Open Thread

Ah, the weekend.

So, if you can, consider helping the "Burn Bush for Burner" effort. As of 10:40 p.m. Eastern Time, the ActBlue page reported over 1,040 supporters have contributed more than $35,000. That's amazing for the first day -- and the numbers just keep climbing. The admittedly ambitious goal is to raise $100,000 by Monday for Darcy Burner's campaign against George Bush's yes-man, Dave Reichert. This is a collaborative effort across the progressive blogosphere, which you can see from one of the latest videos posted by Jane Hamsher. Republicans are going to learn there is a political price to pay for having George Bush show up in their states and districts. The number of supporters is as important as the total...so join the bandwagon at any amount and send Bush a message.

With that, what do we need to know? Read the rest of this post...

Fort Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle continues gay-bashing campaign

You'd think the unnaturally homo-obsessed Mayor of Fort Lauderdale would have taken a breather from his 24/7 campaign to destroy tourism there, but sadly, Jim Naugle hasn't gotten the message. he's continuing to assert that there is an epidemic of gay male sex going on in the public beach restrooms.

After failing to convince the city to spend $250K on robo-toilets to prevent all the imaginary man-on-man action (the police can account for only two arrests in three years), he has gone on a public crusade that only further gives Fort Lauderdale a black eye.

For instance, the mayor recently held another press conference, this time flanked by fundies to promote "healthy public places" (video here and here). At his side:

* the Rev. O'Neal Dozier of Pompano Beach's Worldwide Christian Center ("Everyone, regardless of his place on the political spectrum, should agree that public  sex-whether it be in parks, restrooms, department stores, or bathhouses - endangers lives and fuels the public health crisis we face in Broward.");
* Dr. John Diggs of the Massachusetts Physicians Resource Council
* infamous radio fundie Janet Folger of Faith2Action ("The mayor is doing what most families want. We don't want to be known as the AIDS capital in the country.");
* Gary Cass, president of the Christian Anti-Defamation League
* Pastor Willie McBride of Lauderdale Christian Center in Plantation.

Also in this HealthyPublicPlaces.com coalition supporting the mayor, some familiar names -- Americans for Truth, Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, Christian Interactive Network, Concerned Women for America, Coral Ridge Ministries, Faith2Action, Stephen Bennett Ministries, and the Worldwide Christian Center.

Diggs handed out copies of his discredited paper, "The Health Risks Of Gay Sex," which goes into details that they love to obsess over, with headings for "gay sex" such as  Anal-genital, Oral-anal, Human Waste, Fisting, Sadism. Never mind that heterosexuals practice such things; that would ruin Diggs' party. Debunking of this paper can be found here.


Activist Anthony Niedwiecki was interviewed for the Sun-Sentinel article on the press conference wrote this about Diggs:

He basically attributed every sexually transmitted disease to men on men sex, including anal cancer (not a STD, but he repeatedly referred to this) and HPV. When asked by a reporter why they are not addressing the increase in HIV cases among African-American and Haitan-American heterosexual women, the population that has seen the highest increase in Broward over the past few years, he blamed it on gay men on the "down low".  He essentially blamed gay men for every new disease out there and on every new incident of HIV transmission.  As I told one reporter, I felt like it was August 21, 1985.

As Anthony noted, in Broward County women make up a third of HIV cases diagnosed in the past 10 years. It begs the question why this crowd is fixated on imaginary gay men having sex in a beach restroom, rather than communities where they need to focus their attention.

Fort Lauderdale ranks # 6 among gay vacationers last year -- and the demo represents 11% of the $8.5 billion that rolls into Broward County's coffers annually. Naugle is flushing it all away. The Greater Fort Lauderdale Convention & Visitors Bureau has been alarmed at the fallout from the homophobic mayor's tirades, and has sent out letters to try to stave off a boycott of the area.

