Lamont on the Colbert Report in a few.
...video at C&L.
Monday, July 31, 2006
How Joe Went Wrong
This Salon article is quite good. And after you click through the damn ad and read it you can see Tom Tomorrow's latest.
Yuk Yuk
Joe's best friend makes him laugh.
(the video is labelled incorrectly. it was actually the 2004 Radio and Television Correspondents' Dinner.)
(the video is labelled incorrectly. it was actually the 2004 Radio and Television Correspondents' Dinner.)
The Rule of Law
Ah, I miss the good old days when the nation the elite beltway chatters were convinced the fate of the Republic might depend on which telephone Al Gore used to make fundraising calls...
...er, this is actually what I meant to link to.
...er, this is actually what I meant to link to.
Does This Make Any Sense?
Al Hunt gives us the latest defend-Lieberman-at-any-cost column. But I have no idea what this even means:
Can anyone decipher this?
``A Lieberman loss is very bad for Democrats; it says we are one dimension on Iraq,'' says Peter Hart, a top Democratic polltaker. ``Politically, Iraq should be a debate about the Bush administration. A Lieberman defeat detracts from that.''
Can anyone decipher this?
They Write Letters
Democratic Leaders write to President Bush:
The President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. President:
While the world has been focused on the crisis in the Middle East, Iraq has exploded in violence. Some 6,000 Iraqis were killed in May and June, and sectarian and insurgent violence continues to claim American and Iraqi lives at an alarming rate. In the face of this onslaught, one can only conclude that the Baghdad security plan you announced five weeks ago is in great jeopardy.
Despite the latest evidence that your Administration lacks a coherent strategy to stabilize Iraq and achieve victory, there has been virtually no diplomatic effort to resolve sectarian differences, no regional effort to establish a broader security framework, and no attempt to revive a struggling reconstruction effort. Instead, we learned of your plans to redeploy an additional 5,000 U.S. troops into an urban war zone in Baghdad. Far from implementing a comprehensive "Strategy for Victory" as you promised months ago, your Administration=' strategy appears to be one of trying to avoid defeat.
Meanwhile, U.S. troops and taxpayers continue to pay a high price as your Administration searches for a policy. Over 2,500 Americans have made the ultimate sacrifice and over 18,000 others have been wounded. The Iraq war has also strained our military and constrained our ability to deal with other challenges. Readiness levels for the Army are at lows not seen since Vietnam, as virtually no active Army non-deployed combat brigade is prepared to perform its wartime missions. American taxpayers have already contributed over $300 billion and each week we stay in Iraq adds nearly $3 billion more to our record budget deficit.
In the interests of American national security, our troops, and our taxpayers, the open-ended commitment in Iraq that you have embraced cannot and should not be sustained.
Rather, we continue to believe that it is time for Iraqis to step forward and take the lead for securing and governing their own country. This is the principle enshrined in the "United States Policy in Iraq Act" enacted last year. This law declares 2006 to be a year of "significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and sovereign Iraq, thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq." Regrettably, your policy seems to be moving in the opposite direction.
This legislation made clear that Iraqi political leaders must be informed that American patience, blood and treasure are not unlimited. We were disappointed that you did not convey this message to Prime Minister Maliki during his recent visit. Reducing the U.S. footprint in Iraq will not only give the Iraqis a greater incentive to take the lead for the security of their own nation, but will also allow U.S. forces to be able to respond to contingencies affecting the security of the United States elsewhere in the world.
We believe that a phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq should begin before the end of 2006. U.S. forces in Iraq should transition to a more limited mission focused on counterterrorism, training and logistical support of Iraqi security forces, and force protection of U.S. personnel.
Additionally, every effort should be made to urge the Iraqis to take the steps necessary to achieve a broad-based and sustainable political settlement, including amending the constitution to achieve a fair sharing of power and resources. It is also essential to disarm the militias and ensure forces loyal to the national government. Finally, an international conference should be convened to persuade other governments to be more involved, and to secure the resources necessary to finance Iraq's reconstruction and rebuild its economy.
Mr. President, simply staying the course in Iraq is not working. We need to take a new direction. We believe these recommendations comprise an effective alternative to the current open-ended commitment which is not producing the progress in Iraq we would all like to see. Thank you for your careful consideration of these suggestions.
Harry Reid, Senate Democratic Leader
Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic Leader
Dick Durbin, Senate Assistant Democratic Leader
Steny Hoyer, House Minority Whip
Carl Levin, Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services Committee
Ike Skelton, Ranking Member, House Armed Services Committee
Joe Biden, Ranking Member, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Tom Lantos, Ranking Member, House International Relations Committee
Jay Rockefeller, Vice Chairman, Senate Intelligence Committee
Jane Harman, Ranking Member, House Intelligence Committee
Daniel Inouye, Ranking Member, Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee
John Murtha, Ranking Member, House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee
What's the Matter With South Dakota?
Come November, we may find that it's doing okay (from emailed press release):
Sioux Falls, SD – Today the Argus Leader and KELO TV released poll results indicating that voters are likely to reject the restrictive abortion ban signed into law by Governor Mike Rounds earlier this year. The Mason Dixon poll sampled 800 registered voters and found that 47% plan to vote No on Referred Law 6 in November, while 39% of respondents would uphold the abortion ban.
“We are pleased with the results of the poll,” commented Jan Nicolay, co-chairperson for the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families. “Earlier this spring, a large group of volunteers made sure that the voters of South Dakota would have a chance to decide this extremely important issue. This poll is confirmation that the ban is too restrictive and goes too far. However, between now and November, we still have a lot of work to do to defeat the national extremist groups who have taken over our State Government.”
“South Dakotans think this ban is too restrictive and their legislators and Governor have misrepresented them in Pierre. With the continued support of our volunteers across the state, we are confident the ban will be overturned in November.”
Happy Evan Bayh Day
About two months ago - One Bayh, to be exact - Evan Bayh suggested that we need to wait and see a little bit longer on Iraq, and if things aren't working out swimmingly "we're out." He didn't provide precise conditions, leaving him room to wiggle out, but here's what was said:
Again, it's not really clear what conditions he was imposing, but presumably it involved the Iraqi government getting their shit together and making things better.
Since then Iraq has become the forgotten war, but things are not in fact going swimmingly.
Perhaps a reporter should ask Bayh if it's time to get out.
Calling it “the biggest political and military blunder of my lifetime,” Sturgeon said to Bayh, “I’d like you to explain your vote on the war and why you gave the president a blank check to get us into this disaster.”
Bayh calmly answered that “I wouldn’t cast the same vote today as I did then.” He noted that “the French believed that (there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq), the Germans believed that, the Russians believed that, everybody believed he [Saddam Hussein] had weapons of mass destruction.”
Bayh said if the Iraqi factions “get their political act together — and we will know this in the next six to eight weeks… if they can form a government… then there’s something to work with there.” If not, then “we’re out.”
Again, it's not really clear what conditions he was imposing, but presumably it involved the Iraqi government getting their shit together and making things better.
Since then Iraq has become the forgotten war, but things are not in fact going swimmingly.
BAGHDAD (AP) - Gunmen kidnapped 29 people in Baghdad on Monday, while Iraq's latest wave of violence killed 27 people, including four Iraqi soldiers in a suicide bombing.
The interior minister faced calls for his dismissal because of the worsening security crisis in Baghdad and surrounding towns, mostly blamed on sectarian conflict between Shiites and Sunnis.
The Iraqi government said Monday that 30,359 families have fled their homes to escape sectarian violence from mid-February through July 30 - roughly 182,000 people. Baghdad accounted for the highest number of displaced.
Gunmen in military fatigues drove to the main shopping area of Karrada in 15 vehicles and split into two groups, one going into a mobile phone shop and the other into the office next door of the Iraqi-American Chamber of Commerce, said police Lieut. Thair Mahmoud.
They kidnapped 15 staff and customers from the shop and 11 from the chamber, he said. All were believed to be Iraqis. No other details were available.
Perhaps a reporter should ask Bayh if it's time to get out.
4,000
Lieberman's hiring a huge ground force, though he's doing it stupidly.
Communicate with your friends and family.
Invite your friends and family to reach out to their friends and family.
Contact the campaign to help.
Communicate with your friends and family.
Invite your friends and family to reach out to their friends and family.
Contact the campaign to help.
Checklist Liberalism
Mark Schmitt writes:
I think he's really hitting on some important here. Recently a congressional staffer was complaining about the fact that us blogofascists spend too much time criticizing Dems instead of going after Republicans, especially since the conservative wankosphere almost never criticizes their own. While there's perhaps some merit to that general complaint, I responded that Democrats aren't really used to getting criticism from their left. He looked at me like I was nuts and said they get it all the time from interest groups.
That's true, but it is a very different kind of criticism. It's a known dance. They know what the interest groups want, and know what they have to do to satisfy them, or not. Also, the interest group criticism doesn't really get into the media bloodstream, it comes mostly in private other than affecting endorsements.
The bankruptcy bill is the perfect example of legislation no one claiming to be a Democrat should support, and more than that one that every good Democrat should have opposed by any means at their disposable (including filibuster, Joe). It's the kind of legislation which is often marked as "centrist" by the media, as it's supported by a coalition of evil Republicans and self-described "moderate" Democrats, but there's nothing centrist or moderate about it. Unlike some other awful Republican legislation which conservatives have been trained to support (any tax cut, tort reform...) there was no popular support for this bill. It was a complete givewaway. It was just stealing from people and giving to campaign donors.
