Saturday, March 11, 2006

Every Sperm is Scared

Mikhaela portrays Claude Allen's vision of America. I mean, aside from the alleged stealing.

Straw Poll

Apparently the Tweety-Chuck Todd wankfest that was the Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll resulted in Frist at #1, Romney at #2, and Allen/McCain at #3. Tweety and Todd, who had been pushing Allen presumably because if it's a local boy they'll be able to feel more important and involved, were seen crying in the corner.

My prediction: The Republican nominee will not be Frist, Romney, Allen, or McCain.

McCain Hearts Arnold

But enough to break his own law? Campaign finance law makes my head hurt and I'm not sure if this is a genuine violation but it could be.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Wanker of the Day

Victor Davis Hanson.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Tone Deaf

Interestingly, I think McCain has completely lost sight of the politcal dyamics. Ad Nags gives us some more info:
The extent of Mr. McCain's embrace of Mr. Bush was striking, and several Republicans here suggested it reflected two political facts. The first is that he needs to reassure conservatives of his loyalty to Mr. Bush, and the second is that, at this point, he is in a strong enough position in this inchoate field to have flexibility in presenting himself.

Mr. McCain went so far as to condemn the collapse of the port deal, saying that Congress had served Mr. Bush poorly by not permitting a 45-day review of security concerns to proceed, though he did not mention that the deal was sunk by fellow Republicans.

"The president deserved better," Mr. McCain said.

Mr. McCain praised the president for his failed effort to rewrite the nation's Social Security system, said he supported the decision to go into Iraq and blistered critics who suggested the White House had fabricated or exaggerated evidence of unconventional weapons in Iraq in order to justify the invasion.

"Anybody who says the president of the United States is lying about weapons of mass destruction is lying," Mr. McCain said.

We've already hit the tipping point and the post-Bush age is upon us. McCain's absolutely wrong to think that the way to curry favor with the party faithful is to suck up to Bush. The faithful are basically done with Bush, disappointed with what he's failed to provide them with and at least vaguely aware of his detached incompetence. The authoritarian cultists are looking around for a new cult leader and they're a bit tired of the last one. We've reached the end of the days of Republicanism=Bushism, and people are now desperate to redefine it. McCain's neither impressing Republican primary voters nor burnishing his maverick credentials.

Sad pandering politician near the end of his career and he doesn't even know it.


McCain's little incoherent stunt will no doubt play will with its intended audience - the axis of Russert/Matthew/etc... - but my guess is that it'll go about as well with the party faithful as Drudge makes it sound.

Though I am glad that he thinks that no one should give him any support for the next three years.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Been Caught Stealing

Roger Ailes gives us the Claude Allen theme song.

More Allen

Jpod plays the "just being jokey" card. Since cultural conservatives cover themselves in the blanket of Chrisitianity which acts as a Shield From All Criticism by our mainstream media let's consider what kind of freak George Bush appoints to important positions:

And when all else fails, the Administration has simply preached: In February, a hundred CDC researchers on sexually transmitted diseases were summoned to Washington by HHS deputy secretary Claude Allen for a daylong affair consisting entirely of speakers extolling abstinence until marriage. There were no panels or workshops, just endless testimonials, including one by a young woman calling herself "a born-again virgin."

Panty sniffers.


I think it's rather funny that John Tierney has endorsed polygamy, but what says a lot about him as that when he put on his deep thinking cap to do so it never occurred to him to consider or endorse more general polyamorous arrangements. Nope, for Tierney, it's all about women joining a harem to get ahead. At least we know what's in his porn collection.

Personally I don't really care how people arrange their lives into consensual (key part) relationships. However the complexities of such formal legal arrangements may be too much for the state to deal with. The division of assets, child custody arrangments, and other issues would be very difficult to handle in the case of divorce. And the state's interest in the welfare of the children generally is made a bit more difficult to handle.

Milosevic Dead in Cell


Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Late Night

Try not to shoot anybody in the face or commit any refund fraud.

Friday, March 10, 2006

Fresh Thread

Try not to shoot anybody in the face. Unless they're cylons!!!

Hilarious Ignorance

Uh, Jpod, he was deputy HHS Secretary, Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and was nominated by Bush to be a federal judge, and his name has made a few appearances at The Corner. Almost a shame the Democrats blocked the judicial nomination, that would've been funny.




Hopefully this will make frightened Republicans stay home and hide under their beds and cry and the rest of us can get tickets.

Grand Old Police Blotter

Was a bit weird when Claude Allen resigned.

Now we know:

When Claude Allen, President Bush's longtime domestic-policy adviser, resigned suddenly on Feb. 9, it baffled administration critics and fans. The White House claimed that Allen was leaving to spend more time with his family, while the Washington Times speculated that the 45-year-old aide, a noted social conservative, might have quit to protest a new Pentagon policy about military chaplains. Allen himself never publicly explained the reason for his departure.

News today may shed light on the mystery of Allen's resignation. According to the Montgomery County Police Department, Allen was arrested yesterday and charged in a felony theft and a felony theft scheme. According to a department press release, Allen conducted approximately 25 fraudulent "refunds" in Target and Hecht's stores in Maryland. On Jan. 2, a Target employee apprehended Allen after observing him receive a refund for merchandise he had not purchased. Target then contacted the Montgomery County Police. According to a source familiar with the case, Target and the police had been observing Allen since October 2005.

