Maureen Dowd pushing Obama for prez in '08

Her logic is strong:

"The weak and pathetic Democrats seem to move inexorably toward candidates who turn a lot of people off," she advises. "They should find someone captivating with an intensely American success story... and shape the campaign around that leader....

"The Democrats should not dismiss a politically less experienced but personally more charismatic prospect as 'an empty vessel.' Maybe an empty vessel can fill the room."

She adds that it may be true "that Americans, as one Democrat told me, 'will never elect a guy as president who has a name like a Middle East terrorist.'" But the Democrats, she says, do not "stand for anything" and they have "no champion at a time when people are hungry for an exciting leader, when the party should be roaring and soaring against the Bushies' power-mad stumbles.

"They should groom an '08 star who can run on the pledge of doing what's right instead of only what's far right."

Wouldn't it be amazing to have somebody run who nobody already hates and who we all actually kind of like? Crazy ideas. Read More......

Long day without an open thread

Became a rather interesting news day, didn't it. Read More......

"Laura Bush Would Vote for Woman President"

God bless her feminist soul.

Stay tuned for tomorrow's installment: "Laura Bush would swim with black folk." Read More......

Molly Ivins on the warpath against DC Dems

The lady is on fire...

Mah fellow progressives, now is the time for all good men and women to come to the aid of the party. I don’t know about you, but I have had it with the D.C. Democrats, had it with the DLC Democrats, had it with every calculating, equivocating, triangulating, straddling, hair-splitting son of a bitch up there, and that includes Hillary Rodham Clinton.

I will not be supporting Senator Clinton because: a) she has no clear stand on the war and b) Terri Schiavo and flag-burning are not issues where you reach out to the other side and try to split the difference. You want to talk about lowering abortion rates through cooperation on sex education and contraception, fine, but don’t jack with stuff that is pure rightwing firewater.

I can’t see a damn soul in D.C. except Russ Feingold who is even worth considering for President. The rest of them seem to me so poisonously in hock to this system of legalized bribery they can’t even see straight.

There's lots more. Read it. Read More......

Sen. Feingold blasts fellow Democrats for being spineless

Halle-fracking-lujah.

Finally a Democrat with some backbone, conviction, and who's not afraid to take on a president who's at 34% in the polls:

Wisconsin Sen. Russell Feingold accused fellow Democrats on Tuesday of cowering rather than holding a vote to censure President Bush over domestic spying.

"Democrats run and hide" when the administration invokes the war on terrorism, Feingold told reporters.

Feingold introduced censure legislation Monday in the Senate but not a single Democrat has embraced it.....

"I'm amazed at Democrats ... cowering with this president's numbers so low," Feingold said.

The latest AP-Ipsos poll on Bush, conducted last week, found just 37 percent of the 1,000 people surveyed approving his overall performance, the lowest of his presidency.

Feingold is sadly right. Bush is at the helm of one of the greatest failed presidencies in American history and the Democrats continue to cower in fear. So long as Democrats continue to value their jobs more than the best interests of their party and their country, they will continue to sit back, do nothing, and enjoy their hefty paychecks and their honorific titles.

Remember, even in the minority they call you "Senator" and take your calls. So why put your job on the line to become the majority when success means more work for the same pay and perks?

Now sure, success also means risking your own personal livelihood in order to save your country, but we wouldn't want the public to think Democrats cared about anything as grandiose, selfless and patriotic as that, now would we.

Pitiful. Read More......

Remember that story about Iran supplying components for IEDs in Iraq? Surprise! It was a lie!

Remember a week ago when I reported that Bush and Rummy were claiming that the Irani government was supplying explosive components for IEDs to the Iraqi resistance? Remember how at the time I said it sounded like we might be being duped, again?

Well, today the Chairmain of the Joint Chiefs of Staff just came right out and said there is no evidence whatsoever for Bush and Rummy to claim that Iran's government is behind this.

The top U.S. military officer said on Tuesday the United States does not have proof that Iran's government is responsible for Iranians smuggling weapons and military personnel into Iraq.

President George W. Bush said on Monday components from Iran were being used in powerful roadside bombs used in Iraq, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said last week that Iranian Revolutionary Guard personnel had been inside Iraq.

