That Ann Coulter...

She's such a sweet girl.

Coulter had told the Philander Smith College audience Thursday that more conservative justices were needed on the Supreme Court to change the current law on abortion.

...

"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said.

Tee hee! So nice and sweet...

The Cleaners are on their way.

Josh Marshall breaks a story about the Abramoff/Prezn'it photos and why they are getting hard to find.

A great piece of journalism.

Fried Peace agreement with a side of freedom fries!

Hamas. The sound of the name is enought to fill many with dread. They have been known for years as a brutal terrorist regime that advocates the destruction of the state of Israel. They franchised the use of suicide bombing in terror campaigns, and made the world fear them.

Today, it seems they are going to be running the country. The Paelstinian people have voted in massive numbers and have given a very impressive majority of the seats in the legislature to Hamas. In total about 76 of the 132 seats are going to the (former?) terrorist organization. It remains to be seen whether Hamas can lead without resorting to old and ingrained tactics.

CNN has this story detailing what is now known about the vote and it's ramifications. It looks like there is going to be some serious sould searching going on throughout the middle east in the coming months. Israel, for certain, is going to be severely on edge.

The old guard Fatah movement, long seen as the only power structure in the occupied palestinian territories has obviously lost touch with it's electorate. That much has been in evidence for at least the last few years. This vote puts a new nail in the coffin of Fatah.

I had heard that, in the months and even possibly years leading up to this vote that Hamas had been providing much of the civic leadership for many towns and villages in the territories. This new government will be tested early and often by the international community to see how legitimacy might create more social responsibility. I am concerned with the outcome. I am not sure that the new rulers will be able to keep the peace. I am hopeful that the changes that occured last night will not prove to be ill. What else is there but hope?

I know that the Palestinians were getting sick and tired of not being heard by their own government. I know that they feel more represented by Hamas which they see as good actor in their civic leadership. I can only pray that Hamas' leadership sees this as an opportunity to progress beyond armed conflict and into the light of international community. Let us all hope that they do.

Fafblog! Oh pretty pretty Fafblog!...

Fafblog! the whole worlds only source for Fafblog, Has the goods on why the Democratic party is totally doomed.


Go. Read. Now.

>go on read it!<

How do the conservatives balance this?

So I have a serious question.

What is the higherarchy of fiscal conservatve priorities? There is a lot of talk recently about giveaways to lawmakers by lobbyists and lobbying firms. I want to look at another layer of this though.

In the article titled:Closed-Door Deal Makes $22 Billion Difference at WAPO today there are some very interesting questions raised. A shorter version of the article would be to say that Republicans have been increasingly making fiscal decisions with constant input from industry lobbyists and with total exclusion of Democrats in closed session conference committees. These bills, when passed have a tendancy to run favorable to the interests of the lobbyists often to the tune of Billions of dollars of savings for industry, and sometimes just plain payoffs.

Now I know that the republican party is the party of industry. It goes without saying. They believe that having a strong private sector with as little government regulation as possible is vital to the nation's health. I will concede that to a point they are very correct.

Here's the rub. At what point does giving taxpayer money away to industry become poor fiscal policy? In other words, Congress is in charge of spending tax money wisely; they are not in the business of enriching industry. If they want to loosen regulation, fine. If they want to cut taxes, ok. Not great but ok.

It looks like the way this medicare bill was set up was that the taxpayers would pay out more in the form of medicare payments to the insurance industry otherwise (it was reported) the industry will just stop insuring people. We're not giving an incentive for good behavior, we're just paying them off. Is that what all of that vaunted conservative fiscal policy is all about? It sounds to me like a prettier version of extortion.

So we come to my main question. What is more important to fiscal conservatives? Is it helping industry and big business or is it ensuring the governments money is well spent? Are they losing sight of their traditional values of fiscal responsability in favor of doing anything to help out a lobbying group.

It seems to me that they are losing their way.

Give us your papers! All of your papers!

The federal government is at it again. This time it's the TSA who's going after even more personal information. USA Today has this story Via Yahoo! That sums up all of the new information that they are going to be requesting. It includes:

"in-depth security background checks" that may involve "using commercial data" for people applying to the Registered Traveler program that starts in June. The checks will help verify people's identities to prove they have no ties to terrorism.

