Yes!

There is a God :-) Read the rest of this post...

Religious right says Roberts is another Scalia or Thomas

I'm not sure that's the talking point the White House wanted to hear out of the gate.

"The president is a man of his word," said Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian group. "He promised to nominate someone along the lines of a Scalia or a Thomas, and that is exactly what he has done."

Read the rest of this post...

NYT analysis of Roberts pick

From the NYT:

With his nomination of Judge John G. Roberts, President Bush moved Tuesday to plant the conservative imprint on the Supreme Court that has been a central aim of his presidency, but with a member of the Washington legal establishment designed to frustrate any Democratic effort to block Mr. Bush's replacement for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Read the rest of this post...

More background on Roberts

Financial disclosure form from his Senate confirmation to the appeals court.

Questionnaire from his Senate confirmation. Read the rest of this post...

John G. Roberts: Partisan hack

The more I read and the more I hear about Bush's Supreme Court nominee, the more this guy sounds like a partisan hack. His experience is in politics, partisan politics, it's not being a judge. Hell, he's only been a judge for 2 years. That's hardly the kind of experience that prepares you to be a Supreme Court justice. What Roberts has experience in is being a partisan political operative, the very thing you don't want on the Supreme Court.

Roberts donated to Bush's election, and Bush seems to be treating the Supreme Court like it's France - a plum assignment for your buddy who helped you out in the last campaign. The Supreme Court isn't France, and being a Supreme Court justice is a bit more important than being an ambassador. I'm just not sure Bush gets the difference.

Anyway, that's my initial take.

MyDD has also picked up on the partisan hack angle. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Though I can't guarantee it won't fly off the bottom of the page any time soon :-) Read the rest of this post...

NYT: President's appointment could push court to the right

NYT story on Roberts is up.

Washington Post story is up too. Read the rest of this post...

Ok, here's a Rove post for you :-)

This is actually quite interesting. Basically, the State Dept memo about Plame and Wilson shows that State didn't buy the administration's bull about Niger and uranium. So it's more evidence that Bush knew the claims were bull:

A State Department memo that has caught the attention of prosecutors describes a CIA officer's role in sending her husband to Africa and disputes administration claims that Iraq was shopping for uranium, a retired department official said Tuesday.... "It was a memo on uranium in Niger and focused principally on our disagreement" with the White House.

Read the rest of this post...

Please forgive the momentary Roberts overkill in posting

But I think it's important that all of this be assembled on one page, so folks can access it readily over the next 48 hours. Read the rest of this post...

Howard Dean on Roberts

Statement by DNC Chairman on the Nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court:

Washington - Faced with a growing scandal surrounding the involvement of Deputy White House chief of Staff Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff Lewis Libby in the leaking the identity of a covert CIA operative, President Bush announced his nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court late this evening. Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean today issued the following statement on the nomination:

"It is disappointing that when President Bush had the chance to bring the country together, he instead turned to a nominee who may have impressive legal credentials, but also has sharp partisan credentials that cannot be ignored.

"Democrats take very seriously the responsibility to protect the individual rights of all Americans and are committed to ensuring that ideological judicial activists are not appointed to the Supreme Court. The Senate Judiciary Committee will now have the opportunity to see if Judge Roberts can put his partisanship aside, and live up to a Supreme Court Justice's duty to uphold the rights and freedoms of every American and the promise of equal justice for all."

Read the rest of this post...

The Nation on Roberts

The Nation's initial take on Roberts:

This is a real in-your-face selection by the president, and the Dems' response remains to be seen. Stalwart senators like Edward Kennedy, Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin can be expected to respond in kind but the Senate leader Harry Reid sounded an alarmingly cautious note when he told the New York Times, "The president has chosen someone with suitable legal credentials." Fortunately this fight should energize some potentially very large segments of society which would be affected by a Court that will threaten the future of legal abortions, affirmative action for minority groups, and other issues that many Americans have long taken for granted.

Read the rest of this post...

Planned Parenthood on Roberts

"The nomination of John G. Roberts raises serious questions and grave concerns for women's health and safety." - More from Planned Parenthood here. Read the rest of this post...

Human Rights Campaign (gay rights group) on Roberts

JUDGE ROBERTS THREATENS TO TIP THE COURT TO FAR RIGHT

Statement by Joe Solmonese, President, Human Rights Campaign

The rights and freedoms of millions of Americans are at stake as the Supreme Court hangs in the balance. President Bush nominated Judge John G. Roberts; now it's the Senate's and the American people's turn to do their job.

