It's Finally the Weekend Open Thread

Let's get it started.... Read the rest of this post...

Career Lawyer, not Skull and Bones Pal, to head Plame Case

This is an interesting development. Last week, Newsweek had reported that an old college pal of Bush's would be heading the Plame leak investigation. Apparently, there are some people at the Department of Justice who are concerned about the rule of law:

David Margolis, a lawyer at the Justice Department for 40 years, was named Friday to oversee a special prosecutor's investigation of who in the Bush administration disclosed the name of an undercover CIA officer.

Margolis, whose title is associate deputy attorney general, is taking the place of Deputy Attorney General James Comey, whose last day of work was Friday. Comey will be Lockheed Martin's new general counsel.

Comey made the designation of Margolis. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has stepped aside from the probe because he was White House counsel when Valerie Plame's name was leaked in 2003 and he has testified to the grand jury investigating the unauthorized disclosure.

Comey gave broad discretion to U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald of Chicago when he was appointed to investigate the leak in December 2003. Margolis is not expected to alter Fitzgerald's mandate in what are likely to be the final months of his investigation. The grand jury ends its term in October.

So Fitzgerald can continue his work without any changes. Indictments soon? Read the rest of this post...

AP profiles Casey Sheehan

Now, if you are a right wing nut, a la Michelle Malkin, you are already speaking for Casey Sheehan. However, if you are human and have a heart, read this AP profile:

He was an altar boy, an Eagle Scout, a church youth group leader. That is what people remember about Casey Sheehan, the 24-year-old soldier whose death in Iraq has become a flashpoint for debate about the war since his mother began staging a peace vigil outside the president's ranch in Texas.

Among family and friends _ not to mention TV pundits, Internet bloggers and newspaper columnists _ opinions vary about Cindy Sheehan's demand to meet with the president to talk about why the U.S. went to war. Like others, they struggle with whether her determination to bring the war home honors or diminishes his choice to join the Army.

But those who knew the young man she so publicly mourns agree that if anyone is an appropriate face for the war's more than 1,800 U.S. deaths, it is Casey. He had a gentle but firm commitment to family, church and country, re-enlisting after the war started and volunteering for the rescue mission in which he and six others were killed last year.

Kinda gives you the sense that Casey was a good kid who was very close to his mother. Imagine that. His mother might have a better sense of what her son would have liked than Malkin, O'Reilly and the rest of that crowd. Read the rest of this post...

Friday Cat Blogging

The indomitable Nasdaq.



And yes, Chris in Paris knows Nasdaq needs a diet. The vet already told them so. Read the rest of this post...

Pres. Bush Vs. Rumsfeld Vs. The Generals: Chaos In Control of The White House

Is Karl Rove distracted or something? The Bush White House is in serious disarray. First, Bush and Rummy seemed to spar over what to call this titanic struggle we're apparently engaged in. Rummy rebranded it as the "global struggle against violent extremism." Bush slapped that down by referring to the "war on terror" at least 57 times when he spoke publicly soon after. (The Weekly Standard and other Bush cheerleaders used that as another excuse to call for Rummy's head.)

Now it's Bush vs the generals. He seemed to be floating a trial balloon via our generals by having them talk about pulling back some troops in the spring, now that everything is going so swimmingly in Iraq. Either that mid-term election ploy was too naked or the obvious fact that Bush had suddenly named the deadline he insisted was dangerous finally sunk in. Whatever the reason, now Bush is saying hold on, we can't be talking about pulling out troops and undermining the war effort. Bush referred to the statements by his top generals as "rumours" and "speculation." The Washington Post called the confusion a case of "seemingly mixed signals" and suggested Bush's people were no clearer than anyone else about what should be happening or when.

Either the Bush White House is having trouble keeping people on message or there is a real struggle over the direction they should be heading in and that fight is sowing disarray in the Administration. But with Rove preoccupied, the only ting certain is that chaos is in control in the White House. Read the rest of this post...