Asked whether the United States has proof that Iran's government was behind these developments, Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Pentagon briefing, "I do not, sir."

So much for that story.

Are we ready to finally stop repeating the Bush administration's lies as truth? Read More......

Imagine running into Moussaoui's mom on a train...

Interesting vignette. Read More......

The Pentagon wants AMERICAblog's help spreading propaganda about Iraq

Honestly, you guys are doing a good enough job lying about things without my help:



I'm fascinated to hear that the Pentagon is spending US taxpayer money to propagandize to the American people. At the State Department that kind of thing is illegal. So why is the Pentagon allowed to do it? I'm also fascinated to read that they're still blaming the mainstream media for not reporting the "real story" of what's going on in Iraq.

The ghost of Armstrong Williams lives on. Read More......

AP: "Iraq Edges Closer to Open Civil Warfare"

It's a very bad situation getting worse every day:

Iraqi authorities discovered at least 87 corpses - men shot to death execution-style - as Iraq edged closer to open civil warfare. Twenty-nine of the bodies, dressed only in underwear, were dug out of a single grave Tuesday in a Shiite neighborhood of Baghdad.

So much for that speech from Bush yesterday. The New York Times basically called what's going on a "civil war":

The wave of dirty killings seems to undermine the American government's insistence that Iraqi security forces can deliver the rule of law. Less than a month after an assault on a Shiite shrine in Samarra nearly plunged the country into civil war, the blood continues to flow, just as freely. The majority of the killings seem to have happened in the same areas where Shiite militiamen rampaged after the shrine attack, implying that no one is able — or willing — to stop them.

According to the Times, Rumsfeld, like his boss, his still optimistic about Iraq:

Mr. Rumsfeld said the Iraqi people are better off without Saddam Hussein, that most of them support the American-led campaign, and that the United States is safer now that the old Baghdad regime is gone. "The sacrifices of today will over time prove the worth of this cause," Mr. Rumsfeld said.

No credibility whatsover. None. Read More......

Bush getting a win over Google in court today

The Bush administration is obsessed with invading the privacy of Americans. Obsessed. If it's not Terri Schiavo, it's eavesdropping. Now, it's Google and the internet. Today, Bush and Gonzales had a win in court according to AP:

A federal judge said Tuesday he intends to require Google Inc. to turn over some information to the Department of Justice in its quest to revive a law making it harder for children to see online pornography. U.S. District Judge James Ware did not immediately say whether the data will include words that users entered into the Internet's leading search engine.

The legal showdown over how much of the Web's vast databases should be shared with the government has pitted the Bush administration against the Mountain View-based company, which resisted a subpoena to turn over any information because of user privacy and trade secret concerns.

Hopefully, Google will keep taking the fight to Bush and Gonzales. But, in the bigger story of how the Bush administration is undermining the privacy of Americans, this is one of the key paragraphs from an article earlier today by Reuters:

Analysts said the Google case shows it is only a matter of time before the U.S. government may seek access to individual Internet records, just as federal agencies already can do for library or medical records.

Bush wants your internet records. He is the most intrusive President ever. There is just no zone of privacy when it comes to the Bush crowd. Read More......

Stop making scents

Please, for the love of God, stop putting perfume in my shampoo.

And my conditioner.

And my skin lotion.

And my shaving cream.

And my soap.

And my hair gel.

And my deodorant.

And my dish soap.

I'm a guy. I'm either gay or metro and like to put on my own cologne, thank you very much ('eau de Mennen' doesn't quite cut it folks), or I'm straight and really don't want to be putting on any perfumes, let alone twelve of them, before my morning coffee.

I'm serious about this. This overkill with perfume in every frigging product has got to stop. Over the past few years I've become allergic to some specific citrus-y perfume. It's the basis of colognes like CK-1 and Incense (it's also the scent that the Aussie product line likes to use). So, I've had to stop buying the products that use this crap, because half the time I don't even know they've put it in and I start wheezing after using it.