Now this is not to say that this will apply to everyone. As the story goes on:

The program will create reserved lanes for people who pass the background check and pay an annual fee, expected to be $80 to $100. Security requirements such as removing jackets and shoes will be lifted as approved passengers go through metal detectors.

So, TSA'll ask you to pay up to 100 bucks for the honor of having all of your financial records scrutinized and then kept on file. all of that just so that you can avoid having to stand in line with the rabble.

Seems fair to me.

The terrorists have won. We are truly paranoid.

GO HAWKS!

Holy shit! This is a sign of the apocalypse...

Pack your bags for the afterlife if you know what's good for you...

The End of Faith Book review

A friend of mine just sent me his review of an interesting new book The End of Faith by Sam Harris

I am posting the review verbatim from his email: (I have taken the liberty to add links where I thought they would do some good.)

I saw the author on C-Span's Book TV, thought he was well spoken, and I purchased the book. I finished it last night.

It is mostly a dry factual recitation, but at the same time it is a very unusual written denunciation of religious faith. The guy obviously runs a risk of being killed by Muslims. If they didn't like Salman Rushdie, this guy has to drive them blind with rage.

He says that it is a taboo to criticize religion, and he thinks the taboo is stupid and should be broken.

He says that members of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths inevitably believe that they are going to a positive after-life experience, and that members of the other faiths and non-believers are not. As a result, members of those faiths put a higher value on their lives/souls, and a lesser value on other lives/souls, and a lesser value on our time on Earth as it pales against the afterlife. As a result, he says the foundation is laid for religious groups wreaking violence on those who don't believe what they do. He cites several examples, including the Spanish Inquisition as a vivid example.

He says that faith based policies that prevent stem cell research, and prohibit condom usage in Sub-Saharan Africa, are simple examples of immoral and irrational policies that result in hordes of suffering and death of humans.

He says Muslims are particularly violent, and it isn't a surprise since the Koran repeatedly urges its followers to commit violence against nonbelievers.

He says with the proliferation of nuclear weapons, if the world community doesn't do something to persuade Jews, Christians and Muslims that their religious beliefs are irrational and ignorant, they the will inevitably destroy Earth and all humans in their attempts to get into their ideas of the afterlife.

Sobering, and a breath of fresh air amidst the red state take over of America. Speaking of which, he analyzes written statements of various religious (redundant?) members of the Bush Administration, scary.

You might read the book, parts of it are interesting. Natalie Angier of the New York Times wrote in her book review:

"The End of Faith articulates the dangers and absurdities of organized religion so fiercely and so fearlessly that I felt relieved as I read it, vindicated, almost personally understood."

Possibly the greatest blog EVER

Ask A Ninja.com has the best advice in the world about all things Ninja oriented. Go check it out.

OMG!!11 LOL!!

Josh Marshall has the best quote I've ever heard.

I just have to post the whole thing. I hope he'll forgive me....

Great Moments in Abramoff-Ain't-Such-A-Big-Deal Spin.


Honorable Mention for Ed Rogers, GOP lobbyist, from last night's Hardball (emphasis added): ". Look, this is going to come out. Nobody is going to keep it a secret. Jack Abramoff is so radioactive—I've got Jack Abramoff fatigue already. I mean, good grief, he didn't kill anybody. Maybe that one guy in Florida."


Gotta love that.

I gotta second that.

It's away!

What a beautiful launch! Congrats to NASA and the crew.

This one was giving me the willies a little bit because of the 72+ pounds of plutonium on board as the main battery system. I really didn't want any problems with that kind of payload!

Anyway, good work!

Watching NASA TV...

I'm just geeking out over here watching the launch of the "New Horizons" Pluto probe. It was scrubbed two days ago and has been reset for about ten minutes from now. I don't know why it's so facinating for me but I have always loved watching rockets go up. It's pretty fantastic. Great science too.

No matter how you spin it that just doesn't look good

From USA Today via Yahoo!

