes the memo had been given to him by Martinez. The Florida senator said he then ordered an internal investigation in his office.

I'm sorry, but Martinez only started investigating this TODAY? There were allegations that it was his staff weeks ago. And he investigates it only today because apparently today is when the press found out the truth. Read More......

Why do we all hate Christ?

I really need to STOP reading the wingnut blogs. Their latest is that to criticize Bush is to criticize Christ. You see, if you point out the fact that Bush is using his Christian credentials, and the religious right, to pull a con job on the American public, that makes you a Christ-hater. And the latest person to hate Christ, America, and all that is good is an editorial cartoonist who won the Pulitzer this year. Really good work too, check it out.

As an aside, I have a hard time imagining Christ feeling real at home with conservative bloggers and their hateful ilk. Conservative reporters on the other hand, well, we know Jesus was big on reaching out to the prostitutes... Read More......

Wingnut bloggers pissed that AP got a Pulitzer for actually covering the Iraq war truthfully

Remember, in wingnutland, there is no truth other than Great Father's truth. All truth flows from that. There is no photojournalism that diverges from Great Father's set of facts. (Though, the irony is that in this case, AP had a lot of cool photos that were very pro-troops, if we have to lower this conversation to that kind of analysis).

An appropriate response to the wingnuts.

And a look at the photo the conservatives think SHOULD have gotten the Pulitzer this year. Read More......

Papers about to report that Sen. Martinez had links to Schiavo memo

That's what Raw Story is saying (no story yet). Now, wouldn't that be funny. You may recall that the whiney conservative blogs (you know them, the ones who say they're straight but have really homoerotic names that would get their asses kicked during recess) have been yelling for two weeks, without a shred of evidence, that the GOP talking points on Terri Schiavo (e.g., the lady is dying, EXCELLENT, let's use this for maximum political gain) are fake.

One of the more prominent reasons given by the conservative blogs was something like "it's impossible to distribute a memo to a Senator without layer and layers of approval, so because no Senator is owning up to this memo, it's obviously a fake." That's of course utter bullshit, but I didn't respond at the time because it seemed just so dumb. But now that the conservative bloggers, along with FOX New and Limbaugh, have jumped on the it's-a-fake bandwagon, it seemed time to blow them out of the water.

First, and I know this will be hard for a conservative to understand since their idea of journalism involves charging by the hour (or $1200 a weekend). But just because a bunch of GOP Senators refuse to fess up about having creating a very very very politically damaging document, it doesn't mean they're telling the truth.

And second, I worked in the Senate as a top aide to a Republican Senator and I could get anything I wanted to practically any Senator I wanted any time I wanted. You simply had to walk up and say "Hi Senator, I work for Senator so-and-so, can I give you this?", and the deed was done. It wasn't exactly rocket science, especially if your boss told you to pass it out. And there were plently of times we copied off talking points for that very purpose.

And finally, the conservative blogs said "but there no Senator's name at the top of the memo, showing ownership, so it must have been a fake." Now, I can't vouch for how stupid those conservative bloggers really are, but in Washington you don't put your name on something that would be politically damaging if it leaked out. You also don't put your letterhead on something you're whipping off quickly and printing on the nearest printer late on a Saturday night in the Senate - you take whatever paper is in the machine at the time, and that's usually white.

But hey, the right-wing bloggers and media outlets don't exist to get the truth, even a biased truth. They exist to back up the official story, truth or lie. It doesn't matter to them what the truth is, they just want to win. And that is the difference between the right and left. They want to win at all costs, and we aren't even willing to fight. But what liberals need to learn - think SavePhil.com - is that it is possible to fight back hard, smartly, and do it honestly. Though at this point, I'd almost settle for liberals who were willing to fight at all. Read More......

ANOTHER DeLay scandal. Man we can't keep up!

From ABC News. Read More......

DeLay tricks doctor in GOP fundraising stunt

Yeah, GOP, you just go on defending this guy. Read More......

Open thread

Hot day Read More......

Lautenberg Slams DeLay, Cornyn

Go Frank. As John notes below, Lautenberg blasted DeLay and Cornyn for their judge bashing comments. RawStory.com has the text of Senator Lautenberg's floor statement. I think it's worth a read and seeing some of the key excerpts:

A few highlights:

Today there is an orchestrated effort to smear the reputation of the judiciary, especially federal judges.

This effort is being waged by Republicans in Congress, as a prelude to an attempt to change the rules for confirming judicial appointments.

In order to justify the “nuclear option,” they are trying to paint judges as “activists” and “out of control.”

In reality, it is the leadership of this Congress that is out of control and endangering the future of a fair court system.