The delicate balance on the Supreme Court is in danger of breaking. If Roe v. Wade falls, so could equality for millions of Americans.

With the Roberts nomination, the right to privacy and the future of a fair-minded Court are in grave danger. Judge Roberts has disputed the right to privacy laid out in Roe v. Wade, and urged that the case be overruled. Reversing Roe could undermine fundamental rights to privacy and liberty that are the legal underpinning for the freedom of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans.

Judge Roberts has advocated for prayer in public schools and for weakening the wall between church and state. He should make clear whether or not he would distort religion for misuse as a proxy for discrimination. Americans deserve a justice who will uphold the separation of church and state.

The unique powers of the Supreme Court, including the power to revisit previous Supreme Court decisions, mean that Judge Roberts' record should be subject to rigorous inspection. We will be working closely with our coalition partners to ensure that Judge Roberts gets a thorough vetting.

The Human Rights Campaign is the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender political organization with members throughout the country. It effectively lobbies Congress, provides campaign support and educates the public to ensure that LGBT Americans can be open, honest and safe at home, at work and in the community. Read the rest of this post...

Wait a minute. This guy has ONLY been a judge for 2 years?

Okay, isn't that a bit of a short resume for being on the Supreme Court? Most of his experience is political.

Employment/background:
2003-present: Judge, US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit;
1993-2003: Partner, Hogan & Hartson LLP;
1989-93: Principal Deputy Solicitor General, US DoJ;
1986-89: Associate, Hogan & Hartson LLP;
1982-86: Associate Counsel to the President, White House Counsel's Office;
1981-82: Special Asst to the AG in the US DoJ;
1980 -81 Supreme Court of the United States, Law Clerk to Hon. Wm. H. Rehnquist Read the rest of this post...

Chimpy is on the air now.

Ugh Read the rest of this post...

Why did Roberts single out the Violence Against Women Act?

Weird -- and possibly disturbing -- coincidence.

Tonight, Bush nominates Roberts who apparently has a disdain for federal laws, prefering state laws instead. But in a radio interview, AP reports that he singled out the Violence Against Women Act as one example of a place where the federal government need not be involved:

Roberts also has made the case that some problems simply should be left to the states. In a 1999 radio interview, he said, "We have gotten to the point these days where we think the only way we can show we're serious about a problem is if we pass a federal law, whether it is the Violence Against Women Act or anything else. The fact of the matter is conditions are different in different states, and state laws can be more relevant."

Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on reauthorizing the "Violence Against Women Act" which expires on September 30, 2005:

Actress Salma Hayek and advocates from organizations fighting domestic violence testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday to push the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, which expires every five years.

The act, a measure that improves responses to domestic and dating violence, as well as stalking and sexual assault, will end Sept. 30 unless it is reauthorized.

"This is not a Democratic or Republican bill," said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., who authored the act when it first passed in 1994. "This is about men and women who have been abused."

According to the American Bar Association, 4 million women encounter domestic violence every year....Lynn Rosenthal, president of the National Network to End Domestic Violence, said the act not only needs to be reauthorized, but provisions must also be made to the bill to increase its success. The law under consideration in Congress would allow victims up to 10 days a year of unpaid leave to take steps to better their situations, such as seeking medical and legal help or moving.

Ninety-two percent of homeless women have been victims of abuse at some time in their lives, Rosenthal said.

She also suggested adding programs that would address the needs of vulnerable populations, such as American Indian women, who experience domestic abuse at twice the rate of other ethnicities.

Maybe Roberts should have gone to the hearing today. He might have learned why that law IS important. Read the rest of this post...

PFAW on Roberts

More from PFAW here, a big report.

Here. More background. Read the rest of this post...