According to Waymon Hudson of Fight Out Loud, on Thursday the tourism board shared with Naugle the blowback that is already occurring:

Board members said that each time the mayor speaks they receive hundreds of E-mails from potential visitors to Ft Lauderdale, saying they plan to take their money elsewhere. One board member said a 200-person group was scheduled to stay at a prominent hotel in Ft Lauderdale. In light of Naugle's comments, they have placed the reservation, along with $250,000 in revenue, on hold.  These concerns have come from not only gay and lesbian travelers, but from other tourists as well.  They have said they no longer see the Greater Fort Lauderdale area as a welcoming or safe place to travel.

What did Naugle say in response?


"I am the Mayor that's not going to back down. One of the things that my dad taught me is that it isn't always about the money, it's about doing what's right."

And he's going to take all of you folks in Fort Lauderdale down with him.

UNITE Fort Lauderdale has action items -- including contacting the Commissioners of the City of Fort Lauderdale.

Related:
* Robo-potty Naugle: "I have longtime friends in the homosexual community."
* Letter from the Fort Lauderdale CVB disowning Naugle
* Shock jock robo-potty Mayor Naugle torched by FL newspaper editorial
* Images of beach restroom sex vex Ft. Lauderdale mayor, calls for robojohns* Naugle: is he looking to keep the straight men out of the potty?
* Flushing Naugle
* The 'Flush Naugle' campaign escalates* Fundie defends homophobic robo-potty mayor Naugle
* Pro-diversity rally in Ft. Lauderdale today to counter the $250K robo-potty mayor. Read the rest of this post...

GOP: The Womb Control Patrol

It's been pretty clear that the anti-choice crowd has its sights on not only controlling the womb, but women's sexuality as well. That's why this should scare the bejesus out of women. According to Birth Control Watch, 86 anti-abortion groups are committed to opposing any form of contraception.

Abortion will never end as long as society approves the use of contraception. The practice of contraception means children are unwanted and provides the rationalization for abortion. It is a violation of human dignity to promote or accept the use of contraception.

OK. That extreme view is no surprise. But wait a minute -- there are occupants of the GOP clown car that are equally willing to deny contraception because of their anti-choice views - and they are on the record about it.

Do you want the policies of these men in your bedroom, in your womb, in your doctor's office, at your local pharmacy?

Cristina Page has an excellent piece in the Baltimore Sun that shows just how extreme the views of the GOP candidates are.

Mitt Romney: When he met with the National Right to Life committee, Mitt was ready to scale back access to contraception with this statement:

"I fought to define life as beginning at conception rather than at the time of implantation." The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists defines pregnancy as starting at implantation, the first moment a pregnancy can be known. Anti-abortion advocates want pregnancy to start at the unknown moment sperm and egg meet: fertilization. They'd also like you to believe, despite evidence to the contrary, that the birth control pill prevents that fertilized egg from implanting in the womb.

Mr. Romney's code, deciphered, meant, "I, like you, hope to reclassify the most commonly used forms of contraceptives as abortions." In fact, he told the crowd, he already had some practice redefining contraception: "I vetoed a so-called emergency contraception bill that gave young girls abortive drugs without prescription or parental consent."

Remember, emergency contraception isn't formulated to disallow implantation; it prevents ovulation. Mitt's clearly ready with the speculum.

Sam Brownback: Here's the man who said that every fetus is sacred -- abortion is the murder of fetal citizens). He has co-sponsoring a bill that would de-fund Planned Parenthood, which is the nation's largest contraception provider.

Tom Tancredo: He's off the hook --

According to Mr. Tancredo, a Colorado Republican, emergency contraception "cheapens human life and simply uses a woman's body to dispose of the child instead of a doctor." By the same logic, so do the birth control pill, the contraceptive patch, the IUD, the NuvaRing, and the Depo-Provera shot - which, it's worth noting, together account for 40 percent of the birth control American women use.

