Et tu, Hillary?

In all the Obama mania of the past few days, one of my readers wrote and inquired why I wasn't writing about Hillary's wife-beater supporter. I told him I wasn't familiar with the story, but would look into it. I'm not 100% sure that this is the same as Obama's guy out in Nevada, but far be it for me to be called a shill for Hillary, so I'll pose the question to you. Is this the same thing?

July 5, 2007, Hillary press release:

Hillary Clinton today received the endorsement of a trio of dynamic elected leaders from Southern Nevada communities -- Ricki Barlow, Councilman, City of Las Vegas; Dennis Keating, President, Nye County School District Board of Trustees; and Stephanie Smith, Councilwoman, City of North Las Vegas.

And we learn this about Ricki Barlow from the Las Vegas Sun:

Barlow also has drawn criticism over a domestic violence arrest in 1998 for allegedly assaulting his wife, Vanessa Garbutt-Barlow. The couple has since divorced.

As part of a plea agreement, Barlow pleaded guilty, according to court records. The charge was later dismissed after Barlow completed impulse control treatment and community service.

Barlow, though, maintains his innocence and says he has never hit any woman, including his former wife.

He has called the accusations against him smear tactics.

Here is the story about Obama's supporter.

In 2004, Mayweather was convicted on two counts of battery for punching two women at a Las Vegas nightclub the previous year. He was given suspended prison sentences, $1,000 in fines and ordered to complete impulse control counseling.

Mayweather in 2002 pleaded guilty to two counts of domestic violence in one case and battery in another. In 2005, a jury acquitted him of a third domestic violence charge, a felony, after his accuser changed her story. He reportedly was convicted of battery in his hometown of Grand Rapids, Mich., and he has also been the subject of civil lawsuits accusing him of battery.

Are they same? Do both deserve the same level of outrage? I'm curious particularly what the women readers think, or those of you more familiar with the domestic violence issue. Read More......

13% would vote for Stephen Colbert for president

Seriously. The sad part is, 12% of them are probably FOX News viewers who didn't get the joke. Read More......

Press releases that make us laugh

Former FEMA Director and Director of Corporate Strategy for Cotton Companies Michael D. Brown Available for Interviews Regarding California Wild Fires

394 words , 23 October 2007 , 18:12 , PR Newswire (U.S.) English

Copyright © 2007 PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights Reserved.

NEW YORK, Oct. 23 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Michael D. Brown, Former FEMA Director and Current Director of Cotton Companies, one of the leading disaster preparedness and restoration organizations in the nation, is available for comment regarding the wild fires that are devastating Southern California.

Currently, the brush fires are affecting hundreds of local businesses and have forced more than 500,000 people out of their homes. Of these 500,000 people, an estimated 10,000 of them have taken shelter at the local NFL stadium, Qualcomm, vaguely reminiscent of circumstances of Hurricane Katrina evacuees two years ago.

"The agency has learned some hard lessons regarding the handling of mass evacuations especially in regard to the bureaucratic red tape that is involved in such a process," said Mr. Brown. "This is a tragic time for many of the people of California, and Cotton Companies is working to ensure that normalcy is restored and that businesses and organizations are back up and running as soon as possible."

Cotton has already deployed a team to San Diego to prepare recovery efforts and has a Community Assessment Team in full force.

Mr. Brown can speak to the turmoil being caused by the California wild fires as well as to some of the new processes in disaster relief efforts that will help to restore California communities. He can offer advice to residents and businesses on proper relief and recovery efforts and provide suggestions for future disaster preparedness.

Since its inception in 1996, Cotton Companies, the nation's leading provider of disaster recovery services, has been coming to the aid of businesses and communities coast to coast with its ability to react, take charge, mobilize and execute on the spot crisis management. Cotton has responded to such high-alert disasters as Hurricane Katrina and the tragedy of 9/11 in New York City. Read More......

HRC tells Obama that religious right activist bigot shouldn't share a stage with any presidential candidate

UPDATE: Greg Sargent at TPM Election Central has more on how this story developed over the day.

Here's what Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese, head of the nation's largest gay lobby, had to say about Donnie McClurkin, the bigot hosting an Obama fundraising concert.