One day after a New York investment group raised $110,000 for Republican Rep. Jerry Lewis (news, bio, voting record), the House passed a defense spending bill that preserved $160 million for a Navy project critical to the firm. The man who protected the Navy money? Lewis.

The fundraiser, which took place July 7, 2003, and the subsequent vote illustrate the kind of relationship between congressman and contributor that's under increased scrutiny in the nation's capital.

Now, I know what I said in my last post but come on! How many Republican congressman and women are out there selling their votes? 10? 20? I had never even heard of this guy. Not even from the Josh Marshall or Atrios.

C&L reader sums up my issue...

It had to happen. Some time in the last week it hit me. I am behaving like a lefty version of Bill O'Riley. There's a thought. Talk about the fastest way to a big rubbery one, but it seems to be true. A reader at another blog, the incomparable Crooks and Liars has this post about how that radical energy can be twisted into a one sided us-or-them mentality that does no-one any real good.

As you may have noticed I have been posting on different topics lately and have been less interested in those stories that have been coming from the more strident part of the Left. This is not to say that my politics have changed. I still am outraged by many things I am seeing in this government but I know that the way to change things is to get more people involved. This involvement must necessarily include people from the political cener and the right. We can't have outreach when we are trying to destroy the right. I'm not sure how to get there but it is something we need to do. Collectively we must move forward. We need to show those on the other side that we are serious without being giant pussies about it. this will require some strategy and some alteration of our thinking.

Leave it to Shatner to find a new charity vehicle

Woah! talk about getting your money's worth. Star Trek and Boston Legal star William Shatner has brought a new level of absurdity to celebrity memorabilia collecting, and has given a great charity a reason to cheer. It seems that he has sold his kidney stone For $25,000 and given the proceeds to Habitat for humanity.

Way to go Bill!

Geek Nirvana!

So in addition to being politically interested I am also a turbogeek. If there's a scientific study out there about something interesting to me you can bet I have already seen it.

I generally don't make it a habit of involving others in my mindless prattling about science and the like, I prefer to keep it under my hat as it were, but this week there's a great experiment that's sweeping planetary scientists off their feet. I'm talking, of course, about the Stardust mission. I am also talking about the newer and less well known Stardust@Home project. This latter is a chance for all of us armchair science geeks to show their stripes by taking part in the search for space dust collected on the aerogelcollector on the Stardust probe.

Stardust@home needs you. Unlike the wildly successful SETI@home project they need more than your computer processing time though. They need your eyes and your ability to discern meaningful data from background noise. You can sign up to help here and get trained when the time comes.

This looks like a great opportunity to release your inner geek and also to help out on a very serious planetary experiment.

MLK Best post ever.

ReddHedd at firedoglake has this post up that really says it all. It even manages to sum up why I started blogging. ReddHedd is one of the most thoughtful and passionate bloggers I have had the opportunity to read. I encourage you to go visit.

Dr. King has fundamentally changed the world. He has given hope a language, has allowed the disenfranchised to have a voice. His legacy continues even today. He believed that using your voice is the best way to further heroic goals of equality for all and that silence in the face of opposition is a quiet betrayal.

Some of the best quotes from Dr. Kings speeches are recorded by ReddHedd in the post but I'll cut and past some of my favorites anyway.

Letter from Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963:

We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people.

Strength to Love, 1963:

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

Beyond Vietnam -- A Time to Break Silence speech, April 4, 1967:

"A time comes when silence is betrayal...."

The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world. Moreover, when the issues at hand seem as perplexed as they often do in the case of this dreadful conflict, we are always on the verge of being mesmerized by uncertainty; but we must move on.

And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movements and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us.

What a joke.

The headline says it all: Ethics Committees Won't Commit to Action

Yahoo! News by way of the AP is reporting that, even with the ever more clear allegations of ethics abuses the house and senate ethics "committees, for now, are poised to remain on the sidelines."

Quite a fitting football analogy. When the going gets tough the tough sit it out, cowering in their locker rooms until the game is over.

Methinks this would not occur if the Dems were in charge.