Open Thread

More cat blogging to come from Paris? Meanwhile, John is falling behind SciFi Friday. Read the rest of this post...

Pentagon Afraid To Release Abuse Images

No, no, they insist. It's not because these photos (and video?) are even worse than the last ones or that it reminds everyone again of how awful and debasing and unAmerican our actions were. It's not because it will remind everyone of how no one in the upper ranks was held responsible for the widespread and despicable mistreatment of prisoners that lowered our image in the world to little better than a tinpot dictator. It's not because the Pentagon is ashamed of the photos.

It's because the Pentagon is worried things might get violent in Iraq and Afghanistan if the photos are released. What the hell do they think is happening right now?

No one higher-up has been held responsible in the military. Bush made clear he approved heartily: why else shower honors on almost everyone in charge when it happened and why else punish no one of any significance?

The sooner these images are released, the sooner we can start truly condemning those humiliating practices, start holding top military officials responsible and start upholding the highest ideals of America instead of the lowest methods of dictators like Hussein Read the rest of this post...

New GOP congresswoman from Ohio - the crazy one - taking on the blogs

But as others have noted, like Atrios, as none of us are blogs anymore - we're now online journals of public opinion - her legislation won't affect us anyway.

Just like the new GOP leadership, if you can't beat 'em, censor 'em. Because this is not America... Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

So how's Friday going in the USA? Read the rest of this post...

Why Does Bush's Summer Break Get a Break From The MSM?

Really, why isn't the media lambasting Bush every day for taking an extended vacation while the violence in Iraq continues to mount? I recognize that a President can stay in touch electronically and do his work from Air Force One or any location on the planet. But the idea of taking a long, leisurely vacation would be outrageous if Bush hadn't already lowered the bar so dramatically that we don't even expect him to attend a single funeral for a fallen soldier.

Mr. President, Americans think you're doing a terrible job handling the war in Iraq. They think you lied to convince the nation to support the invasion. And the insurgency is stronger than ever. Given all that, how can you possibly justify taking an extended vacation? Most Americans get two weeks a year. Do you really think the President should take five weeks off when we're at war? Read the rest of this post...

Kansas Attacks Evolution Again

Kansas actually does a pretty good job of disproving evolution: how else to explain a state regressing from the site of a symbolic victory for academic freedom to the most famous place in America that wants to dumb down the education its children receive?

The Kansas State Board moved one step closer to demanding religious beliefs be taught in science class, showing the board members apparently don't understand what science or a "theory" or "evidence" is any better than a poorly taught ninth grader. A final vote will be held in September or October. After that, kids can be certain that religious beliefs will trump scientific fact and that they'll be ill-prepared for college, where no public university in the country will accept far right dogma as answers in a science course. Among the losers: anyone of faith who doesn't happen to agree with the far right's religious agenda: now their children will be forced to learn the religous beliefs of other families instead of their own, and under the guise of science.

In honor of this, Americablog has obtained some exclusive peeks at what future test questions in science and math and other areas will be like in Kansas after the revamping. See how you do!

Question: What does DNA stand for?
Answer: God.

Question: What is 21 divided by 7?
Answer: God.

Question: Which came first, the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence?
Answer: The Bible. Read the rest of this post...

Did Rove violate federal false statements statute by lying to Bush about Plamegate?

As Joe notes below, the AP has picked up on something very interesting. Rove may have violated the federal false statements statute if he lied to Bush about his role in Plamegate. (And if he told Bush the truth, then Bush has been concealing evidence in national security investigation.)

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any
matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or
judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly
and willfully -
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or
device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the
same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5
years, or both.

Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Anything interesting in the morning papers? Read the rest of this post...

OP/ED: NARAL Should Not Have Pulled Ad

I'm going to take this opportunity to disagree with some of my fellow bloggers (and readers who have commented) on the NARAL ad. I believe that the ad should stand and remain on the air.

For me, the crux of the issue is that Roberts and his cronies in the Bush White House spent time and energy filing a "Friend of the Court" brief to argue that Federal discrimination laws shouldn't be applied to Operation Rescue because their blockades of abortion clinics didn't just block women, they also blocked men. (Because so many men need abortions I suppose?)