“I spoke with Sen. Barack Obama today and expressed to him our community’s disappointment for his decision to continue to remain associated with Rev. McClurkin, an anti-gay preacher who states the need to ‘break the curse of homosexuality.’ There is no gospel in Donnie McClurkin’s message for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people and their allies. That’s a message that certainly doesn’t belong on any Presidential candidate’s stage.”

“I did thank him for announcing he would be adding an openly gay minister as part of the tour and for his willingness to call on religious leaders to open a dialogue about homophobia. We hope that Sen. Obama will move forward and facilitate face to face meetings with religious leaders, like Rev. McClurkin, and the GLBT community to confront the issue of homophobia.”

“We also call on all of the Presidential campaigns to look within their ranks of supporters and make the same commitment to engage in a dialogue among differing views around issues of equality and fairness for our community.”

Now the ball is back in Obama's court. Does he agree with HRC that bigots like McClurkin don't belong on any presidential candidate's stage, or is Obama going to continue embracing a man who thinks gays are "trying to kill our children"? Read More......

Wife beaters for Obama

Not kidding. Obama is now embracing a guy who beats up women. And not just a guy who beat up a woman once (as if that would be okay). No, the guy Obama is using in Nevada, Floyd Mayweather Jr., has repeatedly beaten up women for years.

In 2004, Mayweather was convicted on two counts of battery for punching two women at a Las Vegas nightclub the previous year. He was given suspended prison sentences, $1,000 in fines and ordered to complete impulse control counseling.

Mayweather in 2002 pleaded guilty to two counts of domestic violence in one case and battery in another. In 2005, a jury acquitted him of a third domestic violence charge, a felony, after his accuser changed her story. He reportedly was convicted of battery in his hometown of Grand Rapids, Mich., and he has also been the subject of civil lawsuits accusing him of battery.

An Obama spokesman called the guy's wife-beating "mistakes." (The campaign is now trying to downplay this guy's role, he's "just a supporter" - well, he was the title and subject of a press release they sent our earlier this week, so he's clearly not just some supporter like your or me.) Mistakes? Yeah, I'd say. And he keeps making em. But Obama's spokesman says the guy has paid for his mistakes, so it's okay for them to use his as one of their mascots. But just to be sure, did Obama's spokesman mean the guy had paid for his 2002 two counts of domestic violence and battery, did she mean his two counts of battery in 2004 when he punched two women, did she mean the reports of his battery conviction back home in Michigan, or the various civil lawsuits? It's so hard to keep track with these Obama celebrities - if they're not beating the crap out of women, they're busy trying to eradicate the world of gay people.

Yes, never a dull moment in Obama-land.

On a more serious, it's one thing to want to win so bad you can taste it. It's another to want to win so bad that you tolerate gay-bashing and wife-beating simply because the guy is famous. At some point the real Barack Obama needs to show his face, or there are going to be very few reasons left to vote for this man now or in the future.

CORRECTION: A few friends alerted me to the fact that one of the sentences in my closing paragraph sounded as if I was implying that there was a wife-beater constituency in the black community (or elsewhere). I don't think any such thing, have never heard of such a thing, certainly didn't intend to imply it, and I apologize for giving that impression. Rather than rework the sentence, I deleted it outright to avoid even the appearance of such a suggestion. What I was trying to say, and I think the rest of the paragraph explains clearly enough, is that there's a growing pattern of Obama embracing celebrities that are just downright nasty people, and worse, once he finds out how nasty they are, he continues to embrace them because they're celebrities and can help him reach their fans. And I think that stinks. Read More......

BREAKING: Obama staff secretly trying to get grassroots to pressure Human Rights Campaign not to criticize him

Ok, that's sleazy as hell. And pretty much guarantees that HRC now has to blast Obama, bad, or they're going to be seen as caving to his pressure. Seriously not ready for prime time, this campaign. Read More......

Would Obama put a klansman on stage so long as a black minister got to introduce him?

Obama's latest sleight of hand in "cure the gays"-gate is he's now offering to have a gay preacher open his homophobic gospel tour where he's going to be showcasing an outspoken homophobic bigot who thinks gays are trying to kill your children, who thinks being gay is a "curse," and who thinks that gays need to be cured (the anti-gay activist is now denying that he ever used the word "cured" - whatever, the guy thinks we need to be fixed, can be fixed, it's all the same thing).

Which brings up the question: Would Obama put a Klansman on stage so long as he brought a black minister or a rabbi up there too?