The mother of all shitstorms is about to start

In the past months we have heard little about the Abu Ghraib debacle but it looks like all of that might be about to change. Tis last week the general in charge of the "new techniques" at Abu Ghriab prison, Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, invoked his rights against self incrimination during a court martial of a subordinate accused of abuses in the prison.

This story in WAPO tells about the recent deals involving high level military personnel. These deals may allow prosecutors to get information about higher ranking military leaders and possibly even members of the civillian leadership involved in the decision to use torture-like-treatment of detainees in the military prisons both in Iraq and at Guantanamo Bay Cuba.

This story has been largely off the radar for a pretty good while now and is looking like it will be getting up to speed in the not too distant future. Look for more reporting on this soon.

Some thoughts on The NukeOp and Alito

A friend of mine and I have been having an ongoing discussion via email about the state of current politics. Here's an exchange I think is of particular interest:

First his questions:

I've begun to wonder how different outcomes would effect the midterm elections, and I'm curious what your thoughts are.

I think the likelihood of being voted out of committee on to the floor is virtually 100%.

I think the likelihood of there being 51 or more votes to confirm on the floor is about 99%.

I find it difficult to calculate the likehihood of a filibuster. I'm going up and down.

If there is a filibuster, it is less difficult to calculate the likehood of the nuclear option, I put it at 55%.

And that gives rise to my wondering who that would help more in the midterm elections.

The Republican base is still out there, and the red meat of the nuclear option would drive them into a Revelations like rapture.

But the Democrats could cite it as another staggering step toward fascism, and ask the voters to help them.

The Republicans would counter with "they won't even give our nominees simple up and down votes," obviously we need more Republicans in the chairs to stop their unfair tactics.

Republicans, sadly, are currently MUCH better at spinning their messages.

So the question is, if the nuclear option happens, who will it help more? I have to think top strategical brains on each side are deeply analyzing that question.

What are the great Thorrad's, the Wonderful Optimist of the Left, thoughts?

Then my response:

Well...

Now that's an interesting question. I am personally of the belief that we almost have to trigger the Nuclear option. There is almost no downside to it. The repubs in the world (Not in congress) are going to howl no matter what. There is no reason to appease them in any way. There are a good number of folks in the Dem base too. They are up for a good fight right now. They have endured a massive amount of disappointment so far and I think thy are spoiling for a battle. If we filibuster we might trigger the NukeOp. I am not too sure that we will however.

The Repubs have got to see that there is at least a chance that they will be unseated in the next few years if not in this election cycle. So long as there is a chance that they would become the minority again I think they will be very reticent to do away with the only real and effective weapon of the minority. Do you think that there would be any chance of them gettting even the slightest bit of sympathy from the Dems if they took the filibudster off the table and then were voted into minority status? I for one do not. I think they would be reminded by every senator that they were the ones who approved it and that they could just go suck it. (Hell, that's what I would do.)

As for whether or not the NukeOp will make or break the repubs it remailns to be seen. I think it would hurt rather than help. And hurt a lot. The average joe sixpack out there is neither a Republican nor a Democrat. He wants to be left alone by the government and thinks that the Federal Gov. is really just too far seperated from his life to bother with. The Feds have little impact on the average american. Even the most invasive laws only effect a very small number of us really. But that being said, there is a tremendous feeling in the general population that the rules of the Federal Gov. should be fair and should favor the weakest of us. Unfortunately right now that's the Dems. There is a massive amount to which the average joe identifies with the underdog in this country. They are likely to see an attack on the filibuster as an unfair attack on the weaker man. This is a powerful rehtorical device, and can bring a lot more sympathy with it than you might imagine.

I do think that, left to his own, Alito will be confirmed. I also think that the chances are higher than you think that there will be a showdown on the filibuster. I also think that we will win that showdown. Whether we win by getting to filibuster and defeat Alito or by triggering the NukeOp and getting to watch the Repubs destroy a longstanding minority institution we will win. The only way we would truly fail would be to not mount a challenge to this nomination.

We are already challenging it.

That's just what I think.

T

True.

This comes from the following first class web site:Corey Anderson - American Idle

Go. Visit. NOW!!!