John McCain:

[H]e has "consistently voted against taxpayer-funded contraception programs." And Mr. McCain reports that his adviser on sexual-health matters is Sen. Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, who leads campaigns claiming condoms are unsafe and opposing emergency contraception.

These pols are at odds with American women who use contraception -- and this is a huge base of voters to tick off. Dreams of womb control are not going to appeal to this group. Some stats from the Guttmacher Institute:

* Virtually all women (98%) aged 15-44 who have ever had intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method.

* Overall, 62% of the 62 million women aged 15-44 are currently using a contraceptive method.

* 31% of the 62 million women do not need a method because they are infertile; are pregnant, postpartum or trying to become pregnant; have never had intercourse; or are not sexually active.

* Thus, only 7% of women aged 15-44 are at risk of unwanted pregnancy but are not using contraceptives.

* Among the 42 million fertile, sexually active women who do not want to become pregnant, 89% are practicing contraception.

And one other matter -- the last refuge of non-permanent birth control left, aside from the rhythm method, is the condom. I think it would be prudent to ask whether the candidates would like to pull all of the rubbers from the shelves because it is interfering with God's plan for procreation. Read the rest of this post...

Froomkin wants to know what happened to Bush's "lost year" in Iraq? And what were the costs?

Froomkin:

A new national intelligence estimate concludes that President Bush's troop surge shows no signs of accomplishing its goal of encouraging political reconciliation in Iraq.

An influential Republican senator and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff now favor a troop withdrawal. (Sen. John Warner wants Bush to demonstrate that the commitment in Iraq is not open-ended; Marine Gen. Peter Pace argues that the military simply can't keep this up.)

These and other developments take us back in some ways to December 2006. It was then, in the wake of the November election and the report of the Iraq Study Group, that the debate in Washington finally appeared to be shifting away from how to achieve victory and toward how to cut our losses.

Instead, Bush ignored public sentiment, overruled his military commanders and opted for escalation.

And now it appears that the only thing the surge has bought him is time -- nine months or maybe a year, during which he was able to postpone the inevitable.

What has that year cost America -- and Iraq? For starters, a year in Iraq translates to over 1,000 more dead American soldiers; over $100 billion more in direct appropriations; over 15,000 more dead Iraqi civilians; and countless grievous wounds and shattered families both here and there.

In light of the costs, having bought a year of time may not seem like much of an accomplishment. But if Bush can drag things out another year or so, he can wash his hands of the whole mess and leave it for his successor to deal with.

Read the rest of this post...

Maliki criticism is misdirected

This week included a deluge of criticism aimed at Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, starting on Monday when Senators Levin and Warner returned from a quickie two-day trip to Iraq and said that Maliki should be voted from office. Subsequent criticism came from the new National Intelligence Estimate, Ayad Allawi (the former PM who penned a WaPo op-ed that basically said, "Topple Maliki and put me back in power!), and, perhaps most bizarrely, a high-powered Republican lobbying firm apparently being paid by Allawi.

The attacks on Maliki are mostly misguided. While the critiques are true, they really describe the problems of the prime minister position more than any failure on the part of Maliki himself. This is just part of the four-year fantasy that if we just find the right guy to run Iraq all our problems will be solved.

I wrote a piece for the American Prospect on this topic over four months ago, and every word remains applicable today. An excerpt:

There are three major problems with the pattern of U.S. indecision, transitory support, and constant meddling in internal Iraqi political affairs over the last four years.

First, the approach distorts the American public's understanding of the conflict by perpetuating the absurd idea that Iraq can be fixed if we just get the right Iraqi leader in power. There is no Nelson Mandela waiting in the wings, no Ataturk -- not even a Yeltsin or a Nasser. The internal conflicts in Iraq, not to mention a constitution that essentially mandates proportional ethno-religious representation in parliament, currently preclude the ascendance of such a unifying leader. [...]