I'm just not getting the equivalence here: One bigot = one gay guy, and then everything is okay. How many gays balances one bigot, Senator? One, two, three, three-fifths? That's just not the way it works in civil rights, Senator. You don't get to be a bigot so long as you suck up to the gays too. You NEVER get to be a bigot, period. You never get to embrace bigotry, ever. It doesn't matter many how many of your best friends are gay. It doesn't matter how many gays you put on stage. You don't ever get to showcase a renowned bigot to line your pockets and get you votes, ever.

Would you do this to any other minority, Senator? Would you let a klansman or a white supremacist, or a Holocaust denier, on stage so long as you invited a rabbi and a black minister too? I somehow doubt it. You'd do the right thing and kick the bigot out of your little show. But we're quickly learning that doing the right thing isn't part of the Obama vocabulary.

NEXT UP: How Obama is using a known, serial woman-beater to push his campaign in Nevada. Read More......

Dear Fellow Democrats

I had very high hopes for the country after the Democrats won a majority of Congress in 2006. I truly believed that they would draw down and eventually end the war. Who could blame me? That was the platform they ran on. I’m convinced that the past election was indeed a referendum on the war in Iraq. To be a candidate who was resistant to Bush was just enough to get elected in 2006 in my opinion. It’s almost a year since the Democrats took control of Congress, and they have not produced one piece of legislation that would start the process of ending this war that is sucking our nation dry. Bush has beaten them in every single standoff.

While I’m clearly disappointed in the inability of the new Congress to end the war in Iraq I am happy they are in control as opposed to the Republicans. Had the last election swung the other way we probably would have invaded Iran by now. Bush would have been totally out of control and the damage would have been irreparable (if it’s not already). At least with the Democrats in power there have been hearings, oversight, investigations, and President Bush as been significantly scrutinized. No results have been produced but it has hindered his ability to run wild like a mad dog as he did previously. However, it’s still not enough and Congress needs to do more.

The Democrats keep telling us “we will hold this president accountable.” When they fail to do that they tell us “we just don’t have the votes.” That is true in some cases and it’s a problem. But it’s no excuse.

Since the Democrats have not done the job we elected them to do they at least owe us an explanation as to why. If it’s not simply politics and it’s just complete “Republican obstructionism” they need to convey that message better to the American people. The Speaker and Senate Majority leader need to constantly be on public television and writing oped pieces in the major newspapers explaining themselves. Furthermore, they should ensure that all members of Congress in the Democratic Party personally explain to their constituents why they have not been able to keep their promises.

I never advocated for impeachment. I’m not now either. However, I think it was very foolish for Speaker Pelosi to say “impeachment is off the table.” All that did was send a message to President Bush that he can operate however he wishes without facing any consequences. With Democrats controlling Congress Bush should be scared of impeachment (at least) considering the astronomical number of criminal acts he has committed. Instead he continues to laugh at us and dare us on every issue because he knows Congress will not punish him.

Sadly, it appears that we are stuck with this until 2008. The Democrats will do a lot of barking but no biting. And when the “song and dance” is over the Democrats will write blank checks for Bush’s war in Iraq to ensure another victory in 2008 taking a sizable majority of Congress and the White House.

I could be wrong but I have not seen any action on behalf of my party to convince me otherwise.

One would think it would be in the interest of the Democrats to end the war before 2008. Also, it should be the highest priority for the Democratic candidates running for president so they don’t have to inherit this mess when they are inaugurated in 2009. I wonder if the Democrats think a continuation of the war is a good political strategy for them (I don't know).

What about what the polls? They indicate that an overwhelming majority of Americans want an end to the war. We know Bush doesn’t care about the wishes of the American people, but Congress should being that they are the ones up for reelection.

Bush still enjoys strong support from Republicans in Congress. They would follow that fool to the gates of hell. And all the while our side is completely divided and in disarray.

There is a solution. It’s called unification. Speaker Pelosi needs to rally the conservative Blue Dogs, the progressives, and the moderates within the Democratic Party to come together in solidarity to finally defeat Bush and his neocon machine. They must be equally as stubborn as Bush when dealing with him and not take no for answer. If the president vetoes legislation send it right back to him. He never compromises--so why are we? Bush has clearly demonstrated the need to be micromanaged by Congress. The proper "checks and balances" that we are all waiting for can start the cycle of ending the war, restoring the trust of the people, repairing the damage the Bush Administration has done to America, and putting our country back on track at home and abroad.