My opinion of (some) Republicans just go ta little sunnier

From my home town newspaper came a great story of how a representative democracy should work. In this story in the Seattle Post Intelligencerwe learn of the State senate Minority leader and how he finally heard the voices of those being discriminated against.

OLYMPIA -- In what could be the turning point for a decadeslong political fight, a key Senate Republican announced Monday that he would reverse his position and support an anti-discrimination bill for gays and lesbians.

The change of heart by Sen. Bill Finkbeiner, R-Kirkland, likely means gays and lesbians would enjoy the same protections that racial minorities, women and religious groups get under the state Civil Rights Act.

Last year, after avoiding bringing the bill to a vote for nearly 30 years, the Senate rejected the gay civil rights bill by a one-vote margin. Finkbeiner, then the Senate minority leader, voted no, as did his entire caucus and two Democrats.

Finkbeiner said Monday, the first day of the 2006 Legislature, that several conversations in the past year have led him to more fully understand the level of discrimination against gays and lesbians.

"I now find it is both appropriate and necessary for the state to make it clear that this is not acceptable," he said in a statement.

This gets to the heart of what it means to be a leader. The sentiment is lost on no-one:

Rep. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, the gay civil rights bill's longtime champion, said the potential impact of Finkbeiner's move could not be overstated.

"This is a watershed moment in the 30-year history of the struggle for gay and lesbian equal rights in the state of Washington. This is a courageous vote on Senator Finkbeiner's part," said Murray, who has consistently sponsored the bill since taking office in 1995.

"Senator Finkbeiner's willingness to be open, to listen to his constituents, to changing his mind is commendable."

I am happy to say that this occurred here in my own state. If this catches on we could become a model for other states and even the federal government.

Kudos to Senator Finkbeiner.

Straw Men flying out of Grassleys mouth

Chuck Grassley has just thrown out a whole string of completely fallacious questions to Alito. he was saying things like "Judje Alito, do you believe that the President of the United States has Unlimited supreme power?" There were a whole run of questions like that designed, i guess to toss enough straw men out to make an impenitrable wall through which no Liberal mind could tread.

What a meatwad.

Holy Cow!

I just heard Chuck Grassley say to alito that he should not lose any sleep over the fact that hhe mislead the Senate Judicial Committee in the case of the Vangard group and his promise to recuse himself if he ever heard a case related to that company. Grassley is allying himself with a liar by saying that there's nothing to worry about when you lie to the american people or to congress.

I'll be damned!

George Will steps off the ranch

Am I reading this righ? Is this thing on? Is that George Will?

It is.

Mr. Will fires a complete broadside against his own party. Some of my favorites:

Before evolution produced creatures of our perfection, there was a three-ton dinosaur, the stegosaurus, so neurologically sluggish that when its tail was injured, significant time elapsed before news of the trauma meandered up its long spine to its walnut-size brain. This primitive beast, not the dignified elephant, should be the symbol of House Republicans.

Yes, one should not taint all of them because of the behavior of most of them. Why, perhaps half a dozen of the 231 Republican representatives authored none of the transportation bill's 6,371 earmarks -- pork projects. And now among House Republicans there are Darwinian stirrings, prompted by concerns about survival.

That's a hell of an opening! But wait there's more...

In Washington, such concerns often are confused with and substitute for moral epiphanies. Tom DeLay will not return as leader of House Republicans, whose new fastidiousness is not yet so severe that they are impatient with Ohio Rep. Bob Ney's continuing chairmanship of the Committee on House Administration, in spite of services he rendered to Jack Abramoff. Ney has explained, by way of extenuation -- yes, extenuation -- that he did not know what he was doing.

Ouch!

Liberals practice "K Street liberalism" with an easy conscience because they believe government should do as much as possible for as many interests as possible. But "K Street conservatism" compounds unseemliness with hypocrisy. Until the Bush administration, with its incontinent spending, unleashed an especially conscienceless Republican control of both political branches, conservatives pretended to believe in limited government. The past five years, during which the number of registered lobbyists more than doubled, have proved that, for some Republicans, conservative virtue was merely the absence of opportunity for vice.