Failing to oppose the bankruptcy bill is one of the reasons brand Democrat has such problems. It's the type of thing which shouldn't require outside pressure. The bill was wrong. Everybody knows that. It was an evil sadistic piece of legislation which will destroy lives. Good Democrats shouldn't have needed to be pushed to oppose it.
On the Senate side, Democrats who voted for it:
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Byrd
Carper
Conrad
Inouye
Johnson
Kohl
Landrieu
Lincoln
Nelson
Nelson
Pryor
Reid
Salazar
Stabenow
Shame on them.
...adding, missed Bingaman.
But it’s not working. Why? Two reasons: One of course is that Iraq, and the constellation of foreign policy and security failures it represents really is huge. And while Democrats can accept a fairly wide range of viewpoints, roughly from Biden’s make-it-work to Murtha’s get-out-now, only Lieberman’s stay-the-course is ridiculous. It’s pretty difficult to look at ANWR and Iraq and conclude that a good position on ANWR more than offsets a bad one on Iraq. (Especially if there’s no reason to think that Ned Lamont has a different position on ANWR or the other three buttons.)
The second reason is that Lamont supporters actually aren’t ideologues. They aren’t looking for the party to be more liberal on traditional dimensions. They’re looking for it to be more of a party. They want to put issues on the table that don’t have an interest group behind them - like Lieberman’s support for the bankruptcy bill -- because they are part of a broader vision. And I think that’s what blows the mind of the traditional Dems. They can handle a challenge from the left, on predictable, narrow-constituency terms. But where do these other issues come from? These are “elitist insurgents,” as Broder puts it - since when do they care about bankruptcy? What if all of a sudden you couldn’t count on Democratic women just because you said that right things about choice - what if they started to vote on the whole range of issues that affect women’s economic and personal opportunities?
But caring about bankruptcy, even if you’re not teetering on the brink of it or a bankruptcy lawyer yourself, is part of a vision of a just society. And a vision of a just society - not just the single-issue push-buttons of a bunch of constituency groups - is what a center-left political party ought to be about. And at the end of this fight, I don’t expect that we’ll have a more leftist Democratic Party, but one that can at least begin to get beyond checklist liberalism.
I think he's really hitting on some important here. Recently a congressional staffer was complaining about the fact that us blogofascists spend too much time criticizing Dems instead of going after Republicans, especially since the conservative wankosphere almost never criticizes their own. While there's perhaps some merit to that general complaint, I responded that Democrats aren't really used to getting criticism from their left. He looked at me like I was nuts and said they get it all the time from interest groups.
That's true, but it is a very different kind of criticism. It's a known dance. They know what the interest groups want, and know what they have to do to satisfy them, or not. Also, the interest group criticism doesn't really get into the media bloodstream, it comes mostly in private other than affecting endorsements.
The bankruptcy bill is the perfect example of legislation no one claiming to be a Democrat should support, and more than that one that every good Democrat should have opposed by any means at their disposable (including filibuster, Joe). It's the kind of legislation which is often marked as "centrist" by the media, as it's supported by a coalition of evil Republicans and self-described "moderate" Democrats, but there's nothing centrist or moderate about it. Unlike some other awful Republican legislation which conservatives have been trained to support (any tax cut, tort reform...) there was no popular support for this bill. It was a complete givewaway. It was just stealing from people and giving to campaign donors.
Failing to oppose the bankruptcy bill is one of the reasons brand Democrat has such problems. It's the type of thing which shouldn't require outside pressure. The bill was wrong. Everybody knows that. It was an evil sadistic piece of legislation which will destroy lives. Good Democrats shouldn't have needed to be pushed to oppose it.
On the Senate side, Democrats who voted for it:
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Byrd
Carper
Conrad
Inouye
Johnson
Kohl
Landrieu
Lincoln
Nelson
Nelson
Pryor
Reid
Salazar
Stabenow
Shame on them.
...adding, missed Bingaman.
Why?
I'm not posting this to be critical. I'm genuinely perplexed. Why do some people like Lieberman? What, really, is there to like about the guy?
...oops, Stoller got there before I did.
...oops, Stoller got there before I did.
Josh Marshall keeps talking about how much he likes Lieberman, what a nice guy he is and was, and how loved he was. The narrative seems to be that this guy fell from grace, a wonderful and brilliant man beloved by all who changed recently and suddenly, becoming out of touch and angry. I've heard it said that he is by far our smartest Senator, traditionally with the best and most loyal staff on the Hill.
Maybe it's because I'm inexperienced in politics, but I don't get this at all. Lieberman's justification of torture is just a flashing red light that this guy has no moral center. But Josh isn't the only one talking as if Lieberman were once Ghandi; it's a trend among men I know that are in their thirties or above, and had a strong connection to the political establishment prior to 2001.
Speaking of Bouncing
While Stoller's slogan needs a bit of work, the basic point stands. Republicans must be waking up every day thank Jeebus for the fact that the Democrats haven't bothered to notice that everybody hates George Bush.
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Mel
Ah, what can I say.
Aside from maybe, just maybe, spelling it out so clearly that idiots in the mainstream media will stop pretending otherwise I guess I didn't find Gibson's little outburst all that interesting. He laid it out nice and clearly awhile back, and everyone agreed not to notice. I'm not sure if Holocaust Denial is perfectly correlated with anti-Semitism, but it's close enough not to need to draw a distinction. Maybe lots of his best friends are Jewish, but Gibson made his holocaust denial (minimizing, to be exact, but it's all part of the same thing) perfectly clear to Magic Dolphin Lady Noonan.
As I wrote previously:
Aside from maybe, just maybe, spelling it out so clearly that idiots in the mainstream media will stop pretending otherwise I guess I didn't find Gibson's little outburst all that interesting. He laid it out nice and clearly awhile back, and everyone agreed not to notice. I'm not sure if Holocaust Denial is perfectly correlated with anti-Semitism, but it's close enough not to need to draw a distinction. Maybe lots of his best friends are Jewish, but Gibson made his holocaust denial (minimizing, to be exact, but it's all part of the same thing) perfectly clear to Magic Dolphin Lady Noonan.
As I wrote previously:
Holocaust deniers for the most part don't claim that it was entirely fiction. What they do is say that the numbers and intention were exaggerated, that World War II was a tragedy all around and the holocaust happened in the context of a war in which lots of people were killed. In other words, yeah some people died but it wasn't the big deal everyone makes it out to be. And, that's precisely what Gibson said to Peggy Noonan:
I have friends and parents of friends who have numbers on their arms. The guy who taught me Spanish was a Holocaust survivor. He worked in a concentration camp in France. Yes, of course. Atrocities happened. War is horrible. The Second World War killed tens of millions of people. Some of them were Jews in concentration camps. Many people lost their lives. In the Ukraine, several million starved to death between 1932 and 1933. During the last century, 20 million people died in the Soviet Union.
As David Neiwert wrote:
It's important, of course, to understand that this is exactly the storyline pushed by Holocaust deniers, namely, that yes, there were many Jews killed in Europe during World War II, but they were only a small part of the total who died in the war, and the "6 million" number is grossly exaggerated. Not only is this exactly what Hutton Gibson told the New York Times, you can find the exact same views at such Holocaust-denial organs as the Barnes Review, the Institute for Historical Review, and the Adelaide Institute.
There's no conflict between creating a miniseries based on a novel which takes place in the context of the holocaust and being what we call "holocaust deniers."
Could Be Worse
I know nothing of Jared Kushner, but prompted by Drudge who sez:
I decided to see which team he played for. Could be worse.
REPORT: A 25-year-old law student has bought the NEW YORK OBSERVER... MORE...
Jared Kushner, son of Charles Kushner, a once prominent but now disgraced New Jersey real estate developer, has bought the paper...
Kushner is independently wealthy, paid under $10 million for the salmon-colored sheet... Developing...
I decided to see which team he played for. Could be worse.
Time for Another Blogger Ethics Panel
You mean people in Washington sometimes have financial conflicts of interest which aren't always clearly disclosed? I'm just shocked. I'm sure no journalists are aware of this stuff either.
One Biden
Apparently it's equal to five years.
"We" are not there. "We" are not dying. Those serving the armed forces and obeying the military command, Don Rumsfeld, and CiC George W. Bush are.
To build something that can outlast us, we're talking about being there at least another five years," says Sen. Joseph Biden, who returned from his seventh trip to Iraq in July. "If we were doing it well and we had a little luck, we could be there in a circumstance where we are not dying but we are spending."
"We" are not there. "We" are not dying. Those serving the armed forces and obeying the military command, Don Rumsfeld, and CiC George W. Bush are.
Meanwhile
In the forgotten war Joe Lieberman doesn't want to talk about anymore:
*BAGHDAD - Four marines were killed in action in restive Anbar province, the U.S. military said on Sunday. The marines, assigned to Regimental Combat Team 7, died on Saturday.
*YUSUFIYA - Two people were killed and three wounded when gunmen attacked a minibus in Yusufiya, 15 km (9 miles) south west of Baghdad, a police source said.
BAGHDAD - Three suspected insurgents died and a fourth person was wounded in an explosion in a house that an interior ministry source said was being used as a factory for homemade bombs.
BAIJI - A policeman was shot dead by gunmen in the oil refinery city of Baiji, 180 km (112 miles) north of Baghdad, police said.
NEAR TUZ KHURMATU - Kidnappers killed a policeman and a civilian after snatching seven people in an ambulance near Tuz Khurmatu, 70 km south of Kirkuk, on Saturday evening. The five others, including a second policeman, were released after being tortured, the police said.