Second, such relentless meddling in political conflicts we do not fully understand ensures that neither Iraqis nor other regional powers can establish any reliable relationship with the United States. [...] American inconsistency therefore fuels unpredictable behavior in and around Iraq, seriously damaging military and diplomatic efforts. And for all of these difficulties, our careening policies in the region never seem to actually gain anything.

Finally, the constant search for the "right" policy or the "right" Iraqi leader epitomizes the "Quiet American" idea that the United States can -- and should -- affect everything everywhere. [...] Sometimes the best thing to do in a delicate and difficult political situation is to take a step back from the fray.

Allawi is not the answer. He has virtually no domestic constituency, no military or militia forces loyal to him to support security efforts, and he royally screwed things up last time he was in power. Recently Ambassador Crocker was asked about Allawi. His response? "Crocker, when asked about Allawi, said he only spoke to people who actually came to Iraq." Ouch.

The problems in Iraq, as anybody who follows them closely knows, are structural and political. They were not caused by nor can they be fixed by a single leader. And for the US, the worst result would be the double-whammy of further screwing up Iraq by installing a "non-sectarian" leader . . . followed by administration claims that we have to "give the new leadership a chance, not withdraw troops at such a crucial moment." I'm not saying Maliki is on his way out (there were similar rumblings in late winter/early spring about deposing him and he survived), but if he does go, it would likely be doubleplus ungood all around. Read the rest of this post...

Last night's 'God's Warriors' on CNN

I watched the third part of CNN's documentary with Christiane Amanpour, "God's Warriors" and it will have the fundies hopping mad. Parts one and two dealt with extremist movements in Judaism and Islam. Last night's installment took a look at religious fundamentalists in the U.S., the "Christian" right wing. The transcript is here.

Amanpour conducted the last TV interview with Rev. Tinkywinky at Liberty University the week before Falwell died. He again recanted the apology he made for saying "the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians" were responsible for 9/11. He calls his young Liberty University scholars "pit bulls for Christ;" his goal is to graduate as many fundie lawyers as possible, to infiltrate and influence the judicial system in favor of God's law.

Michael Jensen has a great piece up at AfterElton about this part of the doc series. A snippet:

It would be hard to imagine a documentary examining the impact of Christian fundamentalists on American culture that didn't include a look at the part played by gay issues. Fortunately, God's Christian Warriors doesn't disappoint and the result is a fascinating and often frightening look at the religious right that any progressive -- but especially any gay progressive -- would be well advised to watch.

...While watching Amanpour interview some of these fundamentalists, I hoped she would ask just what would happen to gay people should they get their way: stoning to death, as suggested in Leviticus? After all, fundamentalists claim the Bible should be the foundation upon which America is built and that would be the logical conclusion.

...If looked at through the prism of understanding what the religious right wants for America, however, then the documentary can be considered a success if even only a few Americans -- especially gay ones -- wake up to what these Christian fundamentalists aspire to. And for anyone paying attention for the last twenty years, no explanation is needed as to what it is the religious fundamentalists want for America.

As God's Christian Warriors makes amply clear, their goal is an America that is governed by biblical principles; principles that leave no room for gay people to co-exist in any meaningful way except by going deeply back in to the closet.

CNN has done a fine job on this series; I am curious how the documentary is being received by fundamentalists, considering it is quite harsh (but accurate) about the violent history of the religious right regarding abortion activity, showing the shootings of doctors and bombings of clinics -- acts Falwell condemned when the topic was raised by Amanpour. I'd venture a guess that being lumped in with extremist factions of Islam and Judaism is going to cause a massive uproar in the fundie press shortly.

Oh wait...take a look at the drivel already up at WingNutDaily.

What are your thoughts on CNN's documentary series, 'God's Warriors'?



And the headline of the related story, which has all of the expected hysteria:
CNN airs 'one of the most distorted programs' ever
Documentary compares Jews, Christians to Muslim terrorists

CNN will proabably re-air all three parts over the weekend. Check listings.