Pro-corporate, anti-environment

ROBERTS IS A FRIEND TO CORPORATE AND ANTI-ENVIRONMENTAL INTERESTS

Roberts Coauthored Amicus Brief in Support of Mountain Top Removal.
"Another Bush judicial appointee with experience representing the mining industry is John G. Roberts, Jr., a former colleague of George Miller's at the Hogan & Hartson law and lobbying firm. Roberts was one of the co-authors of Miller's amicus brief on behalf of the National Mining Association's challenge to the government ban on mountaintop removal." While serving on the DC. Circuit Court Roberts ruled against environmentalist who were pushing for stricter government regulation of copper smelters." [Center for Investigative Reporting, 10/12/04]

Roberts' Lobbying Efforts Cost the American People $500 Million a Year.
While working at the law firm of Hogan and Hartson Roberts was registered to lobby for the Peanut industry. In his capacity as the industries lobbyist, Roberts pushed legislation that maintained subsidies whose costs, the GAO estimated, were $500 million a year to consumers. [Center for Investigative Reporting, 10/12/04]

Roberts Argued that Private Citizens Do Not Have the Right to Sue Over Environmental Regulations.
In 1990 while serving as Deputy Solicitor General during the first Bush administration Roberts argued against a citizen's right to sue over environmental violations. Roberts aregued, in the Supreme Court, that citizens did not have the right to sue over environmental violations unless they were directly affected by those violations. [Environmental Magazine, 12/31/03] Read the rest of this post...

Why does John Roberts hate our troops?

ROBERTS OPPOSED TROOPS RIGHT TO REPARATIONS FOR BEING TORTURED BY IRAQIS

Roberts Would Have Taken Position That Would Have Deprived American Soldiers Tortured in Iraq from Seeking Restitution. The case of Acree v. Republic of Iraq, was filled under the terrorism exception to the Foreign Soverign Immunities Act by 17 American soldiers who had been captured and tortured during the Gulf War. The district court had decided in favor of the plaintiffs, but the Government contended that the court did not have jurisdiction due to federal law. Roberts would have agree with the position, depriving Americans tortured in Iraq from receiving restitution. [Acree v. Republic of Iraq, 370 F.3d 41 (D.C. Cir. 2004)] Read the rest of this post...

A quick note about Karl Rove

Obviously, tonight's story is Roberts. We probably won't post anything new about Rove until tomorrow. We have two stories now. And in any case, Roberts' nomination hearings won't be until September. The stories on him will grow cold in about 3 days I think. So Rove will probably get a 3 day reprieve from the media, if he's lucky, then it will all start again. So fret not, he's hardly off the hook. Read the rest of this post...

NARAL on Roberts

NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA: JUDGE JOHN ROBERTS AN UNSUITABLE CHOICE FOR SUPREME COURT JUSTICE

Washington, DC – NARAL Pro-Choice America, the nation’s leading advocate for personal privacy and a woman’s right to choose, has announced that it will oppose Judge John Roberts, President Bush’s nominee for Supreme Court Justice, John Roberts, is a divisive nominee with a record of seeking to impose a political agenda on the courts, rather than a unifier Americans could trust to preserve our personal freedoms like the right to privacy and a woman's right to choose.

“Americans deserve a nominee who respects this country’s culture of freedom and personal responsibility, and who understands the profound effect his decisions have on our everyday lives,” said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America. “We are extremely disappointed that President Bush has chosen such a divisive nominee for the highest court in the nation, rather than a consensus nominee who would protect individual liberty and uphold Roe v. Wade. President Bush has consciously chosen the path of confrontation, and he should know that we, and the 65% of Americans who support Roe, are ready for the battle ahead.”

Some of the lowlights of Judge Robert’s background include:

· As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts argued in a brief before the U.S. Supreme Court (in a case that did not implicate Roe v. Wade) that “[w]e continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled…. [T]he Court’s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion… finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.”

+
· In Rust v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court considered whether Department of Health and Human Services regulations limiting the ability of Title X recipients to engage in abortion-related activities violated various constitutional provisions. Roberts, appearing on behalf of HHS as Deputy Solicitor General, argued that this domestic gag rule did not violate constitutional protections.

· Roberts, again as Deputy Solicitor General, filed a “friend of the court” brief for the United States supporting Operation Rescue and six other individuals who routinely blocked access to reproductive health care clinics, arguing that the protesters’ behavior did not amount to discrimination against women even though only women could exercise the right to seek an abortion.

· The Court was so accustomed to the Solicitor General and the Deputy Solicitor General arguing for the overturn of Roe that during John Roberts’s oral argument before the Supreme Court in Bray, a Justice Asked, “Mr. Roberts, in this case are you asking that Roe v. Wade be overruled?” He responded, “No, your honor, the issue doesn’t even come up.” To this the justice said, “Well, that hasn’t prevented the Solicitor General from taking that position in prior cases.” Read the rest of this post...