BAGHDAD - Iraq's oil pipeline to Turkey has been fixed and exports will be resumed to the port of Ceyhan at a rate of 600,000-700,000 barrels per day, Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani said. A senior oil ministry official said pumping would start within a few days.
BAGHDAD - Police said they found 15 bodies in different parts of the capital, all bearing signs of torture and shot in the head.
Damned Dirty Hippies
Like Digby I'm extremely tired of - and puzzled by - a bunch of clueless old men seeing politics solely through the lens of their political formative years.
As usual the Lamont blog has a great roundup of Joe stuff, but I was actually most struck by this nugget from Lieberman:
One of the standard lines about Lieberman from his supporters is to point to his support for the civil rights movement and his opposition to the Vietnam war as reasons to support him, as if what he did 40 years ago is more important than what he's doing now. This Washington Post article says:
I'm not entirely sure what Lieberman is saying now, but the only rational interpretation I can take is that the problem with the Vietnam war - which he once opposed - was that the public turned against it, and not with, you know, the war itself.
Wow.
As usual the Lamont blog has a great roundup of Joe stuff, but I was actually most struck by this nugget from Lieberman:
His upbeat article would be published in the Wall Street Journal under the headline, "Our Troops Must Stay," contradicting the dramatic call days earlier by U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., for the withdrawal of U.S. troops.
And so ended any chance for Lieberman, 64, a three-term senator, to have his usual easy conversation with Connecticut voters about his re-election.
Today, with nine days left until his Aug. 8 primary with anti-war challenger Ned Lamont, Lieberman is scrambling to regain his footing among Democrats who repeatedly signaled their anger over the war - only to be ignored.
Public and private polling told Lieberman in January that Democrats were abandoning him over his efforts to prop up public support for an unpopular war that was paralyzing the Bush administration and jeopardizing the GOP's control of Congress.
But Lieberman persisted.
"I was worried about a repeat of Vietnam," he said Friday during an interview aboard his campaign bus. "Public opinion was moving away from supporting the war for reasons that were understandable, but not complete."
One of the standard lines about Lieberman from his supporters is to point to his support for the civil rights movement and his opposition to the Vietnam war as reasons to support him, as if what he did 40 years ago is more important than what he's doing now. This Washington Post article says:
Lieberman broke into politics as a reformist who opposed the war in Vietnam, and he won a state Senate seat in New Haven in 1970 with the help of, among others, Bill Clinton, who was a student volunteer at Yale Law.
I'm not entirely sure what Lieberman is saying now, but the only rational interpretation I can take is that the problem with the Vietnam war - which he once opposed - was that the public turned against it, and not with, you know, the war itself.
Wow.
Slightly Deranged
Zakaria is right. Rumsfeld's a loon and it's time a few more people said so.
We can't count on the junior senator from Connecticut to do so. His view:
That was in 2004. As far as I know he still hasn't seen "any good reason" for Rumsfeld to resign, even though his senior colleague certainly has.
We can't count on the junior senator from Connecticut to do so. His view:
We're in the middle of a war — you wouldn't want to have the secretary of defense change unless there's really good reason for it and I don't see any good reason at this time.
That was in 2004. As far as I know he still hasn't seen "any good reason" for Rumsfeld to resign, even though his senior colleague certainly has.
Unity
There's a very creepy trend out there. It's driven by a combination of arrogance and elitism and it also has a strong authoritarian streak to it. We get the latest version of it from (no surprise) the idiotic Moose:
Basically there are people who imagine that there is a supermajority political consensus in this country which is shattered by nasty partisanship from politicians. There's a belief that fundamental disagreements about how this country should be run come not from voters but from politicians.
Magically, of course, this imagined supermajority political consensus always seems to match perfectly with the personal political views of the person calling for unity. And, unsurprisingly, it tends to roughly match up with the basic worldview of the Washington Post editorial board.
It's authoritarian because it calls for conformity and brands dissenters as the problem. Get on board the unity bus, they say, can't we all get along. That's what the nation needs. Stop your nasty disagreements, and let my team rule without criticism.
For all his railings about the blogosphere, the Bullshit Moose is about the most unhinged blogger there is. He's troubled by disagreement, especially anyone who disagrees with him. He assumes their motives, unlike his, are impure and base (odd for someone who has made his living getting paid to agree with other people, from the Christian Coalition to the Heritage Foundation to John McCain), while he transcends all that petty nonsense with his vision of a shining country on a hill. It isn't just him, of course. This basic view is possessed by many members of the elite chattering class. It's quite disturbing.
“Both of them realize there is a desire in the country for a different politics of national unity that transcends the current polarization,” Mr. Wittman said.
At the same time, both have endured serious presidential campaigns before and market themselves as independent power brokers within their parties.
“That’s their great commonality,” Mr. Wittman said. “Obviously, if they faced each other in a general, they would emphasize their differences.”
Basically there are people who imagine that there is a supermajority political consensus in this country which is shattered by nasty partisanship from politicians. There's a belief that fundamental disagreements about how this country should be run come not from voters but from politicians.
Magically, of course, this imagined supermajority political consensus always seems to match perfectly with the personal political views of the person calling for unity. And, unsurprisingly, it tends to roughly match up with the basic worldview of the Washington Post editorial board.
It's authoritarian because it calls for conformity and brands dissenters as the problem. Get on board the unity bus, they say, can't we all get along. That's what the nation needs. Stop your nasty disagreements, and let my team rule without criticism.
For all his railings about the blogosphere, the Bullshit Moose is about the most unhinged blogger there is. He's troubled by disagreement, especially anyone who disagrees with him. He assumes their motives, unlike his, are impure and base (odd for someone who has made his living getting paid to agree with other people, from the Christian Coalition to the Heritage Foundation to John McCain), while he transcends all that petty nonsense with his vision of a shining country on a hill. It isn't just him, of course. This basic view is possessed by many members of the elite chattering class. It's quite disturbing.
NYT for Lamont
Here it is:
On the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Lieberman has left it to Republicans like Lindsey Graham of South Carolina to investigate the administration’s actions. In 2004, Mr. Lieberman praised Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for expressing regret about Abu Ghraib, then added: “I cannot help but say, however, that those who were responsible for killing 3,000 Americans on September 11th, 2001, never apologized.” To suggest even rhetorically that the American military could be held to the same standard of behavior as terrorists is outrageous, and a good example of how avidly the senator has adopted the Bush spin and helped the administration avoid accounting for Abu Ghraib.
Mr. Lieberman prides himself on being a legal thinker and a champion of civil liberties. But he appointed himself defender of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and the administration’s policy of holding hundreds of foreign citizens in prison without any due process. He seconded Mr. Gonzales’s sneering reference to the “quaint” provisions of the Geneva Conventions. He has shown no interest in prodding his Republican friends into investigating how the administration misled the nation about Iraq’s weapons. There is no use having a senator famous for getting along with Republicans if he never challenges them on issues of profound importance.
If Mr. Lieberman had once stood up and taken the lead in saying that there were some places a president had no right to take his country even during a time of war, neither he nor this page would be where we are today. But by suggesting that there is no principled space for that kind of opposition, he has forfeited his role as a conscience of his party, and has forfeited our support.
Mr. Lamont, a wealthy businessman from Greenwich, seems smart and moderate, and he showed spine in challenging the senator while other Democrats groused privately. He does not have his opponent’s grasp of policy yet. But this primary is not about Mr. Lieberman’s legislative record. Instead it has become a referendum on his warped version of bipartisanship, in which the never-ending war on terror becomes an excuse for silence and inaction. We endorse Ned Lamont in the Democratic primary for Senate in Connecticut.
One of the Gang
Not enough has been said recently about Lieberman's membership in the "gang of 14," a bipartisan group of Republcian bullies and Democratic losers. Basically the Democrats in this group endorsed the very important principle put forth by the Republicans that the Republicans had the right to cheat. The principled Democrats in the gang managed to get the very important compromise which basically got the Republicans to promise to not cheat as long as the Democrats didn't give them a reason to ever want to.
Some principles.
Losers.
Some principles.
Losers.
Morning Thread
Apologies. The truck that brings the internets to my house had a flat tire, so I had to get up and head to a local coffee shop.
Saturday, July 29, 2006
More Instawanker
Josh Marshall responds here. And as Greg reminds me, Reynolds has done something similar to me a few times by suggesting that I'd advocate the nuking of Iran. The basis for that was back when Iran was frightening all the cowardly warbloggers I attempted to explain that if Iran got a nuke they'd be rather unlikely to use one as if they did they would cease to exist. This was not an endorsement of such a policy, though I do endorse the policy of everyone believing it's our policy as I think given we have all these nice nuclear missiles it's useful to actually exploit their deterrent effect. I hope we're never tested on what our actual response to nuclear terrorism is no matter who is to blame, both because I hope nuclear terrorism never happens to us and becaue I don't really want to have to actually consider what the appropriate response to such an event would be.
America the Fringe
52% of people want all troops out of Iraq in a year.
What percent of members of the punditocracy have expressed that opinion?
Who's elitist and out of touch?
What percent of members of the punditocracy have expressed that opinion?
Who's elitist and out of touch?
Holy Crap
If Ad Nags is correct then the blogofascists have taken over the New York Times.
(tip from P O'Neill)
[The New York Times, in an editorial published on Sunday, endorsed Mr. Lamont over Mr. Lieberman, arguing that the senator had offered the nation a “warped version of bipartisanship” in his dealings with President Bush on national security.]