Ok so a little dig at those danmed Liberals then back to the punching! "Hypocracy!" Pow! "conservative virtue was merely the absence of opportunity for vice!" Biff!

Think the Republicains are going to get a drubbing during the mid terms? I have a little hunch they will.

A great primer on the Abramoff matter

Unlike many of my compatriots in the lefty blogosphere I have not spent much time ruminating on the alito appointment hearings now playing on a TV near you. I have chosen to focus a bunch of my time to looking into the Abramoff implosion. and what that might mean for the GOP and the Democrats in the next election cycle.

Today an article entitled A Washington Tidal Wavewas put up on MSNBC.com that, I think, very well sums up the whold affair as it is now known. it shows the cast of characters in all of their glory and points some not-too-subtle fingers at the Federal Government and it's own oversight as reasons that this has gotten so far out of hand.

I would urge you to read it in it's entirety. It is a great resource but here are a few of my favorite bit just in case you don't have my kind of time:

Before too long, recalled a former GOP leadership aide—who, like almost anyone on Capitol Hill these days, declines to be identified talking about his relationship with Abramoff—the DeLay staffers began to think that Abramoff's box at the arena was their box, and, in the cozy way of Washington, it might as well have been. "Jack was sort of like a drug dealer," said the former staffer. "He'd give them [DeLay's staffers] a little taste and then get them hooked."

...

To hear [Bob] Ney's friends tell it, the five-term Ohio Republican was set up. He was lulled into believing that a golfing trip to St. Andrews in Scotland with Abramoff and Reed in 2003 was perfectly acceptable because he was told, said one ally, that "it's just like the trip DeLay took" with Abramoff two years earlier. The official purpose, listed on House disclosure forms, was to give "a speech to Scottish Parliamentarians." Never mind that the Scottish Parliament was not in session and Ney never went there. He was told that, in between golf outings, he would attend a dinner with the Scottish lawmakers. But on the night of the event, he was told by Abramoff that the Scots had canceled at the last minute. A source close to Ney who did not wish to be identified discussing a federal investigation says that Ney had been lured by Abramoff into taking a lobbying junket.

...

Some of Ney's actions may be hard to explain. In 2003, Ney went to London to meet the operator of a Cyprus-based airplane firm, FN Aviation, which was seeking Ney's help in getting permission to sell U.S.-made airplane spare parts to Iran. The owner of the company, Nigel Winfield, a thrice-convicted felon who once went to prison for trying to fleece Elvis Presley, wanted a "humanitarian" exception to a ban on the sale of U.S. high tech to Iran (Iran's aging Boeings had begun crashing). Ney, his lawyers acknowledge, did talk to the State Department, though nothing came of it. (Winfield did not respond to calls from NEWSWEEK.) But on another trip to London, Ney called up Winfield's Syrian-born business partner, Fouad Al-Zayat, known in London casinos as The Fat Man, and suggested they go gambling together. Putting down a $100 bet, Ney ended the evening $34,000 richer, according to his financial reports. Ney says nothing improper took place; he just got lucky. It may also be a coincidence that a year earlier Ney acknowledged at least $30,000 in credit-card debts which he paid off after his gambling windfall.

$34,000 on a $100 bet? I wish I were so lucky... These guys could give a bag of pretzels lessons on how to be crooked.

It's your government, bought and paid for.

Bremer was shot down on troops

I have never been a fan of Paul Bremer nor the Coalition Provisional Authority, but it does seem that history is finally coming out in the open to make him a bit less of a "company man" for the Defense Dept. Today the AP has this story about the sugestion Bremer made to Donald Rumsfeld regarding troop levels. It seems that Bremer thought that there needed to be more than 450,000 troops on the ground to quell the violence of the insurgency. It further seems that General Richard B. Meyers thought differently. It might be seen that Bremer was right in this. I don't want to endorse his policy in any way but I would agree that the higher troop levels would have been useful after the occupation began.

Funny that the Defense Dept. has chosen today, when the Alito hearing is in full swing to release this interesting information. Coincidence? Probably not.

Frightening....