On the issue of law, Roberts may have been technically correct. However, this was a lawsuit that the US federal government was not party to, and yet in they ran in to try and make Operation Rescue's life easier.

What did Roberts know about Operation Rescue back in 1991 when he went to bat for them? Let's just take a couple of Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry's quotes from the era:

''No court can prohibit us from rescuing babies. These judges have joined the heritage of Nazi judges who sanctioned the murders of the innocent.'' (5/22/1990 - St. Louis Post-Dispatch)

''In 30 years, we're going to have forced abortion,'' he said. ''I can already write the decision about how in a society with limited resources we can only accommodate the needs of the most by limiting each family to two babies. You say that's farfetched, but what would you have said 30 years ago if I'd told you we would be killing 1.5 million babies a year, and having Gay Pride Week and AIDS and no prayer in public schools? The feminists got what they wanted, but are women better off with pornography and no-fault divorce and irresponsible fathers who don't pay child support? I don't think so.'' (6/11/1990 - New York Times)

It is completely relevant that Roberts supported Operation Rescue, an entirely fringe group on the Radical Right. Had the US Federal government been party to the case, I could understand that briefs would have to be filed and a position would have to be taken.

This was not the case. In fact, interjecting the Administration into this fight was totally voluntary. Roberts involvement in this case shows just how extreme his views are, and how far outside mainstream American political thinking he is.

The Federal government came in and gave a tacit nod to Operation Rescue by helping call off the Judiciary dogs. The leash got too long and the results were tragic. Roberts and company knew exactly the kind of people they were dealing with, and chose to support them. The public deserves to know that, and for that reason I believe that the ad should have remained on the air.

-- Rob in Baltimore

Read the rest of this post...

Homeland Security Head: If You Want Security, You've Gotta Give Up Privacy

USA Today has an okay interview with Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff. What I missed: hearing how Chertoff is going to head off the political abuse of his department, namely the political machinations that Tom Ridge said were behind so many of the "terror alerts" during Bush's first four years. What Chertoff did say: security trumps privacy.

Chertoff said there is too much worry over a plan by the Transportation Security Administration to collect passengers' full names and birth dates before they board.

"The average American gives information up to get a CVS (drugstore discount) card that is far more in-depth than TSA's going to be looking at," Chertoff told reporters and editors at USA TODAY's headquarters in McLean, Va.

True -- that's why a growing number of people DON'T sign up for those cards at grocery stores and drug stores that let them track every single purchase you make, sell it to any and all comers and give you very little in return. Heck, when I buy a battery at Radio Shack and they demand my phone number, I get into a five minute argument every time.

"Would you rather give up your address and date of birth to a secure database and not be pulled aside and questioned," he said, "or would you rather not give it up and have an increased likelihood that you're going to be called out of line and someone's going to do a secondary search of your bag and they're going to ask you a lot of personal questions in the full view of everybody else?"

So the choice is to just roll over and give up all your privacy in advance or we'll single you out for humiliating treatment because if you DON'T want to give Big Brother your blood type, genetic code and first born baby, obviously you have something to hide? That's the same foolish argument people like to say about unnecessary drug testing or having your every move tracked by cameras -- if you've got nothing to hide, why do you object? Uh, because it's my freedom and privacy I'm trying to protect, not lose. Isn't it? Read the rest of this post...

Cindy Sheehan's Story Going International

The Independent in the UK is the latest international media outlet to tell Cindy Sheehan's moving, impassioned protest at the "ranch" in Texas where Bush is on the longest Presidential vacation in decades while our young men and women are dying overseas. Read the rest of this post...

Crack of dawn open thread

Who's awake? Read the rest of this post...

NARAL Pulls Anti-Roberts Ad

Good idea. When even Jon Stewart is mocking your ad as misleading and inaccurate, it's time to cut bait and move on. Agree or disagree? Read the rest of this post...