(tip from P O'Neill)
Don't Talk About the War
Perhaps Marshall Wittman can explain this one to me, if he can pull himself away from his John McCain shrine for a moment. Lieberman, as those in the Lieberman wing of the Democratic party will tell us, is the kind of Democrat we should embrace in large part because of his hawkish or muscular or visionary or whatever we're calling it this week foreign policy. To win, Democrats need to embrace such foreign policy leaders.
Fine, fine. But if that's the case, why won't Joe talk about the war? If he's the foreign policy leader we're supposed to embrace, why won't he, you know, lead on the damn issue?
I just don't understand.
Fine, fine. But if that's the case, why won't Joe talk about the war? If he's the foreign policy leader we're supposed to embrace, why won't he, you know, lead on the damn issue?
I just don't understand.
Housing
It really could be the perfect storm hitting the economy. The housing market, combined with extravagant federal government spending, has really kept the economy going these past few years. It's done so both by providing a lot of construction jobs and also by providing people with easy credit as they pull equity out of their homes. With the construction market slowing down there are going to be a lot of out of work skilled workers whose skills won't necessarily get them jobs in other sectors. With stagnant or falling home prices people won't have that easy credit anymore. And, with ARMs and no interest loans set to reset in a massive wave soon...
WHEEEEEEEEE
WHEEEEEEEEE
Exterminating the Brutes
And we get back there again. Every time they worry they're going to lose their little game of risk, they dream of dropping a basketball on the board to end the game.
Friday, July 28, 2006
Joe Sez: Screw Labor?
I almost mentioned this in the post below but then I thought the little thingy to the left of the top star might be the union bug (graphic wasn't good enough quality to tell for sure). If it isn't, then those unions should consider rescinding their endorsements.
It's a small thing, but an easy thing. An expected thing.
It's a small thing, but an easy thing. An expected thing.
Clenis
So, Lieberman's basing his entire campaign on how much the Clenis likes him. Aside from the obvious irony given Lieberman's past I suppose we should enjoy a candidate trying to win a race based on the amount of manlove he's received.
Wanker of the Day
Lee Siegel, a New Republic writer who blames bloggers for the ongoing war in Iraq.
I killed JFK, too. True story.
I killed JFK, too. True story.
Stalin
I've been out all day so maybe I'ved missed it, but I don't see that any of the new stories have pointed out why Dean would've compared Harris to Stalin. Josh Marshall says he's confused. It's obviously a reference to the (possibly apocryphal?) Stalin quote:
Anyway, it's generally bad form to compare people to mass murdering dictators, but that clearly wasn't the point of the comparison...
It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.
Anyway, it's generally bad form to compare people to mass murdering dictators, but that clearly wasn't the point of the comparison...
Atrios Memorial Thread
Atrios must have been one of those who according to Dear Leader are "on the TV screens" and "ask questions about, well, you know, this, that or the other."
So they've taken him to GITMO or something.
Until he returns...
OPEN THREAD!
So they've taken him to GITMO or something.
Until he returns...
OPEN THREAD!
YEEEEAAAARGH
Krugman:
Whatever the reason, the fact is that the Bush administration continues to be remarkably successful at rewriting history. For example, Mr. Bush has repeatedly suggested that the United States had to invade Iraq because Saddam wouldn’t let U.N. inspectors in. His most recent statement to that effect was only a few weeks ago. And he gets away with it. If there have been reports by major news organizations pointing out that that’s not at all what happened, I’ve missed them.
It’s all very Orwellian, of course. But when Orwell wrote of “a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past,” he was thinking of totalitarian states. Who would have imagined that history would prove so easy to rewrite in a democratic nation with a free press?
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Leadership
One of the enduring mysteries of our times is why people who have shown either no leadership, or even absolutely disastrous judgment, on foriegn policy issues are still given credit for being important foreign policy voices. One can find many partial explanations for this phenomenon, but even those can't explain the odd case of Joe Lieberman.
The war in Iraq is the issue of our time. Where's Lieberman on the issue? What does he think we should do about it?
On his campaign website he offers no information.
Leadership.
The war in Iraq is the issue of our time. Where's Lieberman on the issue? What does he think we should do about it?
On his campaign website he offers no information.
Leadership.
Reason for Optimism
This poll of competitive House districts does provide a bit of good news for the day. Most encouraging is that even when the candidates' actual names are provided the numbers are almost the same as for the generic congressional ballot.
But, they can't do it alone. Please consider giving to one of these fine candidates or any of your personal favorites.
Local people can attend an inexpensive fundraiser for Patrick Murphy today.
But, they can't do it alone. Please consider giving to one of these fine candidates or any of your personal favorites.
Local people can attend an inexpensive fundraiser for Patrick Murphy today.
Lonely Joe
I don't think Lieberman's going to get Rummy's job. From what I understand there were serious negotiations between the camps in late 2004 about that, though why they fell apart I do not know. I just can't see Bush giving him the job now and as much as I don't like Lieberman I can't imagine he'd really be stupid enough to take it.
Meanwhile
In the forgotten war:
BAGHDAD - The toll from a car bombing and mortar attacks in central Baghdad climbed to at least 27 people killed and 101 wounded, Ministry of Interior sources said.
Smart Republicans
They know the dynamic:
As long as we continue taking the sage advice from Christian Coalition-Heritage Foundation-McCain Staffer Marshall Wittman they can continue their restful sleep.
The White House sees the risk but is banking, in part, on the Democrats' history of not capitalizing on such moments.
As long as we continue taking the sage advice from Christian Coalition-Heritage Foundation-McCain Staffer Marshall Wittman they can continue their restful sleep.
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Car
Who amongst us does not enjoy a little nookie in the car?
I think his issue is not waiting until sunset.
Norm Coleman Sr., the father of Minnesota's junior senator, was cited for lewd and disorderly conduct Tuesday after police officers reported finding him engaged in a sex act in a car near a pizzeria on E. 7th St. in St. Paul.
A police report said officers were called to Savoy Inn at 7:40 p.m. to investigate a report that two people were having sex in a car. The police report stated a woman, Patrizia Marie Schrag, 38, also was cited for lewd and disorderly conduct.
The elder Coleman, 81, raised his son in New York City. He has since moved to Minnesota, and public records indicate he lives in St. Paul.
Sen. Coleman issued the a statement after learning of the citation against his father.
"I love my father dearly," the senator said. "I do not condone his actions or behavior, and I am deeply disturbed by what I have learned. He clearly has some issues that need to be dealt with, and I will encourage him to seek the necessary help."
I think his issue is not waiting until sunset.
My Hands Are Tied
As Froomkin notes, even the White House is starting to acknowledge that our troops are just caught in the middle of the crossfire.
President Bush and national security adviser Stephen Hadley yesterday for the first time publicly acknowledged the momentous shift in the role for U.S. troops in Iraq, from fighting terrorists to trying to suppress religious violence.
This sea change was described in such understated terms that it was eclipsed by news about the crisis in Lebanon. Bush described a change in tactics; Hadley called it a repositioning.
But it's a historic admission: That job one for many American troops in Iraq is no longer fighting al-Qaeda terrorists, or even insurgents. Rather, it is trying to quell an incipient -- if not already raging -- sectarian civil war, with Baghdad as ground zero.
Arguably, that's been the case for quite a while. But having the White House own up to it is a very big deal.
As things stand now, an overwhelming majority of the American public no longer supports Bush's handling of the war, which they think was a mistake in the first place. A majority wants American troops to start coming home soon. What unqualified support there is for the war seems to come from people who believe it is central front in the war on terror.
Blogola
Hey, we've found an actual example of undisclosed blogola, unsurpisingly from a right winger who was oh so upset by the fully disclosed relationship between Kos and the Dean campaign.
Full disclosure: I met Patrick once.
Full disclosure: I met Patrick once.
The Big Gay Clenis
As we always must remind people, the problem isn't that an Ann Coulter type person exists, the problem is that respectable news outlets treat her as a serious news person. Watch Amy Robach take very seriously Coulter's theories about Bill Clinton's sexuality.
Lies and the Lying Liars
Oooh, just feel that straight talk from Saint McCain.
Call McCain's offices and ask them if his ignorance or deception about this issue means he's unqualified to lead. Ask if he intends to apologize to those who smeared.
241 Russell Senate Ofc. Bldg.
United States Senate
, Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-2235
Fax: (202) 228-2862
Phoenix
5353 North 16th Street
Suite 105
Phoenix, Arizona 85016
Phone: (602) 952-2410
Fax: (602) 952-8702
Tempe
4703 S. Lakeshore Drive
Suite 1
Tempe, Arizona 85282
Phone: (480) 897-6289
Fax: (480) 897-8389
Tucson
407 W. Congress Street
Suite 103
Tucson, Arizona 85701
Phone: (520) 670-6334
Fax: (520) 670-6637
Call McCain's offices and ask them if his ignorance or deception about this issue means he's unqualified to lead. Ask if he intends to apologize to those who smeared.
241 Russell Senate Ofc. Bldg.
United States Senate
, Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-2235
Fax: (202) 228-2862
Phoenix
5353 North 16th Street
Suite 105
Phoenix, Arizona 85016
Phone: (602) 952-2410
Fax: (602) 952-8702
Tempe
4703 S. Lakeshore Drive
Suite 1
Tempe, Arizona 85282
Phone: (480) 897-6289
Fax: (480) 897-8389
Tucson
407 W. Congress Street
Suite 103
Tucson, Arizona 85701
Phone: (520) 670-6334
Fax: (520) 670-6637
Contribute
Two and a half more years of all Republican rule is a rather grim prospect. Consider making a contribution to one of these fine candidates or whoever your favorite happens to be.