In a total WTF moment Kos of DailyKos fame discovers an online service that just might be one of the most invasive things ever made available: A service that for a mere $110 will give you the entire monthly phone records of any phone you want records for. Cell or land line.

Let that sink in for a minute. You can get full incoming and outgoing phone records for any number in the US. Any number. You can get info on who called your ex-girlfriend, your congressman, or your bookie. By the same token they can get total access to you.

They can look at every call you made in the last month.

Hope you don't have anything to hide...

Here's the story that opened this can of worms...

War president?

Does anyone know if we have actually declared war? I am under the impression that congress never actually declared war against anyone in a literal binding sense. I know that there was a resolution as follows:

(a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and
appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

I guess I don't see where all of the wiretapping, detention, torture, and assumption of extraconstitutional powers is coming from...

Is it just me?

BTW, you can look at the whole resolution here.

Pat Robertson: Idiot.

SO what the hell's up with Pat Robertson now? CBS News Has the latest in his longstanding war against rational behavior.

Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson suggested Thursday that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine punishment for "dividing God's land."

"God considers this land to be his," Robertson said on his TV program "The 700 Club." "You read the Bible and he says 'This is my land,' and for any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, 'No, this is mine."

*chuckle*

It's just getting too easy to make fun of these guys. Where's the challenge?

Go read.

The Rude Pundit Has a series of essays aout his time in New Orleans this last week. The writing is powerful and the photos give you a sense of just what the difficulties will be in getting NO back together. If it can ever be gotten back together.

Wal-Mart has the answers!

So there's a book for everyone right? Well over at Wal-Mart you can buy:Support Our Troops: Quotations on Patriotism and Prayer with Magnet(s) Only $9.35.You save 6%!



Just what we all need for our Pickups or SUVs Show our troops in the field that we can all support them by doing nothing but memorizing some pithy sayings and shopping for taiwanese crap from a lowest common denominator store chain.

Whither Ariel Sharon?

When he came into power following the reign of Benjamin Netanyahu I was appalled. It seemed to me that he had alll on his own provoked the Al-Aqusa intifada that has now been raging in Israel. My thinking on this was colored by news reports of Sep 28, 2000, when Sharon, acting allegedly in the interests of keeping historical artifacts from being vandalized by Palestinian archaeologists, went to the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif complex along with almost 1,000 police officers. The news reports hailed him as a zionist hardliner with whom no negotiation was possible.

It seemed to me that in electing this man to prime minister in 2001, Isrealis were putting their worst foot forward and saying to the world that they were not the least interested in peace. I obviously had a very wrong impression of Mr. Sharon. In the intervening years I have become aware of his passion for not only the Jews of Israel but also for a lasting peace that he knew would be difficult to attain. He has engineered great changes in the way that Palestinian/Israeli relations have been managed and what a lasting Mid-East peace could look like. He has brought his country far but still has a tremendous amount of work to do. As he leaves politics due to his body's frailty, his policies are in a state of half-completion.

I now wonder how Israeli politics will keep from running backwards away from some of the very pragmatic and prudent steps that this amazing centrist political figure has wrought. He came in as (in my removed and obscured american eye) and arch conservative hawk. He has gone out as a consensus building centrist who took the best ideas from both the extreme right annd the extreme left.

The politics of the middle east cannot be easily encapsulated, especailly by me, but it looks like they are about to enter a very chaotic periiod in the next days and weeks. I fervently hope that cool heads will prevail and that the route to peace will be found.

WV Mining disaster 2

It occurs to me that the last post seemed a little flip and as if I was scoring political points on a very tragic event. I am not. I do feel terrible for the families of those who were lost. I am also, however, aware that there are questions that need to be asked about how the workers of this country are being served by the federal regulators that are supposed to be responsible for their safety. What does it say that the job of looking after the safety of miners was given to mine owner/operators who are at best more consious of their bottom lines than their duty to the workers that they hire to do the back-breaking physical work? Do we really need to have an event like this to find out that keeping people safe should be a priority? There are 12 families that think that there should be more safety on the job right now. At least 12. This kind of calculus is easy for a four old to understand. We need to hold our leaders to at least that level.