Lautenberg read these remarks from that Cornyn made on Monday (and which every other Democrat should be talkng about):

"I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters, on some occasions, where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public … that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in, engage in violence."

That's when Lautenberg let them have it:

These remarks are almost unbelievable.

Yet they echo the words last week of the House Majority Leader.

Speaking of the judges in the Schiavo case, the House Majority Leader said, “The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior."

These are inflammatory words.

They ignore the fact that our Founding Fathers wanted judges to be insulated from political pressure.

And they are words that could easily incite violence against judges.

This is good stuff. We need more of it. And we need the groups to start including this message in everything they write and send.

From now on, as Lautenberg's statement made clear, the debate about the filibuster and judicial nominations should link Cornyn and DeLay to violence against judges. Lautenberg's right: their remarks are unbelievable, inflammatory and could incite violence against judges. We now have our talking points, let's stick with them.

Thanks, once again, Senator Lautenberg, for saying what has to be said. Read More......

Lautenberg blasts Sen. Cornyn over his sympathy for judge-killers

Silly Senator Lautenberg. Republicans condoning domestic terrorism, that's so six minutes ago. It's Phil A. Buster that's gonna win this issue for us. Read More......

Phil A. Buster

Pardon me while I go have an aneurysm.

(Ok, a bit more background. This is put together by "the" coalition of big liberal non-profits fighting for us on this entire "activist judge" thing. They just released this 2 days ago as their big fighting back campaign.) Read More......

New BlogAd classified ads

I'm joining several of the other blogs in offering new classified ads on the site. They're smaller, much cheaper (at this point), and don't include graphics. They'll be in the left-hand column, below the premium ad. Atrios and Kos already have them up, so can see what they look like on their sites. And you can order them on my site here. Like I said, for now, in the initial stages, they're cheap. Read More......

Oh, yeah, running in front of a bullet just to make Eason Jordan look good

From Reuters. Read More......

Warm afternoon open thread

80 degrees in DC. That should close up my lungs with allergy-induced bronchitis nicely :-) Read More......

In Memoriam

Yesterday's Washington Post:

"Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) says Democrats suffered major setbacks in the 1990s when an ethics-challenged leader -- House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.), who resigned in 1989 -- became a larger symbol of his party than its platform issues. 'That's a cocktail for disaster,' Graham said. If a political leader's personal problems are coupled with 'some policy decisions that are disconnected to the public, then you've got an opening' for trouble, he said. 'If we don't watch it, it could happen to us.'"

Read More......

The DeLay Drip, Drip, Drip Continues

CNN's Congressional Correspondent, Ed Henry, just did a segment on DeLay. Seems the House GOP Caucus had a meeting this morning and were urged to "mount a public defense of DeLay." Henry reported that there was some disagreement about whether the applause for DeLay was strong or mixed.

For some perspective about why this is important, yesterday's Washington Post has a key passage:

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) says Democrats suffered major setbacks in the 1990s when an ethics-challenged leader -- House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.), who resigned in 1989 -- became a larger symbol of his party than its platform issues. "That's a cocktail for disaster," Graham said. If a political leader's personal problems are coupled with "some policy decisions that are disconnected to the public, then you've got an opening" for trouble, he said. "If we don't watch it, it could happen to us."

Basically, the Democrats can destroy the GOP agenda if they take advantage of opportunities presented to them by DeLay in the House and John Cornyn in the Senate.

Clearly, the agenda for the GOP in the House is to save DeLay. To fight the nuclear option in the Senate, make Cornyn the issue. When you are in the minority, the agenda really can be that simple. And Lindsay Graham told us it works.

Time to start a pool on how long DeLay can stick around? Read More......

Open thread

Blah Read More......

Damn that Daily Kos

He got a mention as part of the vast left-wing conspiracy and we didn't. Check out the background of this book cover (I lightened it so you can read who's who). Even David Sirota got a mention, and he's like under 30 - a mere child! Damn.

Read More......

GOP Senator Cornyn defends remarks about how it's understandable why people want to kill judges

Now he's criticizing us. I wonder if he now think it's understandable if people wanted to kill his critics? This man should resign. From ThinkProgress:

Cornyn Refuses to Apologize, Defends Earlier Remarks

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) was on the floor of the Senate last night trying to limit the fallout from his incendiary remarks about judges. But he didn’t apologize or repudiate what he said. Instead, he just lashed out at his critics. Cornyn began:

As a former judge myself for 13 years, who has a number of close personal friends who still serve on the bench today, I am outraged by recent acts of courthouse violence. I certainly hope that no one will construe my remarks on Monday otherwise. Considered in context, I don’t think a reasonable listener or reader could.

In other words, Cornyn stands by everything he said. The real problem is, of course, with the people who criticized him. Here’s Cornyn:

I regret it that my remarks have been taken out of context to create a wrong impression about my position, and possibly be construed to contribute to the problem rather than to a solution.