Related:
* God's Warriors and the homegrown 'Battle Cry' Read the rest of this post...

Neutralize the Bush money machine

Next Monday, George Bush is going to be in Washington State to raise money for one of his stalwart followers, Congressman Dave Reichert. Raising money from the base is about the only use Republicans have for Bush these days -- and those Republicans, like Reichert, are still sticking with Bush's stay the course in Iraq strategy. So there has to got to be a cost to the GOPers who have Bush show up. They need to pay dearly for that support. McJoan at DailyKos and several other progressive bloggers have come up with a great idea:

Bush is going to be spending much of the next 14 months traveling around the country to raise money for endangered Republicans. We can neutralize him as a fundraising tool by using each and every one of these appearances to raise money for our Dem candidates.

Reichert's opponent in 2006, Darcy Burner, is running again. This time, she is going to win. On Monday, while Bush is raising money for Reichert, Burner is hosting a town hall meeting about Iraq. Let's make Reichert and the other Republicans pay dearly for their fundraisers with Bush. As McJoan says, let's "Burn Bush for Burner." You can help. Make a contribution to Darcy Burner. Let's show the Republicans that Bush's appearances will generate campaign funds for the Democratic opponents of the GOPers he's trying to help. You'll be in good company:
Read the rest of this post...

Foreign policy community: credit where credit is due

My colleague Ilan Goldenberg pushes back against what has, I think, moved from an understandable critique of right wing foreign policy establishment crazies and a certain group of Democrats who enable them -- almost exclusively members of Clinton's second term security staff -- to a condemnation of everybody who works on foreign policy for a living.

Go read it. It's short, sweet, and on point.

The problem is not that Democrats don't have anybody good working on foreign policy, it's that the good ones are consistently overlooked for the likes of O'Hanlon, Pollack, Beinart, etc. The fact that those guys keep showing up on your teevee is a *media* problem, not a policy one. Would I like for some of these guys -- especially many of the Republicans; the Kagan family, anybody? -- to be banished from the realm of respectability, the best way to effect that is to elevate better people. People like a Rand Beers (who resigned on the eve of the Iraq war after 35 years of government service and now runs a think tank) or Brian Katulis (a Middle East expert at CAP who actually speaks the language and has spent time in the region -- crazy, I know) or Steve Simon (of the Council on Foreign relations -- the horror!).

Established institutions such as New America Foundation and newer ones including the Center for American Progress and (I'm biased on this one, but still) the National Security Network do great things. Just Wednesday, after Bush's horrifying speech on Wednesday, NSN immediately got dozens of reporters on a conference call with a who's who of military and security people to push back against the president's absurd conclusions, which helped establish a better media narrative.

I've mostly avoided the blogosphere debate over Very Serious People and the Foreign Policy Establishment, but I should say that I think many of the criticisms are insightful and legitimate. That doesn't mean, however, that good people, pieces, and actions should be ignored. Read the rest of this post...

Pace and Joint Chiefs will tell Bush to cut forces in Iraq

The battle lines are being drawn between military leaders and the Bush White House. The Joint Chiefs of Staff will tell Bush that it's time to drastically reduce the number of troops in Iraq. Bush wants to stay the course in Iraq even though it's breaking the military:

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is expected to advise President Bush to reduce the U.S. force in Iraq next year by almost half, potentially creating a rift with top White House officials and other military commanders over the course of the war.

Administration and military officials say Marine Gen. Peter Pace is likely to convey concerns by the Joint Chiefs that keeping well in excess of 100,000 troops in Iraq through 2008 will severely strain the military. This assessment could collide with one being prepared by the U.S. commander in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, calling for the U.S. to maintain higher troop levels for 2008 and beyond.

Petraeus is expected to support a White House view that the absence of widespread political progress in Iraq requires several more months of the U.S. troop buildup before force levels are decreased to their pre-buildup numbers sometime next year.

