Romney now basing his presidential decision-making on his religion, but don't you dare ask him about his religion

So which one is it? Is Mitt Romney's Mormon religion off limits for everybody but Mitt Romney? It's okay for him to give a religious reason for policy decisions, but not okay for anyone else to inquire more about Romney's religion. What other policy decisions is Mitt Romney going to make based on the Mormon religion? Romney, like so many folks on the religious right (even though Romney isn't really religious right, he's a far-left liberal who's only now pretending to be a right-winger) firmly believe that their religion should be the basis of every political decision they make, but when you ask just what their religion is all about, they get all offended, when they're the ones who made their religion an issue to start with.

And let's not ignore what's really going on here. Romney is worried that the religious right, and a lot of Americans, won't vote for him because he's a Mormon. So he's now quoting the Bible to show that he's really one of us. The real reason most Americans won't vote for Romney is because he's a lying hypocrite whose views on everything from guns, to gays, to the environment, to abortion change every two years based on the political winds. Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

I decided to stop being a hermit and take the afternoon off (i.e., get out of my apartment). Went to the National Gallery of Art, the West wing (i.e., the old stuff). Hard to say what I liked the most, though the Rembrandt/Vermeer use of light is simply amazing. And I've always had a soft spot for Lautrec. These were a few of my favs:











Read the rest of this post...

Today Giuliani is for civil unions, two weeks ago he opposed them, but three weeks ago he was for them

It's all so confusing. Just two weeks ago, Rudy came out opposed to civil unions, even though he was previously for civil unions. Now today Rudy is again for civil unions. While it's nice that Rudy is finally telling the truth about his being a liberal, it's still disturbing that he's flip-flopped twice in the past two weeks on this issue. He did the same thing on abortion (the media has been paying attention to the abortion flip-flop, but missed the gay one). So which Rudy is which, why did he flip flop (twice), and how do we know he won't flip flop again when it's next convenient? I mean, the man lied to the American people during the presidential debate, got caught, and now is changing his position again as a result. Lying is kind of a big deal. Read the rest of this post...

Rudy comes out. Says that yes, he is pro-choice, pro-gay rights and pro-gun control

This pretty much takes care of Rudy's GOP chances. The right-wing Republican leaders, including like Pat Robertson, James Dobson and Wayne LaPierre from the NRA, will never, ever let Rudy lead their Republican party. And Rudy may not like it, but that's who does control the Republican Party:

Rudolph W. Giuliani sharpened his liberal credentials before a conservative crowd in Houston today, as he worked to present a more consistent platform on the campaign trail.

At an appearance at Houston Baptist University, Mr. Giuliani said that he favors abortion rights, certain restrictions on gun ownership and gay rights — he is for civil unions, he said, although not for marriage between people of the same sex.

During last week’s debate among Republicans vying for their party’s 2008 presidential nomination, the former New York City mayor was criticized for his halting and apparently contradictory responses to questions about his views on abortion rights. Critics have said that he is trying to run from a record that is much more liberal than the views of the Republican Party’s core voters on the issue.

Read the rest of this post...

Cliff's Corner

The Week That Was 5/11/07

Another week. More preposterousness to report.

This week once again proved that being a Republican means never having to say you're sorry. Whether you're The World Bank Madame, Paul Wolfowitz, still hanging onto your job by the tip of your saliva-crusted comb, an Attorney General so profoundly stupid that people are privately whispering Harrier Miers should have gotten the job or some idiot Texas Congressman quoting the founder of the Ku Klux Klan regarding the War in Iraq. Yeah, I know, I don't even have to make a joke about that last one.

Here's what else I discovered:

1) Being a Republican means you must "hate" the abortion but love the provider. It turns out Mayor Mobster-Lover and the wife he dumped on network TV gave to Planned Parenthood. As did Mrs. Romney. Oops. Kinda hurts that back story about being "personally opposed to abortion."

Meanwhile, John McCain, Sam Brownback and Fred Thompson have also flip-flopped on this issue, meaning for the National Right To Life Committee to find someone they can rely on--beyond this clique of mealy-mouthed circus clowns running for the GOP nomination--they're going to have to hope a strong whiff of embalming fluid and a promise to bring back the Three-Fifth's Compromise might just get Jesse Helms to jump into the race.

2) Being a Republican means that you're actually now motivating generals to retire so that they can do commercials pointing out your war policy sucks more than Dick Morris in a room full of Brit Hume's toes.

3) Being a Republican means that you have to create your own version of YouTube that will inevitably be hysterial, even though it's going to take more work than it did to get Mary Cheney pregnant (how DID she get pregnant?) to find anyone on your side who can come up with something remotely amusing.

4) Being a Republican means you probably voted for George W. Bush. Which means your only hope for emotional salvation is getting bitten by one of these squirrels and hoping you go quickly into that goodnight.

** Sorry a bit short my friends, manuscript due on June 1. Read the rest of this post...

"Liberal wealthy super-elites" = Jews? Gee, ya think?

The Republican party hasn't lost its ability to hate just about everybody. I had thought with all their attention of late to Muslim-bashing and gay-bashing, they'd forgotten about the Jews. But alas, no suck luck. The GOP propaganda organ, and cult-run newspaper, Washington Times has joined the recent surge of George-Soros-Jew bashing that's been on the uptick of late in the Republican party and among their surrogates (is it just a coincidence that GOP surrogate and CNN host Glenn Beck last night noted that America just can't afford a Jew as president?)

In this latest broadside in the Moonie paper, we learn that the "amoral" and "wealthy super-elite" George Soros has a "hatred of Christianity" and "control" over a vast conspiracy to take over the world.

What, no comment about his nose?

The article even attacks Atrios as part of the great Jewish conspiracy (I hear his name was Atriosowitz before he emigrated).