Allen is charged with practicing a form of shoplifting called "refund fraud."

...more on Allen:

Known as Rove’s enforcer, Allen wielded a heavy, censorious and punitive hand at HHS. In November 2001, Thompson loyally toed the Rove-Bush line when he put Allen in charge of supervising HHS’s audit of HIV-prevention spending. Allen led an HHS witch-hunt that investigated all of the AIDS service organizations (ASOs) receiving any federal funding (like New York City’s Gay Men’s Health Crisis) whose staff members had disrupted Tommy Thompson’s speech to the 14th Annual International AIDS Conference in Barcelona; they were there to protest Bush’s lethal do-nothingism about the AIDS pandemic. These audits were designed to intimidate ASOs into abandoning AIDS advocacy. A number of ASOs, like San Francisco’s Stop AIDS Project and half a dozen other California AIDS-fighting groups, were ultimately purged from receiving U.S. funding by the Allen-led witch-hunt because Allen didn’t like their science-based sex-education programs. Allen ordered Advocates for Youth, the leading national coalition for safe-sex ed, audited half a dozen times.

Moreover, Allen was the driving force to replace science-based sex ed with the failed policy of teaching that only abstinence prevents AIDS. A black conservative and religious primitive, Allen helped bludgeon the Centers for Disease Control, which reports to HHS, into purging safe-sex materials from its Web sites and into adopting mandatory new rules requiring AIDS-fighting groups to teach that condoms don’t work in preventing the spread of AIDS, as I reported in the L.A. Weekly last year ("Condom Wars," June 25–July 1). When a federal judge found that a federally funded Louisiana abstinence program "illegally handed out Bibles, staged anti-abortion prayer rallies outside women’s clinics and had students perform Bible-based skits," Allen refused to have the program audited, while continuing his repeated audit persecutions of effective AIDS-fighting groups teaching condom use.

Allen also enforced his abstinence-only line when he was commissioner of Health and Human Services for Virginia under right-wing GOP Governor Jim Gilmore. There, too, he bent public health priorities to the religious right’s agenda, and led a state-sponsored anti–safe sex crusade that he cooked up with a kooky abstinence-only Christer outfit called the Institute for Youth Development, which also claims that condoms don’t work to prevent AIDS and teaches children to fear, rather than understand, sex. As Allen said then of condom use, "It’s like telling your child, ‘Don’t use the car,’ but then leaving the keys in the Lamborghini and saying, ‘But if you do, buckle up.’"

Allen’s history as a gay-baiter goes back to his days as a top aide to the notorious homophobe Senator Jesse Helms. In 1984, Allen accused Helms’ Democratic challenger, then-Governor James Hunt, of having links to "queers," "radical feminists," socialists and unions (Hunt was, in fact, a Bible-quoting right-wing Dem.) And Allen forged his odious reputation as a black capo for the racist right when he continued working for Helms despite the senator’s militant opposition to making Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday a national holiday.

Notorious for his anti-abortion stance, at HHS Allen helped use its regulatory powers to turn Title 10 of the Public Services Act — which Bush père had championed — away from family planning and the promotion of condom use and into an abstinence-only program. In his Virginia years, Allen’s Christian-right extremism led him to endanger the health of children. Then Allen worked to defeat legislation that provided health insurance for children of the working poor, largely because the program covered abortion services for rape and incest victims under the age of 18. "When the law was ultimately enacted, Allen was faulted for not enrolling children quickly enough, and admitted that ‘abortion was the sticking point’ delaying the enrollment of children," as People for the American Way (and civil rights groups like the NAACP) pointed out last fall when they successfully opposed Bush’s nomination of Allen for a federal judgeship. "In this episode, Allen proved himself to be so adamantly opposed to reproductive rights that he found it preferable for poor children to go without health coverage than to risk an underage sexual-abuse victim having access to state-funded abortion services."

Lamont on AAR

I took a little nap (wee flu bug) and then forgot about it and missed it, but the Lamont Blog lets us know what we missed.

You can donate to Ned here. here.


Ford's former press secretary sure is a wanker.

Bill Frist IS a Pimp


Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.


Unlike Jeralyn I think it's perfectly fine to accept an ad and then mock it, but it's nice to see all the pro-torture conservatives on record.

More Clinton Inevitability

Ezra fleshes it out a bit.

I'm not totally sure I agree with the basic storyline, but mostly because "inevitable" is a bit of a strong word for anything. It's nonetheless interesting because it's a way of looking at the primaries which has been largely absent from the conversation.

The undeniable point is that this dynamic will be there, it will be important, and anyone who wants to beat Clinton will have to figure out how to change it somewhat.

Recent experience makes us think that a primary win in Iowa means it's all over, but let's remember 1992. In order, Clinton lost Iowa, New Hampshire, Maine, South Dakota. On a day with 7 primaries he then won one - Georgia - and lost Colorado, Idaho, Maryland, Minnesota, Utah, and Washington.

He then won North Dakota, lost Arizona, and won South Carolina.

...On the other hand, today's indictment of Hillary Clinton might have a big impact on her political future.

Groundhog Day

5-25-2004 Bush Seeks to Reassure Nation on Iraq

8/22/05 Bush plans bid to rally Iraq support.

