Evening open thread

Blah Read the rest of this post...

McCain Has 'No Confidence' in Rumsfeld - Says Another 100,000 Troops Needed in Iraq

Kiss Rummy buh bye. Oh, and by the way, how's that draft coming along? As for linguists, I'm sorry, but BUSH KICKED THEM ALL OUT FOR BEING GAY. I guess it was more important to bash the fags than win the war on terror.

You voted for it, America. You got it.

Asked about his confidence in the secretary's leadership, McCain recalled fielding a similar question a couple weeks ago.

"I said no. My answer is still no. No confidence," McCain said.

He estimated an additional 80,000 Army personnel and 20,000 to 30,000 more Marines would be needed to secure Iraq.

"I have strenuously argued for larger troop numbers in Iraq, including the right kind of troops — linguists, special forces, civil affairs, etc.," said McCain, R-Ariz. "There are very strong differences of opinion between myself and Secretary Rumsfeld on that issue."

Read the rest of this post...

CREW sues FEC

Another installment in Mehlman Monday. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a great feisty ethics watchdog in DC, is suing the Federal Elections Commission. The FEC basically said that Washington lobbyist Grover Norquist and Bush campaign chair and incoming GOP party chief Ken "I won't say I'm straight" Mehlman violated federal campaign laws, but they weren't going to do anything about it. CREW is taking them to task, and demanding they do their job.

More from Atrios. Read the rest of this post...

Bet Osama is scared now

Retired Army colonel, 70, sent to Afghanistan Read the rest of this post...

Radical Right Catholic Group: Jews hate Christians, love anal sex (I kid you not)

Thanks to Josh for pointing out this recent broadcast of MSNBC's Scarborough Country.

I do have to ask, what is this man even doing on TV at this point? He is no better than David Duke. He's a Jew-hater. Yet he goes on American Family Radio. He goes on MSNBC. The American Family Association's AgapePress quotes Donahue to defend their positions on "family" issues. Would they quote David Duke and other Jew-haters to defend their positions on their culture wars? Or is any Jew-hating bigot is a-okay so long as he claims to speak for God? Is that the religious right's position? Is that MSNBC's position? Funny these guys are all worried about Janet Jackson's nipple but when it comes to people who spread anti-Jewish world conspiracy theories in the name of God, they're totally mum.

PAT BUCHANAN: Bill Donahue, what do you think about "The Passion of the Christ"? And as a practical matter, even if Hollywood hated the film, it seems to me as an artistic work of art, a smashing triumph, a film of great controversy and interest, it ought to at least be nominated for best picture. It pulled in more money than any other picture all year.

WILLIAM DONAHUE, PRESIDENT OF THE CATHOLIC LEAGUE: I spoke to Mel a couple of weeks ago about this. And I don't think it really matters a whole lot to him. It certainly doesn't matter to me. We‘ve already won.

Who really cares what Hollywood thinks? All these hacks come out there. Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, OK? And I'm not afraid to say it. That's why they hate this movie. It's about Jesus Christ, and it's about truth. It's about the messiah.

Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions. I believe in traditional values and restraint. They believe in libertinism. We have nothing in common. But you know what? The culture war has been ongoing for a long time. Their side has lost.

You have got secular Jews. You have got embittered ex-Catholics, including a lot of ex-Catholic priests who hate the Catholic Church, wacko Protestants in the same group, and these people are in the margins. Frankly, Michael Moore represents a cult movie. Mel Gibson represents the mainstream of America.

Read the rest of this post...

Speaking of indecency

To round out our Indecency Day coverage, I had heard about this but had never actually seen the photo, until now. You may, or may not, have known about a recent photo of VP Cheney that caused a bit of a stir. Um, why don't you just take a look at the photo yourself, and look at it closely.

- Photo.

- Article about the photo (it's for real). Read the rest of this post...

This is what the religious right is upset about

A bunch of fake statues. Note the original photo, then note the photo I enlarged.





You can clearly see the line across the guys' stomach at the belly button, delineating where the costume begins. Note how each guy has the exact same line, the exact same cut to his lower muscles, the exact same knee, the exact same genitalia, etc. It's a damn good job, but they're wearing plastic casts or some such thing, exactly replicating the famous ancient Greek statues of the Kouros.

I took the liberty of cutting out the Kouros' crotch and putting it next to the actor's crotch. Gee, notice any similarities here?



Yes, it's a freaking exact replica of a Greek statue that these guys were in essence carrying around with them. But now, apparently, even one of the most famous statues of ancient Greece is no longer acceptable to the sensitive standards of red-state America.

I really hope they do teach their kids all this flat-earth stuff - let's see them ever get a real job. Read the rest of this post...

Fake nudity, bad. Big real bulge, okay.

You have to love that the religious right has now launched an FCC indecency investigation of the Athens Olympics Opening Ceremony for showing dancers who were pretending to be nude - yes, I've researched it, it was faux nudity.