This past summer, when I was in Paris, I needed some skin lotion, so went to the supermarket and got something for babies that was specifically labeled "hypoallergenic." It, of course, was loaded with that same citrus-crap that almost killed me. And this was for babies. Imagine the lawsuits if they sold that crap in the US and someone's baby had an allergic reaction to something specifically marked "hypoallergenic" because they actually loaded it with perfume that's known to produce allergic reactions.

I will bet you, and write this down, that in the next ten to twenty years someone will determine that all of these scents are compounding to cause some major health issues. I know I had zero allergies growing up, and now am on antihistimes all four seasons.

You can blame genetics.

I blame Nivea. Read More......

Boston Globe blasts Romney over Catholic Charities homophobia

Boston Globe:

Nearly a half-century ago, John Kennedy challenged bias against the Catholic Church. Now, Romney is defending bias from the Catholic Church. Romney works for all the people of Massachusetts. It is a shame to see him doing exactly what Kennedy forswore nearly a half-century ago: accepting instructions on public policy from the pope.

And what's also a shame is that the once-respected Catholic Charities is now nothing more than a haven for gay-hating bigots. Catholic Charities has long been welcomed to the progressive table in DC politics, attending meetings with other liberal groups, etc. No more.

Next time a Catholic Charities representative tries to attend a meeting of liberal advocacy groups, someone should show the homophobic bigot the door - preferably a gay parent. These sorry excuses for human beings would rather leave orphaned children homeless than let them be adopted by loving gay parents.

Catholic Charities is homophobia. Do not support them any longer. Read More......

White House knew top aide Claude Allen was accused of felony and did nothing about it

Their reasoning? He had already had lots of background checks a while ago and they came out okay.

Huh? Security clearances check to see if there's anything in your past, they don't guarantee that you aren't going to commit a felony tomorrow, and they certainly don't exonerate you preemptively.

The larger pattern just keeps filling in of a White House where crimes are meaningless, and national security during wartime is meaningless. Claude Allen, Bush's top domestic policy adviser, was allowed free reign to the White House after he was accused by the police of stealing. All Allen had to do was tell the White House fuggedaboutit and they looked the other way, like they always do.

Jeff Gannon accessed the White House 200 times in a two year period without having undergone the required 3 month background check. Fuggedaboutit. Bernie Kerik for Homeland Security? Fuggedaboutit. Harriet Miers for Supreme Court, Brownie for FEMA, Karl Rove and Scooter Libby leak Valerie Plame, and on and on and on.

In the crony White House, it's not what you know, it's what law you've broken to get there that counts. Read More......

Radical Christian fundamentalist leader Pat Robertson attacks Muslims again

These are the kind of people the Republican party has made its bed with.

Television evangelist Pat Robertson said Monday on his live news-and-talk program ''The 700 Club'' that Islam is not a religion of peace, and that radical Muslims are ''satanic.''

Read More......

Arianna rips Vanity Fair for upcoming Judith Miller profile

Hell, just watching Arianna use the phrase "circle jerk" makes this piece worth a read :-)

(Though, with her accent, I can't get the creepy feeling out of my mind that it's my godmother saying it - brrrrrr...) Read More......

CREW files complaint against Grover

This is serious stuff. Citizens for Responsibility in Ethics in Washington (CREW) is going after Grover Norquist -- he should be afraid.

Grover's name keeps popping up in the middle of the Abramoff scandal. Now, CREW is alleging that Grover was using his non-profits as for-profit companies to launder money. That would violate IRS rules - irnoic for the leading anti-tax guy:

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) today filed an Internal Revenue Services (IRS) complaint against Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), and American for Tax Reform Foundation (ATR Foundation), conservative, non-profit organizations led by right-wing activist Grover Norquist. The complaint asks the IRS to investigate activities by the groups which may violate IRS regulations and require a revocation of their tax-exempt status.

The complaint alleges that Norquist used either or both ATR and ATR Foundation as commercial enterprises by laundering money derived from Indian casino clients of former lobbyist and convicted felon Jack Abramoff. The casinos made contributions to ATR, which then skimmed a fee off the top before passing the money on to former Christian activist Ralph Reed and other anti-gambling activists. In this way, Norquist, Reed and Abramoff were able to disguise the fact that the money used to fund anti-gambling activities was generated through Indian gambling. The point of the anti-gambling campaigns was to prevent competition to the Indian casinos.