12-1-2005 Bush Presents Plan to Win Iraq War.

Today - Bush again aims to rebuild support for Iraq

No wonder Trent Duffy resigned.


I doubt I'll take too much away from the forthcoming Matt Bai profile of Mark Warner except that Mark Warner participating in the exercise proves that he or his people need better judgment. Any Democratic politician who doesn't realize (or whose people don't realize) that if Matt Bai comes knocking at your door wanting to do a profile, you slam it shut and bolt the door needs to rethink his press strategy.

Since the story says Trippi says the Clinton nomination is inevitable if she runs, I'll provide his reasoning which he shared the other night. Basically his take is that Clinton will get literally all of the African-American vote in the primaries, and therefore the only way to knock her out is to figure out how to get some of that vote.

Contract on America

Armando reminds us just how truly vapid the Contract With America was. The only reason it had much resonance was because the press at the time treated it as if it were chiseled on stone tablets and given to them by Moses. The Democrats are quite capable of typing up an utterly vapid press release themselves, and the press would respond by basically ignoring it or treating it with disdain, as they probably should.

Of course the Dems can improve their messaging, but stories about how they don't have a message just write themselves which is why they'll keep being written.

Norton Again

To be clear, Abramoff tendrils of course reach to Norton but that's not necessarily why she resigned. If she resigned because of that it means more than tendrils, it means the investigation is bumping up against her and she's gotta bail before it makes King George look bad.

From America for Sale: (pdf)

In December 2000, DeLay aides Tony Rudy and Thomas Pyle helped GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff get access to newly-nominated Interior Secretary Gale Norton. Abramoff represented several Indian tribes interested in lobbying the Secretary. This assistance occurred just a few months after Abramoff and his clients donated money to DeLay, gave him use of a skybox, and took him on a lavish golfing trip to Scotland in the summer of 2000. Soon after the email exchanges offering help, Tony Rudy left DeLay's office to work for Abramoff.

Besides using his Congressional contacts, Abramoff and his Indian tribe clients gained access to Interior Secretary Gale Norton by donating a quarter-million dollars to the Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy (CREA), an "environmental" group Norton co-founded in the late 1990s with conservative activist Grover Norquist. The group's current president, Italia Federici, who describes Norton as a mentor and worked on Norton's failed Senate run, acted as a go-between for Abramoff and the Department of the Interior, even though CREA's mission does not include Indian affairs advocacy. The result of the lobbying and contributions was that Abramoff and his client, the chairman of the Coushatta tribe, sat with Secretary Norton at a CREA-sponsored fundraising event in September, 2001.

Another avenue for Abramoff to get access to the Interior Department was J. Steven Griles, Deputy Secretary at the Department of the Interior. From 2001 to 2005, Griles used his position as the number-two person in the Department to try and prevent the Jena Band of Choctaw Indians from building their casino. According to Michael Rossetti, former counsel to Secretary Gale Norton, Griles repeatedly tried to get into meetings in which Norton reviewed the Jena proposal, and even tried to show Norton a binder full of materials arguing against the proposal—a binder that, when questioned, Griles admitted came from Abramoff. One of the main channels of communication between Abramoff and Griles was Griles' friend at CREA, Italia Federici. While Federici and Abramoff regularly contacted Griles about the Jena casino and other various Indian matters, Abramoff's clients contributed heavily to CREA. Abramoff even offered Griles a job lobbying at Abramoff's firm of Greenberg Traurig.

Wanker of the Day

Andrew Sullivan.

The comment about Krugman being "too important to have his columns available to non-subscribers" is also ridiculous. Times Select is likely an idiotic business decision but it wasn't as if it was Krugman's decision to do so. In any case, Sullivan has long written for The New Republic which makes much of its content available only to subscribers.

Bye Gale

CNN sez Gale Norton is resigning.

...I don't think the universe likes me enough for this to be the result of Abramoff tendrils getting too close to her, but Faiz provides the visual.

A Cure for the Joeldrums

Ned Lamont will be on the Randi Rhodes show today. He may be making a little news...

Sandy Speaks

O'Connor warns about Republican attacks on judicial independence.

It strikes me that that Republican attacks on the judiciary are rather similar to their attacks on the press. "Judicial Activism"/"Liberal Bias" are just frames into which you can plug any judgifying/journamalisming you don't like. And wankers like Fred Hiatt are aiding their cause:

Washington, D.C.: I've noticed The Post has embraced blogs in a big way. Most seem to be opinion, not straight news, which I guess is what blogs everywhere tend to be. Some are on the left (Froomkin), some in the middle (the debate), but I haven't seen any that are consistently right-of-center. What do you think of the blogs on the site now (Achenblog, debate, etc.)? Do you read them? And are the any plans to add a conservative blog?

Fred Hiatt: I don't oversee this Web site--but I believe the people who do agree with your point and are in the process of looking for a right-of-center blog. I think it would be a good idea.

I have no idea what Froomkin's politics are, but I also have no doubt that if Kerry had won the election administration his column would pretty much be the same as it is now, and people like me wouldn't be calling for a "pro-Kerry" blogger to balance him out.

Lying Freak Rick Santorum

I linked to this before but you really have to click through and watch the video.


Religious conservatives would prefer that people die than have sex. That'd be really funny except one of those conservatives is on the CDC's immunization committee.