Cornyn doesn’t regret what he said. He only regrets that people took what he said “out of context.”

Watch the video, read the transcript and judge for yourself. Cornyn is just digging his hole deeper.

Oh, he regrets that his remarks have been taken out of context. So he regrets that he got caught, not that he said something stupid. So, let's republish his remarks, in context, again, to see what he really meant.

Here's the text of what Cornyn said, 4:54 PM Eastern time today, in context - he clearly is blaming the judges for the violence against them.

…it causes a lot of people, including me, great distress to see judges use the authority that they have been given to make raw political or ideological decisions. And no one, including those judges, including the judges on the United States Supreme Court, should be surprised if one of us stands up and objects.

And, Mr. President, I'm going to make clear that I object to some of the decision-making process that is occurring at the United States Supreme Court today and now. I believe that insofar as the Supreme Court has taken on this role as a policy-maker rather than an enforcer of political decisions made by elected representatives of the people, it has led to the increasing divisiveness and bitterness of our confirmation fights. That is a very current problem that this body faces today. It has generated a lack of respect for judges generally. I mean, why should people respect a judge for making a policy decision borne out of an ideological conviction any more than they would respect or deny themselves the opportunity to disagree if that decision were made by an elected representative?

Of course the difference is that they can throw the rascal -- the rascal out -- and we are sometimes perceived as the rascal -- if they don't like the decisions that we make. But they can't vote against a judge because judges aren't elected. They serve for a lifetime on the federal bench. And, indeed, I believe this increasing politicalization of the judicial decision-making process at the highest levels of our judiciary have bred a lack of respect for some of the people that wear the robe. And that is a national tragedy.

And finally, I – I don't know if there is a cause-and-effect connection but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. Certainly nothing new, but we seem to have run through a spate of courthouse violence recently that's been on the news. And I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in -- engage in violence. Certainly without any justification but a concern that I have that I wanted to share.

You know, it's ironic, if you look back, as we all have, being students of history in this body, all of us have been elected to other -- to other bodies and other offices and we're all familiar with the founding documents, the declaration of independence, the constitution itself, we're familiar with the federalist papers that were written in an effort to get the constitution ratified in New York state. Well, Alexander Hamilton, apropos of what I want to talk about here, authored a series of essays in the Federalist Papers that opined that the judicial branch would be what he called the -- quote -- "least dangerous branch of government." The "least dangerous branch." He pointed out that the judiciary lacked the power of the executive branch, the white house, for example, and the federal government and the political passions of the legislature. In other words, the congress. Its sole purpose -- that is, the federal judiciary's sole purpose was to objectively interpret and apply the laws of the land and in...

Read More......

Open thread

DeLay resigned yet? Read More......

New Iraqi President appointed

Interestingly enough, he's a Kurd. This sets up the PM slot for Jaafari who will be appointed in the near future. The selection of Jalal Talabani for the position of President does bring back the memory of a story from the past. There was a small AFP story (which was not very well circulated) from over a year ago that mentioned something about the Kurds actually catching Saddam and holding him for the Americans until they could strike a deal for power sharing in the future. If that story was correct, it looks as though the Kurds received their payback for that move. Either way, it's good to see some progress with the government in Iraq. Now if they could only organize themselves enough to actually train their own military and take over a situation that they should be owning. Read More......

Prince Ranier graciously contributes to MSM death coverage

It's all death, all of the time. Vote rigging in Zimbabwe? Who cares, the Pope is still dead and it's time to re-write the history of a controversial man who had beliefs that were radically different than most Americans, Catholic or not. Iraq chooses new President? Whatever...there's another story about someone who is crying while waiting in line to see the dead body of the Pope. Ohhh and now we can look forward to stories about Prince Ranier.

To think that I found the historical re-write of Reagan and the excessive coverage disgusting. It just never stops these days with the MSM. Give it a rest and find something that has to do with the living for a change and give us some actual news. Read More......

Update on DeLay/Zogby results

From an Atrios link, wotisitgood4 corrects the false results of the Houston Chronicle/Zogby poll for DeLay's support. The guy isn't just slipping, he's falling off of a bloody cliff! The Zogby poll said 49% would vote for another candidate, as did the initial online story (he has screengrabs) and so says Zogby as well. This is even worse than the already bad 45% who would vote for another candidate that was in the story.

Nice to see the Chronicle has such high standards and changed the actual results of their own poll to lessen the blow to their local boy. It looks as though this could be a non-issue in light of the new stories coming out but interesting nevertheless. Read More......

For Tom DeLay

Turn up your speakers. If that doesn't work, try this one. Read More......