And, a reminder that local folk can attend an inexpensive fundraiser with Patrick Murphy, Thursday at 5:30 at the Happy Rooster at 16th and Sansom.
And, a reminder that local folk can attend an inexpensive fundraiser with Patrick Murphy, Thursday at 5:30 at the Happy Rooster at 16th and Sansom.
Leadership
I'd like to see some of that great leadership on foreign policy that Democratic foreign policy leader Joe Biden keeps telling Democrats they need to provide. I recognize that Democrats are out of power, so that leadership is going to mostly be rhetorical and political leadership. It's going to provide the foundation for actual leadership if Democrats ever manage to obtain power. A good start would be to begin to make people understand - and shift the terms of the debate - to the place where it needs to be, in reality. In that reality, Iraq is not going to "turn a corner." Things are not, as Joe Lieberman keeps claiming, getting better. It's a disaster.
People need to understand what Matt Stoller understands:
I still don't know why we invaded Iraq. I still don't know what the architects hoped to achieve, or how they hoped to achieve those goals. Like The Editors I don't have any idea how to unshit the bed, but it isn't just going to go away.
Henley writes:
People need to understand what Matt Stoller understands:
It's quite clear that Iraq is the signature issue, not just for this cycle, but for decades. It is a mess that we must manage, and it will probably be messy for a long time, and that mess is going to come home in many unexpected and dangerous ways.
I still don't know why we invaded Iraq. I still don't know what the architects hoped to achieve, or how they hoped to achieve those goals. Like The Editors I don't have any idea how to unshit the bed, but it isn't just going to go away.
Henley writes:
Starting with the buildup to this needless war in Summer 2002, it’s been four years of waste, folly and lies. And failure. Lots and lots of failure. Now like some athritic slots junkie the remaining rump of American hawkery dreams of the one more war that will make good their losses to this point. Of course, they’re really our losses. Compounding.
Do What You Can
The most important thing most of you can do at this point, if you wish to support Ned Lamont, is to contact everyone you know in Connecticut and make sure they know about the primary. Even if your friends and family are moderately plugged into the political world it's quite possible that an August 8th primary just isn't really on their radar. You don't even necessarily have to try to sell them on Lamont, just please let them know that the primary is happening.
You can do it your own way, or you can use this handy tool from the Lamont campaign which will help you follow up.
It's gonna come down to turnout at this point.
You can do it your own way, or you can use this handy tool from the Lamont campaign which will help you follow up.
It's gonna come down to turnout at this point.
Conason on Lieberman
Sums it up in one line:
He has left the reality-based community for the never-land of neo-conservatism—and if he loses, that will be why.
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Chicks
Was out seeing the Dixie Chicks this evening. Was quite an enjoyable show, good musicians and surprisingly good sound for an arena.
Not much politics, but they strolled on stage to the sounds of "Hail to the Chief" and began the encore with Travelin' Soldier.
Not much politics, but they strolled on stage to the sounds of "Hail to the Chief" and began the encore with Travelin' Soldier.
The Editors Speak
Finally somebody gets it right so I don't have to bother to try.
- I’ve said nothing about war in Lebanon or Ethiopia because I have nothing to add, and also because - as you may or may not be aware - the United States is actually involved in a hugely bloody war right now, and this is more of a pressing concern to me personally. I don’t know the secret formula for unshitting any of these beds - I promise I wouldn’t be shy if I did - but I currently only have to sleep in one of them; and, as it turns out, that’s the one bed where I actually have some miniscule chance of influencing the situation. So that’s my concern.
They Write Letters
Keith Olbermann writes to Romenesko:
- From KEITH OLBERMANN: Subject -- Response to Ailes. "Over the line?" Where was Roger Ailes when Bill O'Reilly defended the Nazi SS stormtroopers from Malmedy in World War II? The SS shot 84 American POW's there in 1944, and three different times in the last year, Bill called has called those dead American heroes war criminals. I guess there is no line at Fox News.
Big Dog Disco
I don't know what motivated Clinton to actively campaign for Lieberman, but I think Tom Schaller's engaging in a bit of wishful thinking to imagine he did it in exchange for Lieberman promising not to run on the Lieberman for Lieberman ticket if he loses the primary. I suppose it's possible Lieberman made the promise, but he already made and seemingly broke that promise to other senators. If he pulled petitions to run and is now changing his mind then he made a tremendous campaign blunder.
It would have made sense for Joe to float rumors about running as an independent for a couple of weeks and then instead of announcing that he was pulling petitions give a stirring tribute to the amazing wonderfulness of the Democratic party. He could've said that he's had to ignore his advisors who are begging him to make the jump because he just can't imagine running as anything but a Democrat, blah blah blah. It would've put a stop to the basic Lamont campaign narrative/momentum which had for weeks been built around Joe jumping ship.
But Joe couldn't do that, and now I imagine he's committed to his course.
It would have made sense for Joe to float rumors about running as an independent for a couple of weeks and then instead of announcing that he was pulling petitions give a stirring tribute to the amazing wonderfulness of the Democratic party. He could've said that he's had to ignore his advisors who are begging him to make the jump because he just can't imagine running as anything but a Democrat, blah blah blah. It would've put a stop to the basic Lamont campaign narrative/momentum which had for weeks been built around Joe jumping ship.
But Joe couldn't do that, and now I imagine he's committed to his course.
WHEEEEE
Feeling that old time Bush bounce.
(via pony boy)
PRINCETON, NJ -- A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds 37% of Americans approving of the way Bush is handling his job as president and 59% disapproving. Despite many extraordinary events dominating the news over the past weeks -- including the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon and Bush's high-visibility trip to Europe -- this slight drop from the 40% approval rating measured earlier in the month is not statistically significant and falls within the margin of error between the two surveys. The current 37% rating is similar to his average approval rating of 37% for all of June.
(via pony boy)
Pakistan
Like every other sentient being on the planet I'm rather confused by our policies towards Pakistan. We're generally led to believe that Bin Laden is hanging out there along with some of his pals. It's a dictatorship with an unclear line of succession if that dictator ever accidentally gets in the way of an assassin's bullet. They have an active nuclear program. Their top nuclear scientist was handing out nuclear technology like candy on Halloween. The country promptly pardoned him for this and we didn't say a thing. Oh, and for the Malkins of the world THEY'RE ALL BIG SCARY MUSLIMS.
And, just for fun, they have a new plutonium plant. And the Bush administration hid this fact from Congress. Probably for the best, as Republicans were busy readying legislation to make Bush Supreme Exalted Emperor of the Universe even though Alberto keeps telling them not to bother as the AUMF ALREADY made him Supreme Exalted Emperor of the Universe.
And, just for fun, they have a new plutonium plant. And the Bush administration hid this fact from Congress. Probably for the best, as Republicans were busy readying legislation to make Bush Supreme Exalted Emperor of the Universe even though Alberto keeps telling them not to bother as the AUMF ALREADY made him Supreme Exalted Emperor of the Universe.
Monday, July 24, 2006
Principles
One thing that's been bugging me about Lieberman is that his knee-jerk retort to criticism on the Iraq war has been that he should be applauded because he's taken that stand on principle. At this point I'm not even sure what his stand is, or what principle motivates it, but nonetheless it's really quite bizarre. It's as if all he has to do is play the "principle" card and he's immune from criticism. I picture Joe as Dr. Evil trying to shut up his son, but instead of saying "shhh" he's saying "principle!" Lieberman's got a whole bag of principle with your name on it! Any time you criticize Joe he just utters "principle!" as if it trumps everything.
Maybe it's those principles voters have a problem with.
Maybe it's those principles voters have a problem with.
Meanwhile
Iraq'd:
BAGHDAD, July 24 (Reuters) - Iraq's morgues are overflowing and 100 civilians a day are killed in communal violence, but official statistics tell only part of the story of a slide into civil war -- for the rest, just listen to ordinary Iraqis.
President George W. Bush will hear the Iraqi prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, in Washington on Tuesday tell him of plans for stemming bloodshed in Baghdad and repeat assurances he gave on Monday that Iraq is not at war with itself.
But talk to people at random in the capital and a picture quickly emerges of a city where virtually everyone has a friend, relative or neighbour who has fallen victim to the sectarian shootings and death threats that Washington accepts are now an even bigger threat than the 3-year-old Sunni insurgency.
Every one of 20 people who spoke to Reuters around their workplace in central Baghdad, from a variety of sects and ethnic groups, had a horror story of conflict touching their lives.
Eight had lost family or close friends to gunmen, four had suffered from kidnaps in their immediate circle, four knew people well who had received death threats. Four knew people well who had died in bombings. Some had themselves been threatened.
"It is Vietnam on Satellite Steroids"
So sez Howie, referring to the Israel/Lebanon conflict.
Why isn't Iraq "Vietnam on Satellite Steroids?" Howie provides a rather unconvincing explanation.
Why isn't Iraq "Vietnam on Satellite Steroids?" Howie provides a rather unconvincing explanation.
Chumps
Lieberman's odd contempt for local media is representative of his larger problems. Note to Joe: the national and beltway press are not the people who are voting for you. Making nice with the locals is probably a good idea.