Reed originally denied knowing the funds came from Indian casinos, but during hearings held by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, Sen. John McCain released numerous e-mails clearly demonstrating that he did, in fact, know where the money came from. The e-mails show that Reed and Norquist worked with Abramoff to create the anti-gambling campaigns and to develop the scheme to hide the origins of the money.

CREW doesn't mess around. If they see smoke, there's usually a fire. The question is whether the IRS will dare to investigate Grover Norquist who is the heart and soul of conservative power in DC. Read More......

That Dubai deal to give up US port security isn't so clear cut after all

Figures. Who cut this deal anyway? Karl Rove? Bush never wanted to end this deal:

The Dubai-owned company that promised to surrender its U.S. port operations has no immediate plans to sell its U.S. subsidiary's interests at Miami's seaport, a senior executive wrote Monday in a private e-mail to business associates.

Even if DP World were to sell its Miami operations to quell the congressional furor over an Arab-owned company managing major U.S. ports, "that would probably take a while," wrote Robert Scavone, a vice president for DP World's U.S. subsidiary.

The e-mail, obtained by The Associated Press, added to questions raised since DP World's announcement last week that it will divest U.S. port operations it acquired when it bought London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co.

Read More......

Tuesday Morning Open Thread

Okay, here we go again. Read More......

Innocent people come clean immediately

They don't normally drag things out with curious statements about "you've only heard half the story." Read More......

Surprise! Dems pretty much wimp out on Feingold and censure. And NYT adopts GOP talking points

And a special brownie point goes to the New York Times for this truly bizarre sentence in their story:

Though polls on surveillance are mixed, Republicans say the public generally backs the idea of eavesdropping on people suspected of being in contact with terror suspects.

There are so many things wrong with that sentence.

Hey, here's an idea. Rather than trying extra hard to slip unsubstantiated Republican talking points into "news" stories, how about just sticking to the actual facts?

The New York Times had a choice. It chose to undercut the facts. But even in doing so, it had a second choice: It could undercut the facts - i.e., undercut what the polls actually say (and most of them skew against Bush, thank you) - but even in undercutting those facts, the Times had to choose between undercutting them to Bush's advantage or disadvantage. Here were their choices:

1. They could write the sentence the way they did:

Though polls on surveillance are mixed, Republicans say the public generally backs the idea of eavesdropping on people suspected of being in contact with terror suspects.

2. Or they could have just as easily written the sentence this way:

Though polls on surveillance are mixed, Democrats and many Republicans say the public generally opposes the idea of eavesdropping on people suspected of being in contact with terror suspects.

The New York Times decided, naturally, to swing right. It's what the mainstream media does nowadays automatically, like flinching to protect your hand from a flame. But in this case, the flame is conservative angst.

And let's not even get into the NYT's "un-biased" description of Bush's program as "eavesdropping on people suspected of being in contract with terror suspects." The Times will say they were simply paraphrasing what the Republicans were claiming, but that's NOT the way Republicans paint the program. It's the way SOME Republicans paint it - lots of other conservative leaders are outraged about what Bush has done and have voiced that outrage. And in any case, how about putting both sides' spin in the paragraph or none at all?

Finally, nice of the Times to mention that many Democrats aren't backing Feingold on calling the program illegal, but NOT mentioning that most legal scholars say the program is in fact illegal. No, no mention of that. Better to make Feingold sound like just another kooky Democrat with his head up his ass.

It's not that the New York Times and the traditional media are evil. It's that they're sloppy. As a defense mechanism against relentless charges of liberal bias and un-Americanism for simply trying to tell the truth far too many in the mainstream media have developed an ingrained and subconscious protection mechanism that tilts them right without their even realizing it.

Except that in this case, like so many the liberal blogs have documented over the years, a good editor should have realized it.

You don't present one side of a story without presenting the other, especially when you already have the facts. When you have the facts, present the facts. When you weaken the facts by presenting spin in a supposed effort to be "fair," you undercut the veracity of your story, your own credibility, and ultimately our democracy. Read More......