I'm no political expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I know that the majority of Congress has a lot more power than it's currently willing to exercise.


My apologies to the Democrats in Congress for the "tough love." But it is very necessary. Our party is losing entirely too many good people over the Democrats backing down to Bush on such crucial issues. There is no defending it.

End of rant.

John Bruhns
Democrat
Iraq Veteran. Read More......

Senate approves Southwick

Remember how we thought the Senate Democrats were going to block all the nasty, right-wing judges? Wrong again:

Senate Republicans scored a key victory Wednesday with the confirmation of Leslie Southwick to the New Orleans-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.

A united GOP conference convinced enough Democrats to cross party lines to first clear a procedural hurdle and then succeed in the confirmation vote. Southwick has been arguably the most contentious judicial nominee of the 110th Congress up to this point, amid strong opposition from Democratic leaders and liberal groups. Senators had invoked cloture in a 62-35 vote and, minutes later, confirmed Southwick on a 59-38 vote.

Read that first line again "Senate Republicans scored a key victory Wednesday...." That's pathetic.

The roll call vote to break invoke cloture (and end the debate) is here. Several Democrats crossed over to support Southwick, but the worst offender is Dianne Feinstein. She cast the deciding vote to get the nomination out of committee in the first place.

Three Democrats, Carper (DE), Inouye (HI) and Salazar (CO), voted yes on cloture, then against the actual nomination. Because, you know, they probably respect the process, blah, blah, blah. Pathetic. Read More......

Obama supporter: "I'm not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children."

Barack Obama's good buddy, the religious right singer who thinks gays are out to kill your children and therefore need to be cured, now says that he's never said anything at all about gays needing to be cured. Funny, then, that Donnie McClurkin let himself be profiled on the lead "gays can be cured" Web site, Exodus International.

What's even more offensive than McClurkin trying to mislead the Chicago Trib about his past (and present) is the fact that Obama's campaign clearly put him up to this interview with the Trib. Trust me, there is NO WAY this guy opened his mouth to the Chicago Trib about this matter without the Obama people setting the entire interview up, or at least approving of the entire thing. Obama is now trying to feed you misinformation about his top surrogates and their anti-gay campaigns. Nice, Senator. It was bad enough that you embraced an anti-gay bigot and put him on stage as your representative, but now you're trying to polish his image in the media and lie about who he really is.

So I did a little more digging about just what Mr. Obama's good buddy has had to say about gays, since Obama is now trying to tell us that McClurkin's comments were all -- ALL -- taken out of context, per the Trib story. Here are a few quotes:

"there are many other things to be done to break the curse of homosexuality"

Oh ok, so we don't need to be cured, rather, our "curse" needs to be broken. Nice, Senator. Do you think being black is a curse? And how would if Hillary put someone on stage to raise money for her who thought that your race was a curse? Would you say that his words were being taken out of context?

"there are countless people who are discontent in this lifestyle and want to be freed from it. They were thrust into homosexuality by neglect, abuse and molestation."

Oh, so we're gay because we were sexually molested. Nice. You are aware, Senator, that this is one of the biggest slurs from the religious about gay people, and that it's an absolute lie. How would you feel if one of Hillary's people claimed that you are the way you are because you and all your people were sexually molested? I.e., you are the way you are because you're seriously screwed up? Then there's this:

"We do it with the drug addict! We do it with the alcoholic! So why can we not do it with those who have sexual differences?"

Gays have no character and are like liars:

"There are certain things like, you know, anybody who has a lying problem; they get to the point where they hate being so, having such a lack of character that they make a change."

And then there's my favorite "out of context" Donnie McClurkin quote:

"The gloves are off and if there's going to be a war, there's going to be a war. But it will be a war with a purpose? I'm not in the mood to play with those who are trying to kill our children."

Yeah, um, that would be people like you and me who are trying to "kill our children."

Yes, Senator Obama, McClurkin is the perfect representative for your campaign. He thinks gays are a curse, that we need to be fixed, and that we're trying to "kill children." And I'm sure you'd have nothing to say about this if he were saying the same thing about African-Americans and Hillary were promoting him.

Stop the spin, Senator, and do the right thing. You're only making things worse.

IN OUR NEXT SEGMENT... we discuss how McLurkin's heroes, the folks at Exodus, discuss homosexuality as "demon possession" that needs a good exorcism. Wonder what the good Senator will have to say about that. Stay tuned. Read More......