Shiny and New
CNN's very proud of everyone they've sent to one corner of the Middle East.
I'd love to see a similar graphic for Iraq. Did you know that "fighting in the Middle East is in its 13th day?"
I'd love to see a similar graphic for Iraq. Did you know that "fighting in the Middle East is in its 13th day?"
Patrick Murphy at the Happy Rooster
For local folks Patrick Murphy will be at the Happy Rooster on 16th street for a fundraiser on Thursday, from 5:30-7:00. I'll most likely be there as well.
You can RSVP here.
You can RSVP here.
Light Them Up
There's probably no greater threat to America as we grew up understanding it than the bill Specter is pushing. David Broder and Barney Frank might find this rather shrill, but it is truly an attempt to destroy the foundations of our government.
Call your Senators. Call your Reps. The information is here. Let them know that people are paying attention. Let them know that people care.
Really, if there's one political phone call you make this year make this one. I know it often seems like this stuff achieves nothing, but it's a quiet (in Washington, anyway) week in July. Surprise them.
Call your Senators. Call your Reps. The information is here. Let them know that people are paying attention. Let them know that people care.
Really, if there's one political phone call you make this year make this one. I know it often seems like this stuff achieves nothing, but it's a quiet (in Washington, anyway) week in July. Surprise them.
Question
When's the last time one of CNN's top anchors went to Iraq?
32 members of the American military were killed there this month.
32 members of the American military were killed there this month.
Wanker of the Day
Arlen Specter.
Remember, this was the man who was suggesting that Bill Clinton could be impeached a second time after he left office.
How the rules have changed.
Remember, this was the man who was suggesting that Bill Clinton could be impeached a second time after he left office.
How the rules have changed.
Sunday, July 23, 2006
Memories
The funny thing about blogging is all the great stuff I've totally forgotten. While looking for something entirely unrelated I came across this blast from the past from CBS.
Ouch
Joe's gonna cry about this one:
...listen to Ned play piano here.
Joe Lieberman and I have been friends and colleagues for 38 years. We ran for and won seats in the Connecticut legislature as a team of reformers in 1970. He was my state senator and I was his state representative. He rose to Senate majority leader as I became speaker of the House. With others, we formed the Caucus of Connecticut Democrats, a progressive coalition, to further the causes of peace in Vietnam and justice at home.
...
As Joe points out, his record on a number of issues, such as the environment, is good. But on the two biggest issues of our times, he is dead wrong.
His blind support of the Iraq war, begun illegally and a continuing catastrophe, is monstrous.
And his defense of an incompetent president, a vice president who fits the dictionary definition of fascism and an extremist administration that has perpetrated torture, illegal eavesdropping and a general shredding of the Constitution is insulting to the people who elected him in the first place.
Joe's constituency is not Bush and Cheney; it is the progressives and moderates, the blacks and Hispanics who gave him his start in politics. We feel he has betrayed us by becoming "Bush's favorite Democrat."
...listen to Ned play piano here.
They Write Letters
Kirt S. writes to the Washington Post.
A Process for Prisoners" speculated on how the Bush administration might work with Congress in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld .
Unfortunately, the democratic process envisioned, wherein the executive branch works with the legislative branch to produce mutually agreeable legislation, has been repeatedly undermined through President Bush's use of "signing statements." With these, President Bush signs the law, then demonstrates his contempt for American democracy by asserting that he will not implement the legislation as written, but rather as he sees fit. My speculation is that President Bush will sign a Hamdan-related law giving him huge media coverage and a political victory; then he'll quietly issue a signing statement contradicting the law's intent, and that will receive scant coverage.
With that, he'll demonstrate that his contempt isn't limited to Congress but also includes the Supreme Court (and the media, which will miss the real story).
KIRT S.
On Top of the World
Well, George Soros finally made good and built a lovely roofdeck for Mrs. Atrios and me.* After way too long dealing with contractors in our place I can now lead my blogofascist empire while gazing at the center city skyline. I can even see Billy Penn's butt from high atop Eschaton world headquarters.
*Troll bait. I rent. Our landlord, who is not named Soros, built the deck.
Time to set up the grill...mmm...lamb chops...
*Troll bait. I rent. Our landlord, who is not named Soros, built the deck.
Time to set up the grill...mmm...lamb chops...
The Next Mayor
Here in Philadelphia we're about to experience a pretty fascinating wide open mayor's race. Lots of contenders, and nobody's putting any money on who's going to win. Just-resigned city councilman (the law says you can't hold the office and run for mayor simultaneously) Michael Nutter become the first to declare, and any more are expected to do the same.
For those who are interested in following it, the best resource I'm aware of is The Next Mayor, a joint project of the Committee of 70, WHYY, and the PDN.
For those who are interested in following it, the best resource I'm aware of is The Next Mayor, a joint project of the Committee of 70, WHYY, and the PDN.
Nedrenaline!
There's much that's annoying about Joe Klein's latest, but even he is starting to get it just a little bit...
The real problem with Lieberman's position on Iraq isn't overweening civility, however. It is that he has abandoned his native moderation for utopian neoconservatism. His support for the invasion wasn't reluctant, nuanced or judicious; he saw a better world coming. Before the war, he told me that he hoped Saddam's fall would touch off a wave of democratic reform in the region. Given that the entire Middle East seems ready to collapse into chaos this summer, it might seem an appropriate time to revise or extend those remarks—to regret his naivete or defend his long-term vision or slam Bush for carelessly betraying that vision ... or something. But the Senator isn't doing that. Indeed, it sometimes seems his position is more reflexive than thoughtful. He still insists that progress is being made in Iraq. "What progress?" I asked. "There's an elected national-unity government," he said. "I don't want to overstate it, but we're beginning to reach out to the Sunni insurgency."
Sunday Talk Shows
Document the atrocities:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (WTTG), 9 a.m.: U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton ; House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.); Plácido Domingo , general director of the Washington National Opera.
THIS WEEK (ABC, WJLA): Will not air because of British Open golf coverage.
FACE THE NATION (CBS, WUSA), 10:30 a.m.: Israeli Ambassador Daniel Ayalon ; Syrian Ambassador Imad Moustapha ; Washington Post columnist David Ignatius .
MEET THE PRESS (NBC, WRC), 10:30 a.m.: White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten ; Washington Post staff writer Thomas E. Ricks .
LATE EDITION (CNN), 11 a.m.: Bolton ; Sens. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) and Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.); Reps. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) and Jane Harman (D-Calif.); Mohamad Bahaa Chatah , senior adviser to the Lebanese prime minister; Israeli Tourism Minister Isaac Herzog ; author Gary Berntsen .
Over to You, Jonah
One does wonder if the current crop of Cornerites will feel the need to respond to Papa Bear Buckley's latest.
Whatever one thinks Buckley - and sensible people don't think much of him - he at least has a bit of a brain. The only contemporary National Reviewer I'd say the same about is John Derbyshire, who while being a man with awesomely loathsome views is usually not an idiot.
Recent CW among certain circles has been that conservatives will try to rescuse conservatism from the clusterfuck of the Bush years by arguing that Bush was no conservative. That will happen to some degree, but it will mostly come from the slightly older conservative commentariat.
The slightly younger crowd had their adolescence in the Clinton years and came of age during the Bush years. This entire political movement has been about defending the actions of the Bush administration.
Buckley finds himself parting ways with President Bush, whom he praises as a decisive leader but admonishes for having strayed from true conservative principles in his foreign policy.
In particular, Buckley views the three-and-a-half-year Iraq War as a failure.
"If you had a European prime minister who experienced what we've experienced it would be expected that he would retire or resign," Buckley says.
Asked if the Bush administration has been distracted by Iraq, Buckley says "I think it has been engulfed by Iraq, by which I mean no other subject interests anybody other than Iraq. ... The continued tumult in Iraq has overwhelmed what perspectives one might otherwise have entertained with respect to, well, other parts of the Middle East with respect to Iran in particular."
...
"I think Mr. Bush faces a singular problem best defined, I think, as the absence of effective conservative ideology — with the result that he ended up being very extravagant in domestic spending, extremely tolerant of excesses by Congress, and in respect of foreign policy, incapable of bringing together such forces as apparently were necessary to conclude the Iraq challenge," Buckley says.
Asked what President Bush's foreign policy legacy will be to his successor, Buckley says "There will be no legacy for Mr. Bush. I don't believe his successor would re-enunciate the words he used in his second inaugural address because they were too ambitious. … So therefore I think his legacy is indecipherable"
Whatever one thinks Buckley - and sensible people don't think much of him - he at least has a bit of a brain. The only contemporary National Reviewer I'd say the same about is John Derbyshire, who while being a man with awesomely loathsome views is usually not an idiot.
Recent CW among certain circles has been that conservatives will try to rescuse conservatism from the clusterfuck of the Bush years by arguing that Bush was no conservative. That will happen to some degree, but it will mostly come from the slightly older conservative commentariat.
The slightly younger crowd had their adolescence in the Clinton years and came of age during the Bush years. This entire political movement has been about defending the actions of the Bush administration.
Saturday, July 22, 2006
Game On
Even though I've previously said that if it actually happens Joe's independent bid will be a lot tougher than his people think, I still have a hard time believing that a claimed Rasmussen poll showing them even in a 3-way race is accurate. Though, anything is possible...
(btw, is this poll being sourced to anywhere other than some kos diarist I've never heardof)
...ah, Glenn Greenwald writes in to say Political Wire has it.