Massive report on Roberts

From the Alliance for Justice. Good job. Read the rest of this post...

Roberts on Roe

Roberts Wrote the Roe v Wade Was "Wrongly Decided and Should be Overturned."

In 1990 while serving as the Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts coauthored a brief in the case of Rust v. Sullivan, "[w]e continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled . . . [T]he Court's conclusion [] in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion . . . find[s] no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution." [Brief for the Respondent, Rust v. Sullivan, 1989 U.S. Briefs 1391 (1990).]

Roberts Wrote Amicus Brief in Support of Radical Anti-Choice Group.

While serving as Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts authored an amicus curiae brief in the Supreme Court in the case of Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic. Roberts filed the brief in support of the radical anti-choice group, Operation Rescue that had blocked access to woman's health care clinics. Roberts wrote that the protestors had not amounted to the discrimination of women "even though only women can have abortions." [Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Petitioners, Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, 1990 U.S. Briefs 985 (1991)]

Read the rest of this post...

Robert's bio

JOHN G. ROBERTS, JR.: A Brief Biography

Born: Born 1955 in Buffalo, NY.

Current Position: U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Nominated by George W. Bush on January 7, 2003, to a seat vacated by James L. Buckley; Confirmed by the Senate on May 8, 2003, and received commission on June 2, 2003.

Previous Positions: Law clerk, Hon. Henry Friendly, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1979-1980; Law clerk, Associate Justice William Rehnquist, Supreme Court of the United States, 1980-1981; Special assistant to the attorney general, U.S. Department of Justice, 1981-1982 ;Associate counsel to the president, White House Counsel's Office, 1982-1986; Private practice, Washington, DC, 1986-1989, 1993-2003; Principal deputy solicitor general, U.S. Department of Justice, 1989-1993.

More on Roberts here.

Education: Harvard College, A.B., 1976; Harvard Law School, J.D., 1979. Read the rest of this post...

Bush to announce John G. Roberts as the nominee

NOW has more on Roberts

CNN on Roberts.

Harry Reid statement on Roberts:

STATEMENT OF SENATOR HARRY REID ON THE NOMINATION OF JOHN ROBERTS TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT

The President has made his choice. Now the Senate will do its job of deciding whether to confirm John Roberts to a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court.

The President has chosen someone with suitable legal credentials, but that is not the end of our inquiry. The Senate must review Judge Roberts¹s record to determine if he has a demonstrated commitment to the core American values of freedom, equality and fairness. The nominee will have an opportunity to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee and make his case to the American people.

I will not pre-judge this nomination. I look forward to learning more about Judge Roberts.

FEC donations from Roberts to Bush, et. al.

AP on Roberts.

US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit. According to ABC, he's very conservative but very well liked by both parties.

50 years old.

Feel free to start your own research on this guy, post it in the comments and/or email me with anything more sensitive. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

So Chimpy is on at 9. Read the rest of this post...

Gary Bauer, values czar, and friend of 19 year old interns everywhere

Gary Bauer, who dropped out of the presidential race in 2000 after being caught spending way too much time behind closed doors with a barely legal intern, now says that liberals hate America. I suspect this is an effort to get the media attention, and our attention, off of Karl Rove.

At some point, someone needs to tell this guy to get a life. Not to mention, I love that the American Family Association seems to be trying to rehabilitate Bauer. They're constantly quoting him, in an apparent effort to make him relevant again after he was disowned by the right following his intern extravaganza. I guess the cloud of adultery has a statute of limitations for the AFA. Wonder how they feel about the other Ten Commandments.

...Pro-family pundit Gary Bauer says he is shocked at the intensity of hatred for America that members of the political Left exhibit. He says liberals hold what he sees as an apparent "very deep hatred" for America and what it stands for today. "It's amazing to me," Bauer commented recently, "how often the American Left -- whether it's Michael Moore or now various U.S. senators -- how often and how easily over the last several years they have compared their own country to Germany and President Bush to Hitler." The conservative spokesman says this happens far too often to be a slip of the tongue. Therefore, Bauer concludes, it must be a sincere hatred for the U.S. and its traditional moral values.

Read the rest of this post...

Latest rumor, it ain't Clement

DailyKos has more. Read the rest of this post...