Pace's recommendations reflect the views of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who initially expressed private skepticism about the strategy ordered by Bush and directed by Petraeus, before publicly backing it.

Bush claims to take advice from the military, but that's never been true. His hand-picked guy on the ground, Petraeus, will do exactly what Bush wants next month. And, don't think for a minute that Bush staffers aren't writing the September report. It's just another political document for them. Read the rest of this post...

Mitt moves up in the polls...

But he probably doesn't want to be at the top of this heap of results from Rasmussen (via Boston.com):

Mitt Romney finally has higher poll numbers than Hillary Clinton.

Unfortunately for the former Massachusetts governor's presidential hopes, the numbers are the percentage of voters who say they would definitely vote against him.

In a national poll released today, 44 percent of likely voters surveyed said they would definitely not support Romney if he were on the 2008 ballot, compared to the 43 percent who said they would definitely vote against Clinton.

And only 16 percent of those surveyed said they would definitely vote for Republican Romney, giving him a 28 percentage point gap between firm opposition and support. Democrat Clinton, the New York senator and former First Lady, only had a gap of 10 percentage points because 33 percent said they would definitely vote for her if she were on the 2008 ballot.

Read the rest of this post...

Causing even more suffering for the people of Iraq, Bush's escalation of the endless war doubled the number of displaced Iraqis

In Bush's "Vietnam is the model for Iraq" speech earlier this week, he feigned concern about the humanitarian impact of ending the war in Iraq. He cited the human suffering that occurred after the U.S. left Southeast Asia:

In reminding Americans that the pullout in 1975 was followed by years of bloody upheaval in Southeast Asia, Mr. Bush argued in a speech on Wednesday that Vietnam’s lessons provide a reason for persevering in Iraq, rather than for leaving any time soon. Mr. Bush in essence accused his war critics of amnesia over the exodus of Vietnamese “boat people” refugees and the mass killings in Cambodia that upended the lives of millions of people.

Too late.

Bush's endless war has already caused the enormous suffering for the Iraqi people. New studies show that the escalation of the war has had a negative impact causing displacement of the Iraqi people to increase markedly:

Statistics collected by one of the two humanitarian groups, the Iraqi Red Crescent Organization, indicate that the total number of internally displaced Iraqis has more than doubled, to 1.1 million from 499,000, since the buildup started in February.

Those figures are broadly consistent with data compiled independently by an office in the United Nations that specializes in tracking wide-scale dislocations. That office, the International Organization for Migration, found that in recent months the rate of displacement in Baghdad, where the buildup is focused, had increased by as much as a factor of 20, although part of that rise could have stemmed from improved monitoring of displaced Iraqis by the government in Baghdad, the capital.

The new findings suggest that while sectarian attacks have declined in some neighborhoods, the influx of troops and the intense fighting they have brought are at least partly responsible for what a report by the United Nations migration office calls the worst human displacement in Iraq’s modern history.

The findings also indicate that the sectarian tension the troops were meant to defuse is still intense in many places in Iraq. Sixty-three percent of the Iraqis surveyed by the United Nations said they had fled their neighborhoods because of direct threats to their lives, and more than 25 percent because they had been forcibly removed from their homes.

Iraq already has bloody upheaval and undue death and misery. That's because Bush invaded their country and has no plan to end the occupation. Read the rest of this post...

Athens Open Thread

The National Archaeological Museum in Athens is a gem, as you can imagine. They had a special exhibit going on of one of the most famous ancient Greek sculptors, Praxitelis. Amazing. And the lighting of the exhibit was phenomenal.

Compare that to our first day in Athens when Fodor's led us into a crack den. Well, actually, it was more a heroin pit than a crack den. I've never watched people injecting heroin before, let alone from 6 feet away. I just kept hoping that mom wouldn't point and say, hey John look at that! She didn't. Note to Fodor's: You might want to give better directions to Diporto restaurant, and warn folks that you're leading them into quite likely the worst section of town.

Read the rest of this post...