(btw, is this poll being sourced to anywhere other than some kos diarist I've never heardof)
...ah, Glenn Greenwald writes in to say Political Wire has it.
Complicit
And, when everyone in the world applies this new standard, we get to work on killing each other.
People
So, only 128 clumps of cells have been adopted. I guess the fetus fetish crowd is about as interested in actually preventing these things from being discarded as the chickenhawks are interested in fighting wars.
Wanker of the Day
Ad Nags:
Ad Nags must be channeling Fox and Friends.
People make mistakes, but you have to have a pretty limited view of history and a really awful bullshit detector to not think "Liddy Dole? First female cabinet secretary? That doesn't sound right..."
...already fixed.
Mrs. Dole has been a nearly unstoppable star for 25 years: the first female cabinet secretary, the head of the Red Cross and a popular senator from North Carolina, never mind the wife of Bob Dole, the former Senate majority leader and Republican presidential candidate.
Ad Nags must be channeling Fox and Friends.
People make mistakes, but you have to have a pretty limited view of history and a really awful bullshit detector to not think "Liddy Dole? First female cabinet secretary? That doesn't sound right..."
...already fixed.
Mrs. Dole has been a nearly unstoppable star for 25 years: the head of the Red Cross and a popular senator from North Carolina, never mind the wife of Bob Dole, the former Senate majority leader and Republican presidential candidate.
Nedrenaline!
I'm pretty sure no elected Republicans at the federal level endorsed Pat Toomey over Arlen Specter in their 2004 primary race, though some state people took sides. So, it's interesting to see both Marcy Kaptur and Maxine Waters jumping in for Lamont.
Here's a recent speech by Waters which discusses the race.
Here's a recent speech by Waters which discusses the race.
Friday, July 21, 2006
Mideast on Alert - 10 Days of Warfare
That's CNN's chyron right now.
I guess new wars make us forget the old ongoing ones.
I guess new wars make us forget the old ongoing ones.
Little Roy
Just adding to the post below. Here's what Sully writes now:
Here's what he wrote at the time:
The voices in his head...
I regret that rhetoric, expressed my regret days after the piece was published, and only ever applied it to those who immediately sympathized with al Qaeda in September 2001
Here's what he wrote at the time:
- What I was clearly saying is that some decadent leftists in "enclaves" - not regions - on the coasts are indeed more concerned with what they see as the evil of American power than the evil of terrorism, that their first response was to blame America, and that their second response was to disavow any serious military action. If this was their attitude in the days after 5,000 civilians were killed, what will they say and do when we have to take real risks and incur more civilian casualties weeks and months from now? These people have already openly said they do not support such a war, and will oppose it. Read Sontag and Chomsky and Moore and Alterman and on and on, and you'll see that I'm not exaggerating. Go to any campus and you'll find many, many academics saying the same thing.
The voices in his head...
Speaking of Comedy Gold
Guess who:
The Press secretary of the Embassy of Israel called to cancel my trip to Israel. They recommend that I not go to Israel. Apparently they have canceled all my interviews and war coverage. Ugh.
Angry
One thing I meant to add to the post below about Angry Joe is that both in general terms and specific to this subject is that the whole "angry liberal bloggers" thing is always quite amusing and misses the mark. Sure there's anger - I submit that there's plenty to be angry about - but the missed dynamic is that much of the time we're having a hell of a lot fun.
When I met Ned and Annie Lamont, and Ned's campaign manager Tom Swan, I said to all three of them that if nothing else this whole campaign has provided us with hours of endless fun.
I mean, Blogofascism? Comedy gold... You can't buy this kind of fun.
When I met Ned and Annie Lamont, and Ned's campaign manager Tom Swan, I said to all three of them that if nothing else this whole campaign has provided us with hours of endless fun.
I mean, Blogofascism? Comedy gold... You can't buy this kind of fun.
Angry Joe
Bogus email publisher Zengerle's article on Joe's woes is actually quite good. Among other things we learn that Joe's very angry. According to the Official Handbook of Punditry, anger is a terribly bad thing which only insane unhinged crazy bloggers have, and so everything he says should be dismissed accordingly.
Ezra chimes in on what motivates Lieberman supporters - a sense of entitlement and privilege. I think he's got most of it, but there's one more little important bit. The thing is that Joe has done Everything Right according to the Beltway Geniuses, at least before Joe Klein discovered he was for populism after he was against it. He scolded the nasty Clenis, he scolds other Democrats, he supported the Iraq war, he goes on the Sunday teevee shows all the time. He's embraced the "I'm a Democrat but I'm not like those other nasty Democrats" schtick which all cool kids know is the only way to be a cool Democrat. They object to the challenge to Lieberman because they see it as a challenge to themselves and their view of how things should be done.
...and Bill Kristol hearts Joe. So, on one side we have Marshall Wittman and Bill Kristol...
Ezra chimes in on what motivates Lieberman supporters - a sense of entitlement and privilege. I think he's got most of it, but there's one more little important bit. The thing is that Joe has done Everything Right according to the Beltway Geniuses, at least before Joe Klein discovered he was for populism after he was against it. He scolded the nasty Clenis, he scolds other Democrats, he supported the Iraq war, he goes on the Sunday teevee shows all the time. He's embraced the "I'm a Democrat but I'm not like those other nasty Democrats" schtick which all cool kids know is the only way to be a cool Democrat. They object to the challenge to Lieberman because they see it as a challenge to themselves and their view of how things should be done.
...and Bill Kristol hearts Joe. So, on one side we have Marshall Wittman and Bill Kristol...
His Beautiful Mind
This is scary:
Each crisis is an opportunity to wage a war they wanted to wage. The president believes Iraq is a success story. No one will tell him anything else. He understands nothing, yet belives he knows better than everyone:
Be very afraid.
In the administration's view, the new conflict is not just a crisis to be managed. It is also an opportunity to seriously degrade a big threat in the region, just as Bush believes he is doing in Iraq.
Each crisis is an opportunity to wage a war they wanted to wage. The president believes Iraq is a success story. No one will tell him anything else. He understands nothing, yet belives he knows better than everyone:
"He thinks he is playing in a longer-term game than the tacticians," said the former official, who spoke anonymously so he could discuss his views candidly.
Be very afraid.
Unhinged
It's true that it's Lieberman supporters who are the unhinged crazies. I don't mean all supporterse of Lieberman, but the ones writing spittle-flecked paranoid rants in the media about how bloggers are sapping their precious bodily fluids and how the defeat of Lieberman may mark the end of the Democratic party, the arrival of the Rapture, and the return of New Coke. As Josh Marshall writes:
Heard a damn thing about the Chafee primary in the national media?
Me neither.
One thing that strikes me is the sheer intensity of views on this race. We've heard a good deal already about the intensity of opposition to Lieberman. But his supporters, or what you might call the anti-anti-Lieberman crowd are really no less intense or in some cases almost unhinged about it. There is this sense that a Lieberman defeat on August 8th would be some sort of apocalyptic event, with Lieberman cast as some martyr, to what I'm really not sure.
Heard a damn thing about the Chafee primary in the national media?
Me neither.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Foul-Mouthed Bloggers
Tom Friedman has a potty mouth:
George Bush and Condi Rice need to realize that Syria on its own is not going to press Hezbollah — in Mr. Bush’s immortal words — to just “stop doing this shit.’’ The Bush team needs to convene a coalition of The World of Order. If it won’t, it should let others more capable do the job. We could start with the elder George Bush and Bill Clinton, whose talents could be used for more than just tsunami relief.
Liars
So, Republicans claim they raised $27 million at a big Bush gala fundraiser, of which $12 million was supposed to go to the NRSC.
Now we find out the NRSC only raised $4.8 million in the entire month of June.
Where'd the $12 million go?
Now we find out the NRSC only raised $4.8 million in the entire month of June.
Where'd the $12 million go?
993
993 of you have given to Lamont. 7 more makes it an even thousand.
Do it just to make Morton Kondracke cry. I can never remember whether he or Fred Barnes is supposed to be the more liberal of the two.
Do it just to make Morton Kondracke cry. I can never remember whether he or Fred Barnes is supposed to be the more liberal of the two.
Your Liberal Media
I know it will shock you all to find out that it's, surprise, still conservative, at least on Sundays. Maybe it's just that all the liberals are in church that day.
Friends
One of Bill Clinton's oddest flaws is his willingness to forgive his enemies. As Jane writes:
Big Dog may not have taken it personally when Lieberman stabbed us all in the back with his speech on the floor of the Senate during the impeachment hearings, but many of us did.
Corruption
Sort of echoing and answering Josh, I do think the corruption stuff has helped make people think, in an abstract sense, "Republicans bad, Democrats not as bad," and has helped give Democrats their massive lead in generic congressional ballots.
However, the more the corruption issue is what's driving the generic ballot lead the worse it actually is for Democrats. Those Democrats who can hang corruption around a Republican incumbent in a tangible concrete way will be able to run with it successfully, but for everyone else it'll be a wash. So, yes, corruption has mattered for the national picture but it won't be enough for the local picture except where people believe that their own member is corrupt.
However, the more the corruption issue is what's driving the generic ballot lead the worse it actually is for Democrats. Those Democrats who can hang corruption around a Republican incumbent in a tangible concrete way will be able to run with it successfully, but for everyone else it'll be a wash. So, yes, corruption has mattered for the national picture but it won't be enough for the local picture except where people believe that their own member is corrupt.
Lie Down With...