You can read the piece for yourself, it's equal parts bizarre (accusing MoveOn of being fringe for opposing the Iraq war (along with the overwhelming majority of the American people) and supporting John Kerry for president (along with 49% of the American people)) - yeah, pretty fringe there - and equal parts simply disgusting for its implied bigotry. At what point will Republicans learn that Jew-baiting and gay-bashing, trashing blacks and Muslims and Latinos, isn't what this country is about, and it isn't what the majority of Republicans are about?

At what point will the Republican party stand for anything more than fear? Do they have any vision for the future that doesn't include bashing someone they hate? Read the rest of this post...

Harry Reid on GOP civil war

Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid, this morning:

Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed a new Iraq Supplemental bill.

Now it is our turn in the Senate to take the next step and pass our version of the bill to conference.

We all know that reaching consensus on a new bill to send to the President will not be easy.

We all know that passions run high on this issue.

But there is new reason this week to believe that a bipartisan consensus on Iraq is emerging.

Throughout these talks with the White House and our Republican colleagues in Congress, Democrats have stood with firm resolve that we need a bill that both fully funds our troops and responsibly changes course in the war.

That is what the American people want. A new poll out this week shows that 75 percent of Americans favor benchmarks and 60 percent favor a timetable for reducing combat forces.

It is what President Bush's own military advisors say we need, including General Petraeus, who has said that this war must be won politically, not militarily.

Now, in just the last few days, we have seen our Republican colleagues tell the President that his war strategy is failing.

Over the weekend, House Minority Leader John Boehner said: "By the time we get to September or October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't, what's Plan B."

This week my colleague Senator Lott said: "This fall we have to see some significant changes on the ground."

And just days ago, Leader McConnell echoed those sentiments as well.

Meanwhile, on Wednesday a broad coalition of Republican House Members expressed their dissent directly to President.

One of them – Republican Tom Davis of Virginia – called it their chance to confront a President who, as he put it, is in a bubble.

I wish that my Republican colleagues – who now agree that President Bush's open-ended commitment has failed – would put some teeth behind their views.

With courageous American troops in harm's way every day, the time for action is long past due.

Nonetheless, this is a welcome shift. It is encouraging.

It gives me hope that in the coming days, weeks and months, we will be able to work together with good faith and bipartisanship to give our troops and all Americans the new course that they demand and deserve.

Read the rest of this post...

GOP war brewing: Rove, Cheney furious at Republican House members who met with Bush, then blabbed about it

Seems Dick and Karl are livid. The hysterical thing is that the anger is being vented at their fellow Republicans. They are losing control.

Rove's anger popped up in today's Washington Post:

White House political adviser Karl Rove, furious that Republican moderates had divulged a confrontational meeting they had on Tuesday with Bush on the war, started yesterday with an angry conversation with the meeting's organizer, Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.), according to several GOP lawmakers. Dan Meyer, the White House's chief lobbyist, called the other participants to express the administration's unhappiness.

Cheney's was broadcast on the GOP channel and picked up by the NY Times:

Some White House officials privately expressed displeasure Thursday that the concerns the Republican moderates raised with the president became public. Vice President Dick Cheney did not mince words in an interview with the Fox News Channel. “We didn’t get elected to be popular,” Mr. Cheney said. “We didn’t get elected to worry just about the fate of the Republican Party.”

GOP civil wars. This is going to be fun to watch. Read the rest of this post...

Petraeus: Don't torture cause it doesn't work. Bush should listen to him.

Since George Bush is constantly telling members of Congress and the American public to listen to General Petraeus, he should take his own advice. George Bush condones torture, but Petraeus says don't do it, it's illegal and it doesn't work:

The U.S. military commander in Iraq told his troops to fight by the rules after a Pentagon survey found many soldiers and Marines back torture and would not report colleagues for killing or injuring civilians.

"This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we -- not our enemies -- occupy the moral high ground," General David Petraeus wrote in a letter dated May 10.

Petraeus, who took command in February to oversee a troop "surge" aimed at securing Baghdad, said the argument that torture can elicit quick information was "wrong".

"Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful or necessary," he said in the one-page letter, which was obtained by Reuters.

Read the rest of this post...

Pope says Catholic politicians better do what he says, or else

So tell me again why it's not okay for us to inquire about the religion of our judges and politicians when they may very well be trying to impose their religion on the rest of us? The Pope said it. Don't do what he says and you're ex-communicated. That's blackmail. And it raises the questions of whether our politicians are doing the bidding of the American people or their respective churches. We have a separation of church and state in this country, and just as importantly, we have freedom of religion. If a politician of a particular faith plans on trying to force his faith down the throats of the rest of us, we have a right to know. Read the rest of this post...

Friday Morning Open Thread

Friday. Finally. Long week. Read the rest of this post...

"Multiple Choice Mitt" Romney blasted by the right

Tough times for Mitt who is just so eager to please everyone, changing his core values every election and now his new friends on the extreme right are calling him "multiple choice Mitt" and questioning his changing positions. And I thought it was going to be such a happy new friendship. It's no wonder he's so desperate to change the subject. Read the rest of this post...

USDA in talks to allow poultry from China to be sold in US

From one bad idea to another. Who needs regulation anyway?

In China, some farmers try to maximize the output from their small plots by flooding produce with unapproved pesticides, pumping livestock with antibiotics banned in the United States, and using human feces as fertilizer to boost soil productivity. But the questionable practices don't end there: Chicken pens are frequently suspended over ponds where seafood is raised, recycling chicken waste as a food source for seafood, according to a leading food safety expert who served as a federal adviser to the Food and Drug Administration.

Mmmmm, dig in! The Bush team continues to cook up some excellent policy. Read the rest of this post...