Overs Win

Hey. Wrong for once. +243K new jobs. USA! USA!

Harold Ford is a Pimp

That's what Liddy Dole and the rest of the racist Republicans are saying.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Frankie Goes Forth

Well this is a step in the right direction, though an extra detail or two is in order. TNR:

Over the last 25 years, liberalism has lost both its good name and its sway over politics. But it is liberalism's loss of imagination that is most disheartening. Since President Clinton's health care plan unraveled in 1994--a debacle that this magazine, regrettably, abetted--liberals have grown chastened and confused, afraid to think big ideas. Such reticence had its proper time and place; large-scale political and substantive failures demand introspection, not to mention humility. But it is time to be ambitious again. And the place to begin is the very spot where liberalism left off a decade ago: Guaranteeing every American citizen access to affordable, high-quality medical care.

And how did that magazine abet that debacle? A clue is to be found at former editor Andrew Sullivan's bio page:

TNR also published the first airing of 'The Bell Curve,' the explosive 1995 book on IQ, and 'No Exit,' an equally controversial essay that was widely credited with helping to torpedo the Clinton administration's plans for universal health coverage. In 1996, Sullivan was named Editor of the Year by Adweek magazine.

The "No Exit" article was indeed widely credited with "helping to torpedo the Clinton administration's plans." It was also, to put it mildly, a factually challenged article. The title referred to the inability of people under the proposed legislation to pay for health care outside their health plan. Not true.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Shrill Before It Was Cool

The Shrill One:

Bruce Bartlett, the author of "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy," is an angry man. At a recent book forum at the Cato Institute, he declared that the Bush administration is "unconscionable," "irresponsible," "vindictive" and "inept."

It's no wonder, then, that one commentator wrote of Mr. Bartlett that "if he were a cartoon character, he would probably look like Donald Duck during one of his famous tirades, with steam pouring out of his ears."

Oh, wait. That's not what somebody wrote about Mr. Bartlett. It's what Mr. Bartlett wrote about me in September 2003, when I was saying pretty much what he's saying now.

Human nature being what it is, I don't expect Mr. Bartlett to acknowledge his about-face. Nor do I expect any expressions of remorse from Andrew Sullivan, the conservative blogger who also spoke at the Cato forum. Mr. Sullivan used to specialize in denouncing the patriotism and character of anyone who dared to criticize President Bush, whom he lionized. Now he himself has become a critic, not just of Mr. Bush's policies, but of his personal qualities, too.

Michael Moore is Fat

Every now and then I'd like to see the conservatarians care about stuff like this at least a little more than what some teacher does somewhere. It's their pet war and their tax money after all.

WASHINGTON - In the first action of its kind, a federal jury found Thursday that a private security company bilked the U.S.-led government in Iraq out of millions of dollars.

Custer Battles, which has had offices in Virginia and Rhode Island, was found to have used shell companies, fake invoices and even stolen forklifts in an elaborate scheme to defraud the Coalition Provisional Authority that oversaw Iraq after the invasion.

Though a handful of other contractors involved in the reconstruction face criminal charges, the ruling marks the first time that a federal jury has ordered a contractor in Iraq to pay back purloined funds to the government.

After a three-week trial, the jury found Custer Battles responsible for 37 separate fraudulent acts, meaning that the firm could face payments and penalties totaling more than $10 million.

"There is an orgy of greed among contractors in Iraq, and the Bush administration is for all practical purposes participating in it," said Alan Grayson, lawyer for the whistle-blowers who filed the case. "They have done nothing to get the taxpayers' money back. They've done nothing to punish the wrongdoers."

Quote of the Day

Graydon Carter:

He speaks to the audience as if they're idiots. I think the reason he does that is because that's the way these issues were explained to him.

I'm with Digby. That's something I've never quite been sure of.

Ad Nags Returns!

Finally Adam Nagourney resumes posting at his blog.

The Derb Gets His Ass Kicked



I certainly had hopes that Franklin Foer would be at least a marginal improvement over Peter "Prime Fighting Age" Beinart over at Joe Lieberman Weekly, at least until I stumbled across this sentence:

The shrewdest observers of human nature in newsprint, such as Tierney's Times colleague David Brooks...


Missing White Woman

Could be a problem for little Ricky.

Ricky's getting some bad press in Pittsburgh too. Oopsy.


Before I forget, monthly jobs data comes in tomorrow. Census forecast is +210K total jobs. I'll take the under bet.

Upcoming Fun

Olbermann's gonna spank O'Reilly tonight.

Ned Lamont will be on the Randi Rhodes show tomorrow, hosted by Sam Seder.

I'll be on the Majority Report 8 O'Clock hour tonight.

Fresh Thread

Try not to shoot anybody in the face.

Conservatives Heart Tweety


...adding, if he's speaking that much for free he certainly enjoys an audience. Alternatively, if he's taking money he may be violating what NBC claimed their policy was in 2002.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.


It's pretty much a given that Ben Chandler probably wouldn't have won without support from bloggers. It's also the case that Stephanie Herseth got a tremendous boost from bloggers, though I won't say I can claim that blogger support was necessary. Neither of those members of Congress are my favorites, but the fact that they were supported despite being rather right wing undercuts the usual media narrative that lefty bloggers only support candidates that are crrrraazy lefties who are otherwise unelectable. Herseth and Chandler won against Republicans in conservative districts.