I was amused by Hugh Hewitt's attack on Jon Chait because it wasn't that long ago that Chait was being quite chummy with Hugh on his radio show. Chait said Hewitt was a "a kind of nutty, but lovable crank" but that he doesn't think "Daily Kos people" are "good for the country."
Game On
So, we have a real race between Lamont and Lieberman.. Those of you who haven't donated because you thought this was a hopeless battle may reconsider.
Or, just as important, please consider using this handy tool to notify friends and family in Connecticut about the race. It's kind of a personal GOTV tool.
Full poll results later might tell us more. Any likely voter poll result is going to depend heavily on the likely voter model, though no one can really predict who's going to show up on a hot August day.
Or, just as important, please consider using this handy tool to notify friends and family in Connecticut about the race. It's kind of a personal GOTV tool.
Full poll results later might tell us more. Any likely voter poll result is going to depend heavily on the likely voter model, though no one can really predict who's going to show up on a hot August day.
WHEEEEEE
I'm feeling that Bush Bounce!
(tip from pony boy)
President Bush's job-approval ratings have changed little from June, according to a recent Harris Interactive poll.
Of 1,002 U.S. adults surveyed in a telephone poll, 34% said Mr. Bush is doing an "excellent or pretty good" job as president, up a tick from 33% in June. By comparison, 65% of Americans said Mr. Bush is doing an "only fair or poor" job, down from 67% last month.
With midterm elections less than four months away, the poll also asked respondents whether they would choose a Democratic or Republican candidate "if the election for Congress were held today." Forty-four percent of those surveyed said they would vote for the Democratic candidate, up from 41% in April, while 31% said they would vote for the Republican candidate, down from 37% in April.
(tip from pony boy)
Shorter David Broder
The Bush adminsitration has subverted the constitution and seized near-dictatorial powers, but what's almost as disturbing is that some unnamed bloggers have overstated the case.
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Fake
Not enough to exploit tragedy, they have to fake it too. Republicans. feh.
The controversial video of the burning World Trade Center towers in a television campaign ad for Ohio Sen. Mike DeWine is doctored, U.S. News has learned. The television spot, which has been lambasted by critics as a political exploitation of the Sept. 11, attacks Democrat challenger Rep. Sherrod Brown for being weak on national security.
On the air in major Ohio markets since last Friday, the ad shows the towers, with the south building billowing smoke, which gradually drifts upward. In the video, the north tower, which was struck first on September 11, is undamaged.
"This particular image is impossible," says W. Gene Corley, a stuctural engineer who led FEMA's building performance study on the World Trade Center after the 9/11 attacks. Corley reviewed the ad atwww.brownvotes.com for U.S. News. "The north tower was hit first [so] the south tower could not be burning without the North Tower burning." Corley also says, "the smoke is all wrong." The day of the attacks, the plumes of ash were drifting to the southeast. "The smoke on 9/11 was never in a halo like that," Corley says.
DeWine's office acknowledged the error. "The Senator was unaware that the image of the towers was a graphic representation and has instructed the campaign to replace the footage with a picture of the Twin Towers," his office said in a statement on Wednesday evening.
DeWine spokesman Brian Seitchik says the image of the burning towers in the ad is a still photo with computer-generated smoke added.
Chris Carney
Chris Carney is running against Don Sherwood. You may remember Don Sherwood from such hits as "64-year-old married Republican accused of choking 29-year-old mistress" and "64-year-old married Republican settles $5.5 million lawsuit by 29-year-old mistress for undisclosed amount."
Need I say anything more?
Help out.
Need I say anything more?
Help out.
Joe Sestak
Joe Sestak is running against Crazy Curt Weldon. When Crazy Curt isn't doing things like dreaming of digging up weapons of mass destruction in the sands of Iraq and listening to nonsense from Ghorbanifar's pal Ali, he's criticizing Sestak for his choice of where to get medical treatment for his young daughter.
Weldon's about the worst the Republicans have and yes that is saying a lot. It's an embarrassment to this country that he's in office. Sestak served 31 year in the Navy, and finished his career as a Vice Admiral. He's out doing a lot of people-centered campaigning - knocking on doors, talking to people at train stations - and with a little help he can win this one.
So, consider a little help.
Weldon's about the worst the Republicans have and yes that is saying a lot. It's an embarrassment to this country that he's in office. Sestak served 31 year in the Navy, and finished his career as a Vice Admiral. He's out doing a lot of people-centered campaigning - knocking on doors, talking to people at train stations - and with a little help he can win this one.
So, consider a little help.
Louise Slaughter
Louise Slaughter is the only incumbent on the list. I put her on there when it appeared she was going to be facing a primary opponent from the right. That opponent decided against it in the end, but she still deserves our support. She spends a lot of time out there fighting the fight and less time groveling than she might, and often has our backs on stuff we care about. So, it's good to have her back too.
Donna Edwards
Donna Edwards is the only person aside from Ned Lamont challenging an incumbent in a primary who is on the Eschaton Act Blue list. Edwards is challenging Al Wynn, who is a proud member of the Eschaton List of Losers you see on the bottom left, dedicated to those representatives who sold out their constituents by voting for estate tax repeal and for the bankruptcy bill.
Edwards isn't a new person on the scene, and she has plenty of non-blogospheric support. Once again I'll let Howie Klein tell you about her.
Edwards isn't a new person on the scene, and she has plenty of non-blogospheric support. Once again I'll let Howie Klein tell you about her.
Grovel
Yes, it's rather sad that politicians need to grovel to rich people. Politicians need to spend a lot of time begging for money and kissing ass. I promise that when (oh, optimism) I'm a rich person I won't really care if they grovel or not.
Still, politicians do need to grovel and a willingness to do so is really critical. New candidates are often shocked and horrified when they're told the number of hours they should expect to spend dialing for donors, but that's the way it works.
So, if some of you more humble people who don't really need to have your asses kissed would step up and donate a few that would mean less time they'd have to spend kissing ass.
Still, politicians do need to grovel and a willingness to do so is really critical. New candidates are often shocked and horrified when they're told the number of hours they should expect to spend dialing for donors, but that's the way it works.
So, if some of you more humble people who don't really need to have your asses kissed would step up and donate a few that would mean less time they'd have to spend kissing ass.
Funny
Laura Ingraham calls out falafel boy as a whiny-ass titty-baby.
O'REILLY: Laura, here's how it works. It intimidates good people who may want to come into the public arena as politicians or commentators. It intimidates them. They don't want to put themselves --
INGRAHAM: I disagree. I hate to disagree with you, Bill, but I disagree. If someone is intimidated by George Soros and Media Matters, then they have no business being in politics or in our business. If you can't stand up for what you think is right and for the values that you think most Americans hold and for what you think is good for this country, then get out of the game, get out of the kitchen, whatever you want to call it, because these people are going to do that. That's the nature of this game. That has been politics for longer than you and I have been alive, and it's going to continue to be politics. And I understand what you're saying. I mean, it's amplified because of the new media and the Internet and everything.
Getting So Much Better All the Time
Since July 6 there have been hundreds of Iraqi casualties in Iraq and about 17 US troop casualties. On July 6 Lieberman said:
Apparently things have improved so much in Iraq that Lieberman think we will be leaving sooner. He now says:
Apprently over the last 12 todays things in Iraq have improved so much that we've gone from beginning to draw down by the end of the year to having withdrawn a "solid" number, and from having half of the troops home by the end of 2007 to having all of them home by about then.
So I am confident that the situation is improving enough on the ground that by the end of this year, we will begin to draw down significant numbers of American troops, and by the end of the next year more than half of the troops who are there now will be home.
Apparently things have improved so much in Iraq that Lieberman think we will be leaving sooner. He now says:
BRIDGEPORT — U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman believes the U.S. will withdraw a "solid" contingent of its military forces in Iraq by the end of the year because of gains made by the Iraqi armed forces.
"There really has been progress made by the Iraqi military," Lieberman said Tuesday during a meeting with the Connecticut Post's editorial board. "Two-thirds of it could stand on its own or lead the fight with our logistical support."
The three-term U.S. senator said he believes a complete withdrawal is possible by late 2007 or early 2008.
Apprently over the last 12 todays things in Iraq have improved so much that we've gone from beginning to draw down by the end of the year to having withdrawn a "solid" number, and from having half of the troops home by the end of 2007 to having all of them home by about then.
Patrick Murphy
Continuing in my lifelong quest to put more Murphy-Americans in Congress, I also recommend supporting Patrick Murphy. He beat down a primary challenege from a well-known local pol, and now he's going after the odious Mike Fitzpatrick. This will be a tougher race - one of the "if we win this one we just might take the whole thing" races - than the other Murphy's (no relation) race, but still one that can be won.
Patrick's a young very likeable guy, seems to have very dedicated people working on his campaign - and from what I can tell he's using young people in a productive fashion which I tend to like - and has been working hard at what he's doing.
Consider giving him some support.
Patrick's a young very likeable guy, seems to have very dedicated people working on his campaign - and from what I can tell he's using young people in a productive fashion which I tend to like - and has been working hard at what he's doing.
Consider giving him some support.
Will
In current contemporary American political discourse the word "will" is defined as "desire to send one set of people to kill another with limited concerns about loss of innocent life."
This is disturbing. I much preferred it when "Will" in the context of contemporary political discourse meant "annoying smug divorced bow-tied conservative with an annoying fondness for bad baseball metaphors."
This is disturbing. I much preferred it when "Will" in the context of contemporary political discourse meant "annoying smug divorced bow-tied conservative with an annoying fondness for bad baseball metaphors."