Al Gore's TV Channel won't be partisan

Great, it's not like he could help fill a niche with a liberal channel. And the whole partisan thing sure hasn't worked for Fox. Why is it that the former Democratic Vice President, who was almost the President, tries to distance himself from politics? Seriously, god forbid there is actually a progressive media. AP has the story:

Former Vice President Al Gore, co-founder of a new television channel launching next month, said he's shunning politics — and so is his media venture....The 2000 Democratic candidate for president was asked if he was concerned the 24-hour news and information channel, called Current, would be perceived as having a political slant. It's scheduled to launch Aug. 1.

"I think the reality of the network will speak for itself. It's not intended to be partisan in any way," said Gore, Current's co-founder (with Joel Hyatt. the founder of Hyatt Legal Services) and chairman of the board.

And, by the way, Hyatt, son-in-law of Howard Metzenbaum, ran for Senate as a Democrat in Ohio in 1994. No politics in his past either.

So, launch a TV channel that doesn't help our side. Thanks, Al. Read the rest of this post...

Help Paul Hackett in Ohio

Swing State Project and Atrios are celebrating National Blogosphere Day by helping out Paul Hackett in Ohio. He's running in an August 2nd Special Election for the open Congressional Seat.

Like most Republicans in Ohio, Hackett's opponent is caught up in a scandal, the details of which can be found at GrowOhio.com.

Paul Hackett's race could and should be the start of new politics in Ohio. Read the rest of this post...

New DemsTV is up

Check out 7 minutes and 58 seconds, it's kind of a fun round of Bush lies.

Read the rest of this post...

25,000 Iraqi civilians have died since the US invasion

Sadly there does not seem to be any stop in sight for these killings and the US/UK are unable to do anything to even slow this down.

The Iraq Body Count -- a London-based group comprising academics and human rights and anti-war activists -- said on Tuesday that 24,865 civilians had died between March 20, 2003 and March 19, 2005.

"Our data has been extracted from a comprehensive analysis of over 10,000 press and media reports published since March 2003. Our accounting is not complete: only an in-depth, on-the-ground census could come close to achieving that," the group said.

NOTE FROM JOHN: But at least they're free dead civilians. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Blah blah blah Read the rest of this post...

Bush to use prime time address about Sup Ct nominee to take attention off of Karl of Alcatraz

This prime time address scam is getting a bit old, guys. It's a Supreme Court nomination, he can't make it without the "we're going to war" prime time address slot. I'm surprised he didn't make the announcement on ground zero in NYC, or perhaps at Pearl Harbor.

President Bush has decided whom to nominate to succeed Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court and was poised to announce his pick in a prime-time Tuesday night address.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the Bush administration was asking television outlets to broadcast the speech live. Bush's spokesman would not identify the president's choice. But there was intense speculation that it would be Judge Edith Clement of the U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

The televised speech was scheduled for 9 p.m. EDT.

Read the rest of this post...

Lots of Rove updates on Crooks and Liars

The Plame/Wilsons' lawyer on Hardball last night.

GOP congressman thinks we should bomb Mecca (but I'm sure his language won't be broadcast across the Middle East and result in the creation of lots more terrorists to kill Americans).

Countdown: Howard Fineman says Bush didn't move the goal posts, he moved the entire stadium. Read the rest of this post...

Karl Rove protest, today in DC

Excellent. From MoveOn.

*** TONIGHT, 6:15pm: Protest at 1700 Pennsylvania Ave. ***
CONSTITUENTS TO REP. JIM GERLACH:
GIVE BACK MONEY FROM ROVE FUNDRAISER

President’s Top Adviser Under Pressure to Resign for Revealing Identity of Undercover CIA Agent

RALLIERS ASK GERLACH TO REJECT ROVE AS PRESSURE MOUNTS NATIONALLY FOR PRESIDENT TO FIRE HIM

Washington, DC—Pennsylvania citizens will protest Congressman Jim Gerlach tonight for accepting contributions at a high-dollar-donor fundraiser in Washington, DC held with disgraced White House advisor Karl Rove. Rove is under investigation for revealing the identity of an undercover CIA agent.

“Congressman Gerlach shouldn’t benefit from Karl Rove’s participation at a fundraising dinner because Rove blew the cover of a CIA agent. Now Gerlach looks like he doesn’t care or that raising money is more important than protecting national security,” said Cynthia Baughman, a MoveOn member from Douglassville, Pennsylvania.