But, anyway, supporting Rodriguez was a no brainer and it's a shame we didn't jump on it earlier. The seat is going to remain Dem regardless (unless Cuellar jumps ship) and it was an obvious opportunity.

There are lots of reasons to support underdogs, and for better or for worse most of the candidates directly supported by Kos and me in the last election cycle were not especially ideologically liberal. They were generally underdogs running against incumbents (most people running against incumbents are underdogs), and in many cases the small amount of funds provided to them helped force their opponents to spend huge amounts of money in return, diverting money from other places.

If my goal in life was to support people who were "winners" I'd be writing checks to Joe Biden, Hilllary Clinton, and Ted Kennedy. All 3 of those candidates will win their next election. All 3 of those candidates have far more money than they need to win their next election. All 3 of those candidates still have no problem getting people to line up to give them even more money for their campaigns. If there's wasted money in campaigns that's where it is. And, yes, I know, that those candidates tend to pass on some money to other candidates, but I'm not sure how supporting party "kingmakers" is really of much value.

It's odd that people who throw $50 at Ciro Rodriguez get mocked while people who throw down $2000 to the Clinton campaign aren't. This is not a slap against Clinton, it's just that the "big money" in campaigns is accepted as the way things are done while the little money is scorned.

Ad Nags Goes to Battle


For the record I never wear pajamas.

Albritton on Iraq and the Wankosphere

Unsurprisingly he says that the military will only embed the "right" journalists.

Tbogg Is Writing a Book

Sounds like a bestseller to me. Probably win a Pulitzer, Polk, Oscar, and Nobel as well.

Lying Freak Rick Santorum

Still lying.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Fresh Thread

Travel day. Try not to shoot anybody in the face.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.


Blitzer just now, roughly:

Officials won't tell us which ships get fully searched, but presumably this ship from Iran would be a prime target...

Now that's journalism!

Softball for the Right

Shocked. On Hardball Republican guests outnumber Democratic guests. Conservative pundits way outnumber liberal pundits. Republican guests get solo spots more often.

Provoking Genocide

A walk down Glennmory lane.


Digby leads us to this fascinating exchange between Tweety and Pat Toomey:

MATTHEWS: Well, let‘s talk about the mainstream. Would you like to repeal or have a court overrule Roe v. Wade?

TOOMEY: Yes, I would. I think that that was clearly not a legitimate decision. It was a case where five Supreme Court justices decided that...

MATTHEWS: Yes, so you would like to get rid of—yes, so you basically would like to see..

TOOMEY: They decided they were going to pass a law.

MATTHEWS: Well, do you think the Supreme Court was wrong in saying a woman has a right to an abortion in the first six months of pregnancy?

TOOMEY: Yes, I think they were wrong to say that. I think that‘s not

a legitimate decision. The Constitution is clearly silent on the issue of

abortion. States had addressed this issue, and the Supreme Court decided

it wanted to overrule the legislative bodies of all 50 states and so it

did. It issued an edict


MATTHEWS: If you go back to state‘s rights on abortion, would you support banning abortion in Pennsylvania?

TOOMEY: Yes, I would, yes.


MATTHEWS: In other words, if a woman had an abortion in Pennsylvania, what would you do to her?

TOOMEY: Well, you know, Chris


MATTHEWS: I‘m serious. What would you do to her? You said you want to ban it. You want to use the law to outlaw abortion.

TOOMEY: That‘s right.

MATTHEWS: What would you do to a woman who had an abortion? What would you do to her?

TOOMEY: Oh, I think we would first look at the doctor who is

performing the abortion and have some penalties


MATTHEWS: Why? Why don‘t you go after the woman? Why don‘t you go after the woman? In any other situation of law and justice, you go after the person who perpetrates the act. If it‘s wrong to commit...


MATTHEWS: No, really. This is what the whole issue of abortion is and where all the B.S. comes into this argument. Are you willing to say that you would put a woman in prison for having an abortion?

TOOMEY: Chris, I‘m not sure what the penalty would be. I‘m saying...


MATTHEWS: Well, say what you want it to be.


MATTHEWS: You said it should be banned. Would you please stand up for what you believe?

TOOMEY: That‘s right.

MATTHEWS: If abortion is wrong and it‘s a crime and it‘s murder, tell me what the punishment should be.

TOOMEY: And I‘m telling you that there should be legal action taken against the doctor who performs it.


TOOMEY: And we‘ve got to think through what we would do with regard to the woman.

MATTHEWS: What would you like to do?

TOOMEY: But, Chris, that doesn‘t change the fact


MATTHEWS: You are running for the United States Senate.


MATTHEWS: And you‘ve said we ought to get rid of Roe v. Wade and you said that abortion should be banned in Pennsylvania, but you won‘t tell me what the penalty should be.

TOOMEY: That‘s right, Chris.

Look, we can take things one step at a time. I think that the constitutional decision was invalid. It‘s perfectly OK to believe that these justices made up a right that doesn‘t exist in the Constitution without deciding exactly what the penalty should be under all circumstances.


MATTHEWS: You want to make up a law without a penalty. It‘s a crime without a penalty. I‘ve never heard of such a thing.


MATTHEWS: Why declare something to be...


MATTHEWS: I‘m serious. This is the problem and the confusion over abortion rights in this country.