Yet those same people have no problem with all the young nubile athletes showing their real packages and more to the waiting eyes of the world. To wit:



Not that there's anything wrong with that photo. But, come on. We get to ogle over these guys (and gals) all day long in their tight little outfits (or wearing next to nothing in the swim competitions), yet the FCC is worried about an actor pretending to be naked.

Michael Powell seriously needs to get laid. And then fired. Read the rest of this post...

Oil Prices Going Back Up - Thanks to Saudi Arabia

Boy, wouldn't it be great if we had a President with a better relationship with Saudi Arabia, so maybe they wouldn't keep f'ing us over? Oh wait, we do. Maybe that's WHY we keep getting f'ed over. If you have any friends or relations in the airline industry, you know that all of the layoffs and wage concessions are necessary while the price of oil keeps going up. If we had a President that cared about jobs, he would be pressuring Saudi Arabia right now. Instead, he's more worried about his oil buddies making more money. From Bloomberg:

Crude oil rose in New York after Saudi Arabia said it will cut supplies to Asia as OPEC members reduce output to stem a price slump.

Saudi Aramco, the world's biggest oil company by output, told Asian customers it will supply 8 percent less than contractual volumes in January, the first reduction since May, refining company officials said. The cut reinforces the Dec. 10 decision by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to trim the group's daily output by 1 million barrels.

The price increase is ``Japan and the rest of Asia reacting to the Saudi cuts to the East,'' said Dennis Kongsiri, a risk manager at Concord Energy Pte, a Singapore-based crude oil trading company. ``The question now is, `Is it enough?'''

Crude oil for January delivery rose as much as 38 cents, or 0.9 percent, to $41.09 a barrel in after-hours electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange and traded at $41.08 at 1:45 p.m. Singapore time.

The Saudi cut has reduced skepticism about OPEC's output cut plan that drove oil down 4.3 percent on Dec. 10 to $40.71 a barrel, the lowest closing price since July 21.

Read the rest of this post...

Bloggers kicked out of state party convention this weekend

CORRECTION: This wasn't a DNC event, it was an association of state party chairs (ASCC). They're the local state party component of the DNC.

Ah yes, the party of our future. (This is a state party meeting that took place this weekend in Florida to air the new DNC chair candidates to the public, party faithful, etc.)

There's something wrong when DNC Chair candidate Donnie Fowler, during his 5-minute presentation on his candidacy, singles out [BOPNews.com blogger] Matt Stoller as an example of embracing the technological ideas that are going to bring this party forward, and then some DNC staffer walks up to Stoller and tells him he's got to leave the room, because he's a blogger. [Yes the meeting was open to the public! You could just walk in off the street, no problem - but a "blogger" - eh gads, not that!]

More from MyDD.com. Read the rest of this post...

Monday morning open thread

Go for it. Read the rest of this post...

It's time Democrats fought back on the filibuster

The Washington Post top story today is about the Republicans talking again about changing the Senate rules to no longer allow filibusters for judicial nominees.

As the article clearly notes, this issue is coming up because the GOP wants to be able to replace ailing Chief Justice Rehnquist with WHOMEVER they want, to hell with the Democrats. What's troubling is that the GOP was starting to signal a few weeks ago that they maybe they WEREN'T going to try to curtail filibusters. Then the radical right flipped out, and now the GOP AGAIN wants to stop the filibuster.

First lesson here. This issue is back in the news because the radical right WANTS it, and that's why the GOP is pushing it.

Second lesson here. They're pushing it because it's part of their larger strategy to create a judicially-enforced theocracy in our country.

There is only ONE thing that blocked the radical right and their supporters from keeping blacks sub-human in the eyes of the law, it was the courts. And in the case of gays, it's the same thing. The courts come to the rescue when the majority simply wants to oppress. The same thing applies with flag burning, abortion, the Ten Commandments and the rest of their ridiculous agenda. The law of the land, the logic of the land, the words of our founders do NOT support their radical agenda once you take the issue away from the hot-headed politicians and put it under the fair-minded scrutiny of independent judges.

So the only way for the radical right to GET their agenda and IMPOSE it on the rest of the country PERMANENTLY is to get rid of the obstacle of the independent judiciary. And their best chance to do that is with their lapdog George Bush over the next four years.

Bush will appoint whomever the radical right wants to the Supreme Court, and once that happens, we're stuck with that wacko for the next 30-40 years, and we're stuck with the rulings of that wacko for even longer. Even if the Dems take back Congress in 2-4 years, and reinstitute the filibuster, it will be too late. Bush's radical right judges will ALREADY be on the court, and the damage will be done. There is a window of opportunity for extremism, and the radical right is trying to seize it. The only thing standing in the way of Bush packing the court with radical right wackos is the Democrats and their filibuster.

Now do you see why the radical right FORCED the GOP to continue fighting to take away the right to filibuster?

The Post article today does a brilliant job of up front showing how the GOP and the radical right are simply outright lying about the facts in this issue. The Post reports that the Democrats blocked only 10 of the president's 229 judicial appointments in Bush's first term. Let me quote what the Post has to say about that record:

"Confirmation of Bush nominees exceeds in most cases the first-term experience of presidents dating to Ronald Reagan."