“Gerlach should call for Rove to resign or President Bush to fire him. The President said that he would ask anyone in his administration that was involved in the security leak to leave. Does Jim Gerlach put fundraising before national security?” said Tom Matzzie, MoveOn Washington Director.

Top presidential advisor and deputy policy chief, Karl Rove, revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent according to Newsweek.

“Whether he outed the agent knowingly or not, he is unfit to serve as a top advisor to a president of the United States,” said Eric Inman from Wayne, Pennsylvania.

DETAILS FOR PRESS

WHAT: “Fire Karl Rove” protest outside fundraiser for Rep. Jim Gerlach
WHEN: Tonight, Tuesday, July 19, 6:15pm
WHERE: 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC

Read the rest of this post...

Reuters: Supreme Court timing moved up to protect Rove

Reuters reports a Supreme Court nomination could happen as early as today...probably Fifth Circuit Judge Edith Clement. And, the accelerated timing is because of Rove:

Sources said the timing of an announcement had been moved up in part to deflect attention away from a CIA leak controversy that has engulfed Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove.

A Republican strategist with close to the White House described Clement as the leading candidate. "She's pretty untouchable," he said. "Plus, it helps take Rove off the front pages for a week."

No question, Rove really does run the White House...and, they really do think the press can only cover one story at a time.

Trying to recall a time when a Presidency was so beholden to one staff person. I don't think it has ever happened. Read the rest of this post...

Rumors Bush will pick Edith Brown Clement as Supt Ct nominee

But don't think for a minute we're going to forget Karl of Alcatraz.

More on Clement:

Age: 57
Graduated from: Tulane Law School.
She clerked for: Judge Herbert W. Christenberry.
She used to be: a judge on the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana.
She's now: a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit (appointed 2001).

Her confirmation battle: Clement doesn't provide much ammunition for opposition groups, but perhaps not much for conservatives to get excited about either. She hasn't written anything notable off the bench (or at least nothing that's come to light yet), and most of her judicial decisions have been in relatively routine and uncontroversial cases.

Read the rest of this post...

13 killed in Iraq today

The violence never seems to end. Read the rest of this post...

Open Thread

Should be another interesting day... Read the rest of this post...

Wingers told It's Not Gonzales

Kyle at Am I Patriotic has the news of Gonzales which appears in today's issue of the Hill:

White House officials have assured select conservative leaders that they will not nominate Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to the Supreme Court to replace retiring Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, according to a conservative familiar with the behind-the-scenes discussions.

The message has filtered out to conservative activists that Gonzales, whom many activists believe would be too liberal on abortion and racial preference issues, is no longer a threat to their cause. That could portend a fierce battle in the Senate in September, as Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) has said Gonzales would be a qualified nominee, suggesting that his selection could have achieved bipartisan consensus.

So, no surprise, they are catering to the right wingers. This is going to get ugly. And the White House really wants to change the subject from the Rove debacle.

Let's see if the press can handle two stories at once. Read the rest of this post...

UN advisor: Don't start trade talks until subsidies are sorted

And he's right. Why bother going through all of the discussions and negotiations when there is nothing concrete that is leading towards the rich countries addressing the subsidies to their farmers? Oil is the primary export from Africa (87%) thanks to Big Oil working out deals that will create problems for years in the mostly poor African countries who have been failing to re-invest the oil money to raise the level of living for the general population.

At Gleneagles the G8 leaders all talked the talk but hey, talk is cheap. Who really sees the Republican party cutting the massive government handouts to wealthy American farmers? I don't see the EU or France cutting back subsidies either because this requires political spine and western leaders are terrified of standing up to farmers.

"These farmers are averaging something like $140,000 per farmer of subsidies per year. They are growing subsidies, they are not growing cotton," [Jeffrey] Sachs told journalists.

"One of the things that needs to be done is for Africa to say 'we're not signing on to another trade round if you don't get this right,'" he said. "That's why the (WTO) meetings in Mexico stopped, because cotton subsidies played such a large part, and I think everyone's heard this now, that there needs to be a trading system that is decent and fair to agricultural production here (in Africa)."

Read the rest of this post...

Muslim Support For Suicide Bombing Drops

An interesting poll in USA Today shows some stark declines in Muslim support for suicide bombing -- especially against other Muslims. This can only be described as good news, though I can't get too excited about polls showing "only" 50% of Muslims in Lebanon, Jordon and Morocco think suicide bombing against the US and our allies in Iraq is ok. Read the rest of this post...