MATTHEWS: People on the far right side won‘t say what they‘ll do.

They simply say they don‘t like the way things are now. What would you do?

TOOMEY: Well, if we overturn Roe vs. wade, one of the things we could do is leave it to states to make some decisions about this.


MATTHEWS: And what would you support Pennsylvania doing? You are running for senator from Pennsylvania. What should Pennsylvania do to women who decide to have an abortion? What would you do to them?

TOOMEY: Chris, I‘ve told you, I haven‘t figured out what I think we

should be doing with


MATTHEWS: Well, shouldn‘t you figure out a few of these things before you run for office?


MATTHEWS: Shouldn‘t you make those basic decisions?


TOOMEY: I think my voting record is pretty clear. I have got a very long voting record. I have made a lot of decisions.

And I think it‘s perfectly legitimate to say that one doesn‘t necessarily support this decision.

MATTHEWS: And what‘s Specter‘s position on abortion rights?

TOOMEY: Oh, is he a big advocate of abortion rights and taxpayer-funded abortion and all the rest, which is way outside the mainstream of the party.

MATTHEWS: OK, thank you very much, Congressman Pat Toomey. Thanks for playing HARDBALL. You may well win this one.

TOOMEY: All right.

I really can't figure out why they can't answer this question. Is it simply recognition of the political reality that punishing pregnant women for this stuff won't go down or is that they really are denying women the agency of their actions? People seem to have no problem with the notion of punishing women for, say, doing drugs or drinking alcohol during pregnancy so I can't quite accept that they would have a problem with holding a woman responsible for terminating her pregnancy.

Picking the Next President

Democrats need not apply, according to Tweety.

The road to the Republican nomination and even the White House, begins with the SRLC [Southern Republican Leadership Conference] in Memphis.


South Dakota has elections this year. The population is actually about evenly split on whether they describe themselves as "pro choice" or "pro life" despite the fact that the state just outlawed abortion. There is a primary in June and a general election in November for the state legislature. I don't know enough about the state to have grand ideas about how to implement the strategy, but if we really had a mobilized choice movement in this country a priority would be figuring out how to punish as many state lawmakers there as possible by voting their asses out of office. The bill was passed with overwhelming support in both of South Dakota's houses, and at least some of those who voted for it must be vulnerable.


Just when you think conservatives can't get any dumber.


It's sort of cute seeing Sullivan turn on his hero, and no surprise he'll assault our collective intelligence by publishing a book on the subject. Still, it'd be nice if every now and then Andrew Sullivan knew what he was talking about. Consider:

Onstead, Sullivan was on hand to second the critique. "This is a big-government agenda," he said. "It is fueled by a new ideology, the ideology of Christian fundamentalism." The bearded pundit offered his own indictment of Bush: "complete contempt" for democratic processes, torture of detainees, ignoring habeas corpus and a "vast expansion of the federal government." The notion, he said, that the "Thatcher-Reagan legacy that many of us grew up to love and support would end this way is an astonishing paradox and a great tragedy."

I know the myth of the Reagan era is one of those consensus things impervious to fact but lets go to the numbers.

In 1981 when Reagan took office, as a percent of GDP federal outlays were 22.2% of GDP. When he left, in 1989, federal outlays were an incredibly shrunken 21.2%. Revenues went from 19.6% to 18.4%, which is why we were blessed with those lovely Reagan deficits.

Under George Bush II, outlays went from 18.5 to 20.1% of GDP in 2005, and revenues from 19.8 to 17.5%. An increase in outlays, to be sure, but federal expenditures are still smaller, as a percentage of GDP, than they were at the end of the Reagan era of small government.

So, yes, under Reagan the federal government shrunk by a wee bit and under Bush it's grown by a bit more but the point is the Reagan era was not a magical age of tiny government and ponies.

I suppose mentioning illegally trading arms for hostages, supporting nun-killing Central American death squads, the Marine incident in Lebanon, and of course the incredible number of Reagan administration officials who were indicted/convicted would be a wee bit too much.

Wanker of the day


(tip from Nim)

Republican Criminal Enterprise

That's where we are now.

Given what we already know, the question is what more are they hiding?


Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Tuesday, March 07, 2006


SOS says Ciro/Cuellar 14,557/8542 with 189/276 reporting

DMN/AP says 14,197/8345 with 163/276



ALL COUNTIES Cuellar 8,127 1,596 Ciro 13,216 22,939 164 276



Ciro: 13216
Cuellar: 8127
Morales: 1596


Ciro: 12495
Cuellar: 7939


Latest SOS:

ALL COUNTIES Cuellar 7,304 1,408 Rodriguez 11,269 19,981 143 276


Latest DMN:

U.S. House - District 28 - Dem Primary - 105 of 276 Precincts Reporting - 38.04%
Name Party Votes Pct
Rodriguez, Ciro Dem 11,269 56.40
Cuellar, Henry (i) Dem 7,304 36.55
Morales, Victor Dem 1,408 7.05



.S. House - District 28 - Dem Primary - 67 of 276 Precincts Reporting - 24.28%
Name Party Votes Pct
Rodriguez, Ciro Dem 9,914 60.20
Cuellar, Henry (i) Dem 5,486 33.31
Morales, Victor Dem 1,068 6.49


County Cuellar (Incumbent) Morales Rodriguez Total Precincts Total
... ... ... ... Votes Reported Precincts
ALL COUNTIES 6,767 1,313 10,041 18,121 128 276


From DMN:

U.S. House - District 28 - Dem Primary - 66 of 276 Precincts Reporting - 23.91%
Name Party Votes Pct
Rodriguez, Ciro Dem 9,696 60.35
Cuellar, Henry (i) Dem 5,320 33.11
Morales, Victor Dem 1,051 6.54


Cuellar 5,016 Morales 983 Rodriguez 8,585 Total 14,584 Reported Precincts 98 Total 276

Numbers are jumping around, cannot account for discrepancies.