The WV mining disaster

Kevin Drum has a very interesting look at the Sago Mine disaster today. If you think there's no way that Bush administration politics could have had a hand in this tragedy, think again.

...after George Bush took office in 2001 the Mine Safety and Health Administration was stocked with coal mining executives who were distinctly less interested in mine safety than they should have been.

Read that post and then check out this one. It talks about the safety record of the mine that exploded. The Sago mine had a safety rating more than 3 times worse than the national average.

Chalk up another "heckuva job" for the cronies in t he Bush administration.

Bush could bypass new torture ban - The Boston Globe

The Boston Globe's Charlie Savage has the goods on the supposedly tough new law that was passed through the house and senate attached to the latest Military funding bill. The language, inserted by AZ Senator John McCain, effectively ended the use of torture or any "cruel, inhuman, or degrading" tactics upon prisoners of war or other captives.

the Bush administration decided, once again that it needs not be bounded by such laws.

After approving the bill last Friday, Bush issued a ''signing statement" -- an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law -- declaring that he will view the interrogation limits in the context of his broader powers to protect national security. This means Bush believes he can waive the restrictions, the White House and legal specialists said.

''The executive branch shall construe [the law] in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President . . . as Commander in Chief," Bush wrote, adding that this approach ''will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President . . . of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."

Some legal specialists said yesterday that the president's signing statement, which was posted on the White House website but had gone unnoticed over the New Year's weekend, raises serious questions about whether he intends to follow the law.

There seems to be no amount of kingly power that Bush and his crew are not willing to take. I was under the impression that this was a nation governed by laws not men. How much of a simpleton I have been.

Go Read the General

Go now!Jesus' General has a post that everyone needs to read...

Why do the troops hate the troops?

Agence France Presse is reporting that the Prez'nits job approval rating has fallen of late among people that are, amazingly enough, in the military!

Seriously, I'm not making this up.

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Support for President George W. Bush's Iraq policy has fallen among the US armed forces to just 54 percent from 63 percent a year ago, according to a poll by the magazine group Military Times.

In its annual survey of the views of military personnel, the group reported on its website that support for Bush's overall policies dropped over the past year to 60 percent from 71 percent.

While still significantly more supportive of the president than the broad US population, the fall in support by military personnel tracks a similar decline in the president's popularity among the general public.

Why do the troops not support our troops?

That Prez'nit. He's a bad, bad, man.

Mr. "Gimmie Five" Goes to Jail

Yes folks it looks like the end of the line for Jack Abramoff. The New York Times is today reporting that the inimitable Mr Abramoff has been scheduled to plead guilty to three felony counts in a plea deal with federal prosecutors. As the blog speculation suggests, this should open the door for a whole lot of very high value prosecutions of GOP congressmen, staffers, and lobbyists.

For those of you who are out of the loop on this guy it might help to know that he is one of the K street regulars who have helped to put together the massive Republican funding machine. At one point in 2002 Abramoff along with his then partner Michael Scanlon devised a scheme which bilked millions of dollars from their Indian gambling clients that ultimately went directly to Mr's Abramoff and Scanlon. They called this scheme "Gimmie Five" as in five million dollars, the sum each of the men was said to have pocketed in the deal. It was ultimately this, and the complaints about this behavior by the Indian tribes involved with the partners that lead to the beginning of the investigation.

Abramoff is a household name in fundraising circles. The deal is expected to make waves in Official Washington as the federal net widens to encompass at least a dozen lawmakers, thier staff, and lobbyists. Former House majority leader Tom DeLay is also heavily implicated.

The size and scope of the ongoing investigation is still not fully known but it may prove to be the largest corruption investigation in the US government in at least a half century. The sheer number of tainted and possibly briberous funds hasn't been seen in at least 65 years and might never have been equalled in the history of the US Congress. Many GOP lawmakers are very nervous about the outcome of this investigation. With Mr. Abramoff's co-operation it would appear that they have reason to be nervous. Keep a good watch on this story. It's going to be a barnburner. In a few weeks though I doubt there will be any other story on the news.