So the truth is that the Democrats have been better about approving judicial nominees than EVEN THE REPUBLICANS WERE UNDER BILL CLINTON. So basically the Republicans are lying about this issue, and the radical right is lying about this issue. They are doing what they always do - lie about the issue enough to give the lie truth in the minds of the public.

So where are the Democrats? Well, so far they've said they'll oppose the change in the filibuster rule. But there's concern, according to the Post article, that the Dems don't want to appear "obstructionist," so they may not even use the filibuster option even if they retain it, regardless of what wacko Bush tries to appoint.

This is the kind of government you get when good men and women don't stand up for their principles. Bush and the GOP in Congress can lie about the truth, pretend our soldiers have body armor, tell us Iraq is really going quite well, and suggest that Bush had no information suggesting Osama was targeting America, and the Democrats simply go along for the ride, nodding happily like the little plastic dog in the back window of your car.

It's time for the Democrats to stand up for themselves. It's time for them to fight back. Worrying about obstruction is what cost them several Senate seats and the presidency just a few weeks ago. Do the Dems really believe that if they simply roll over and play dead Rush Limbaugh and the bad Republicans will simply STOP criticizing them? You've gotta be kidding.

It's time our party woke up and realized that the Republicans are going to criticize us no matter what. They're going to call us angry no matter way. They're going to call us liberal and pro-gay and pro-abortion and pro-union no matter what. Nothing we do is going to stop their incessant harping and their incessant lying. So we should stop trying to stop them and start trying to be ourselves and stand up for our principles and our values and our beliefs.

And the first place to do that is to stand up against the GOP thugs' effort to pack our courts with un-Democratic un-American theocrats. We need our party to start defending us and itself. Read the rest of this post...

Bush Gives Troops "Support and Gratitude" -- But not life-saving equipment

Yesterday, eight more American troops were killed in Iraq. Also, yesterday, George Bush was at a concert wishing the troops well. He said, "These families and the troops they love can be certain that they have the support and gratitude of our nation."

Now, I know the President doesn't read. But he should take a gander at the Newsweek article on American troops in Iraq. They may have his support and gratitude, but they probably want the kind of material that will keep them alive more. Those soldiers he is so fond of just don't have the equipment they need to keep them safe:

Eighteen months after Bush declared that "major combat operations" in Iraq were over—and another war began—the most powerful military machine on the planet, replenished by America's unmatched industrial power, is still sending its soldiers, reservists and National Guardsmen down dangerous roads in soft-skinned trucks and Humvees.

Let's just for a minute imagine if Clinton was the President and this happened. Congress would be calling for his impeachment (and with some validity unlike the last time). His Defense Secretary would surely have been fired. But there are no repercussions for Bush and Rumsfeld.

These frauds challenge the patriotism of anyone who opposed the war. They claim we aren't supporting the troops. We know their audacity is stunning. They send these kids to die in Iraq without the proper equipment, but they are the ones who support them.

Apparently, this is what the American people wanted. Rmember, polling showed that the troops and their families strongly supported Bush. So, why should we all worry when they don't?

Still, I think that if there was a real media....and a real opposition party....maybe there would be some repercussions. Read the rest of this post...

Trouble in paradise, Bush distancing himself from Guiliani

And I thought that it was such a perfect relationship. With the president wetting his pants and sucking his thumb in an underground bunker somewhere in Nebraska on 9/11, Guiliani was the voice of America. Now that the election is over, Bush rode that horse as far as it could take him and now there are signs of trouble in that once perfect partnership. The blood curdling screams of "fear" and "9/11" were oh-so helpful on the campaign trail but now it's time to push aside the "moderates" and non-wingnuts. All of the talk about Guiliani working in the administration seems to be rumor mongering by outsiders.

This should be a case study for those "moderate" Republicans who think they can remain part of the extremists running the GOP. Unless you have a Christian religious conversion of re-birth, you are a heathen and not to be trusted. Re-borns though can apparently blow coke, booze it up, organize secret abortions and skip military service and all is forgiven.

"If the war on terror is your campaign's number one issue, there's no better symbol of that than Rudy Giuliani," said a government official who knows Mr. Bush and Mr. Giuliani and who asked not to be identified because he did not want to be seen as denigrating the mayor's relationship with the president. "But you shouldn't confuse that with closeness."

Republicans say that Mr. Bush felt little affection for Mr. Giuliani, and that he was particularly perplexed as the mayor allowed his personal life to unravel publicly in the spring of 2000.

"There aren't a lot of people close to the president who have those kind of experiences," said the Republican close to the administration, referring to Mr. Giuliani's admissions of infidelity with the woman who became his third wife and
to his bitter split from his second wife, Donna Hanover.

"It's an issue of not understanding it. I've had discussions with him where he's asked, 'What's this guy all about?' "

Read the rest of this post...