Just getting back in from Drinking Liberally. Proving that you never know who will stop by at Philadelphia's DL, Joe Trippi was there.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Polls Close at 8PM

Get your Ciro results here.

Mural City

One of the great things about Philly.

...more here, tip from Agent Orange.

Watch the Video

Digby links to and discusses a video of abortion protesters who are completely flummoxed by the question of what the punishment for women who have illegal abortion should be.

Torture Yoo

I hate these people.

Tweety Hearts Joe McCarthy

Not surprised.

Ciro Headquarters

Tracy has an update at headquarters. Like Chris Bowers I hate election day, and as one half of the story was "netroots help Ciro" the other half will be, if he loses, "netroots are teh suck who waste all their money on stoopid stuff," even though labor and other organizations joined in as well.


Altercation is good today.

The power of the consensus narrative in journalism is all but impermeable to reason or evidence. The right understands this and the left does not. That’s why the right worries little about nuance or getting the details straight; it’s the story that matters. Once you’ve defined the story, journalists struggle to make the facts fit the narrative rather than vice-versa.

The Coathanger State

South Dakota unveils its new logo.

Wanker of the Day

Ralph Peters.

Ciro Day

Cross your fingers. If no candidate gets 50% and the race goes to a runoff I hope many of you will be willing to open your wallets one more time.

How Big a Lead?

Chris Bowers is right. If Democrats are up by 40 points will these stories stop? By 60 points? Should the Dems be running a unified national campaign or should candidates focus on local politics? Is embracing diversity of viewpoints a good thing or a bad thing? Just what does it mean in March of 2006 to "Seize Opportunity."

Political strategists can debate the genuine answers to these questions, but my point is that when journalists write these stories based on nothing they can pick and choose the storyline. "Democrats in disarray" can be replaced with "Democrats blunder by demanding too much partisanship." "Democrats fail to have unified message" can be easily replaced with "Local Candidates Unhappy With National Message." The storyline can be flipped upside down to make the same point "Democrats Are Big Losers" based on... what?

The only real evidence to base these stories on is poll numbers. If generic ballot numbers and other polls showed that the Dems were unlikely to gain any seats there would be a place for these stories. But since that isn't the case... it's just wankery.

The Rape Exception

I've never understood the rape exception to laws forbidding abortion. Aside from it being moral gibberish, how exactly would it work in practice? Would there actually have to be a rape conviction before the exception is triggered, something virtually impossible given the rather short time horizon of pregnancy. Or would a woman simply have to claim to have been raped, and name the alleged assailant.

If it's the latter we can look forward to women making false rape accusations in order to obtain an abortion. If it's the former, it's not really much of an exception.

Poor Men Shouldn't Have Sex

It's a frequent comment by both anti-choicers and busybodies who think it's their right to judge "good" and "bad" abortions largely based on the perceived morality of the women getting the abortion that women who can't afford children shouldn't have sex.

Of course a lot of these poor-women-getting-abortions are married women with children who don't have the economic resources to support another child, and not the caricature of the "irresponsible slut" that the busybodies are conjuring in their heads. If these people really believe that anyone who doesn't have the economic resources to support (another) child should simply stop having sex then that applies to the men as well.

Fortunately, with the twin joys of DNA testing and forced pregnancy more and more men may rationally decide to do just that. Congratulations, fellas!

Generic Ballot Looking Good

Can't get too excited about such things, but still.

PRINCETON, NJ -- The latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, conducted Feb. 28 to March 1, finds the Democrats holding a substantial lead over the Republicans as the party more registered voters currently support in this fall's elections for Congress. More than half of registered voters (53%) favor the Democratic candidate for the U.S. House in their district; only 39% favor the Republican.

Gallup's recent trends on this "generic ballot" question -- from October 2005 through early February 2006 -- found a smaller six- to seven-point lead for the Democrats. However, the current 14-point Democratic lead is similar to a 12-point Democratic lead recorded last August. It is also among the highest seen since the Republicans came into power more than a decade ago.

As long as Republicans continue to hang the Bush/Cheney anchor around their necks this trend should hold. When your entire political existence involves nothing more than fealty to a very unpopular president this is the result.

Much Ado About Nothing

Unless I'm missing something this New York Times article is just another stab at holding bloggers to ethical standards and practices which don't apply anywhere else in the universe.

The public relations industry existed long before bloggers came along and they had reporters' phone numbers long before they had the email addresses of bloggers. Barely edited press releases have long been published, especially at smaller newspapers. I get press releases and information from all over the place all the time. Obviously disclosure is a nice idea if there are any financial relationships, a practice not always followed by our hallowed 4th estate, but if people want to devote their blogs to throwing up Wal Mart press releases they're free.