She's baaaaaaaaaack

And not a minute too soon.

Susan McCue, former chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, is returning to play an advisory role to the Nevada Democrat.

Ms. McCue is leaving her full-time post as head of the ONE Campaign, the anti-poverty group created by the singer Bono, as of Dec. 1 to open a new communications and consulting firm. The move frees her up to help Mr. Reid plot strategy as Democrats head into 2008.

Ms. McCue was known for her close working relationship with the senator, and could serve as an intermediary between lawmakers and activists unhappy with the inability of Congressional Democrats to force a change in Bush administration’s war policy. She could also help bolster Mr. Reid back home in Nevada, where his poll numbers have slipped due to his high profile on contentious issues in Congress.

Susan is a hard ass. And she's smart - politically smart. From what I hear, a lot of Reid's initial successes a few years back, on taking the job of Democratic leader (back when we all loved him), were because of Susan. Then she left and took over the One Campaign, and things start going south in Reid-land. Let's hope this means things will start heading north again. Welcome back, Susan. We missed you. And please bring back the old Harry Reid. We miss him too. Read More......

Dept. Of Justice failing at terror prosecutions while Dept. of Justice is making a priority of political prosecutions against Democrats

Interesting tidbits in today's Political Bulletin from US News and World Report tell the story of the misplaced priorities of the Bush administration's Department of Justice. Seems the Bush team isn't doing so well on terror-related prosecutions. But, the Bush administration is devoting resources towards politically related prosecutions. That political charge comes from a former U.S. Attorney General who was also a GOP Governor. And, you know that political prosecution agenda came right out of Karl Rove's office.

First, the failure on terror:

Acquittals Hurting Counter-Terror Efforts

The New York Times reports, "From 1993 to 2001, prosecutors in Manhattan convicted some three dozen terrorists through guilty pleas and in six major trials." But since "the Sept. 11 attacks, the government's track record has been decidedly spottier, and its failure to obtain a single conviction on Monday in its terrorism-financing prosecution of what was once the nation's largest Islamic charity was another in a series of missteps and setbacks."

Then the stunning testimony from Richard Thornburgh on the politicization of prosecutions:

Thornburgh: Federal Prosecution Was Political

The AP reports Dick Thornburgh, who served as attorney general in the first Bush Administration, "told a House panel Tuesday he thinks the Justice Department had political aims in prosecuting a high-profile Democratic coroner from Pennsylvania." Thornburgh, whose "law firm is representing coroner Cyril Wecht in the pending trial and who acknowledged speaking as an advocate for Wecht, said the outspoken Democrat was 'an ideal target for a Republican U.S. attorney trying to curry favor with a (Justice) Department which demonstrated that if you play by its rules, you will advance.'" The New York Times adds Thornburgh "became the first former Republican attorney general to join with Democratic lawmakers to suggest that the Justice Department under Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales had singled out Democratic politicians for prosecution."

The Bush administration puts all of its energy into politics and spin. This is just another glaring example. Read More......

Wednesday Morning Open Thread

Here's a question: When Turkey launches attacks in Iraq, are they attacking the U.S. since the U.S. occupies Iraq? If Syria or Iran sent troops into Iraq, it would surely be viewed as an assault on the U.S. Just wondering.

Start threading the news. Read More......

Bush continues to cook the books on climate change

More of the same from the team who want to rid the world of science.

The White House severely edited congressional testimony given Tuesday by the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the impact of climate change on health, removing specific scientific references to potential health risks, according to two sources familiar with the documents.

Read More......

Industry proves again that it can self-regulate

Who needs government interference?

In the months before issuing a massive recall of its frozen hamburgers, Topps Meat Co. curtailed testing of ground beef and skipped other safeguards aimed at preventing contaminated meat from reaching consumers, according to a published report Tuesday.

Three batches of frozen patties tainted with a potentially fatal bacteria left the company's plant in Elizabeth, according to unnamed federal regulators cited by The New York Times.

What should already be public knowledge is who the faulty suppliers were for this shoddy operation. For some reason, those businesses are being shielded from the public but consumers have a right to know which businesses are more concerned with profit than with feces spilling all over their product. Interesting set up priorities for a business in the food industry though it helps to explain why the idiots running the business ruined the company so quickly. Read More......