The main reason stories like this are even written is that contrary to popular opinnion the internet often provides a lot more transparency even when there are efforts to hide it. Astroturfing operations of various kinds through all media are nothing new, they're just usually harder to track. If Wal Mart pays 50 people to call talk radio all day and extol its virtues would anyone know?

I'm not defending all astro turfing practices or its practitioners, and there are certainly ethical issues that can be raised. But "Wal Mart PR guy reaches out to bloggers" just isn't much of a story. PR people reach out to me all the time. So what.

Texas Primary Day

Doublespeak does an interview with Nick Lampson and some other guy.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.


Hey, Fred Hiatt and the gang rouse themselves from their slumber to write a decent editorial calling on Congress to repeal the ban on gays in the military. Good for them. But of course what's missing from it is the acknowledgement that George Bush will not call for it and the Republicans who control Congress will not do it. The editorial would be a lot more honest if they appended "...but, sadly, the sociopathic Republican bigots who run the administration and Congress are as likely to do this as they are anything that might actually be good for the country."

But, hey, baby steps for Hiatt and friends I guess.

Monday, March 06, 2006

Fertility May Control You

It's time for more men to understand that getting rid of legal abortion increases by quite a lot the chance that one drunk evening will lead to 18 years of child support payments.

Alternatively, it decreases the chance that they'll get laid.

Sounds Like It's Time For Another Blogger Ethics Conference

I admit I occasionally get free books, CDs, and the odd DVD from publicists which I don't always disclose to you dear reader. And that makes me exactly like Jack Kemp!

emp was undaunted, and launched into an impassioned defense of the deal and of the United Arab Emerites, echoing a column he wrote taking to task those who have criticized it.

"It's the right thing to do," he said, calling the UAE a "valued ally" and reiterating the claim that canceling the deal would, as he put it in his column, "weaken our own national security and our chances for peace and liberation throughout the Middle East and Africa" (Shades of Andrea Mitchell, another die-hard member of the establishment, who suggested on Hardball that killing the ports deal could lead to rioting in the Muslim world).

What Kemp didn't say is that the UAE has invested millions in Free Market Global, an energy-trading company that he chairs.

You think all those zeroes might have had some influence on his opinion? Maybe not. But I'm pretty sure that a disclosure of his financial connection to those he was so fulsomely praising would have had some influence on the opinions of those watching.

Especially if viewers learned that Gen. Tommy Franks, whom Kemp used as his debating trump card -- quoting both in print and on Meet the Press the General extolling the Emirates -- is on the advisory board of Free Market Global, and stands to profit from maintaining good relations with the oil-rich emirs.

I called Kemp to ask him why he hadn't mentioned this intersection of interests, but I haven't heard back, even though I said why I was calling. Or perhaps because I did.

Exclusive Idiots

ABC wankers again.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

A Note To Reporters Concerned About Press Freedom

Just a brief reminder that "the government" is not an abstract entity, but is in fact run by people. That is, if the government starts going after the press for leaks then it's actually "George Bush" and "Abu Gonzales" who are going after the press for leaks.

Something relevant to keep in mind.


You've got to be kidding.

One truly hilarious sentence (in a demented and perverse sort of way) from the ABC report was this: "Majority Leader Bill Frist and committee Chairman Pat Roberts of Kansas have recently been trying to play peacemakers." Is that what they call people these days who try to block investigations into allegations of law-breaking by the President of the United States? "Peacemakers"?


In love with Boehner.


Just a reminder of what was, at least until the nipple, The Most Controversial Moment On Television Ever, causing an epic outbreak of outraged wingnuttery.
On behalf of our producers Kathleen Glynn and Michael Donovan (from Canada), I would like to thank the Academy for this award. I have invited the other Documentary nominees on stage with me. They are here in solidarity because we like non-fiction. We like non-fiction because we live in fictitious times. We live in a time where fictitious election results give us a fictitious president. We are now fighting a war for fictitious reasons. Whether it's the fiction of duct tape or the fictitious 'Orange Alerts,' we are against this war, Mr. Bush. Shame on you, Mr. Bush, shame on you. And, whenever you've got the Pope and the Dixie Chicks against you, your time is up.

The Oscar audience, you may remember, didn't clap.

Interesting times.


I guess CNN promised UAE that 5-6 would be the daily "Pro-Ports Deal Hour" to balance out Lou Dobbs from 6-7 after this episode:

Dubai Ports World tonight is making what I consider to be a rather astonishing new attempt to silence me and our coverage of this ports deal and our reporting of what at least I consider to be legitimate national security concerns about this transaction. Dubai Ports World has actually refused to grant CNN anymore interviews from Washington or London, and it's refused to allow CNN to videotape its operations in the United Arab Emirates and Hong Kong if we were to show you the video on this broadcast.

This is not the first time that Dubai Ports World has tried to silence me. Last week, a spokesman for the public relations firm that represents the company, Mark Dennis, declared, "CNN won't shut up Lou Dobbs." And as a result, they weren't going to cooperate.

Well, let me assure you that this latest attempt to silence our reporting and to explore the national security interests just like their last effort won't succeed. CNN's management, to its great credit, says it won't comply with any of Dubai Port World's demands, and I'll guarantee you that we're going to continue to report on the facts of this deal, we're going to continue to analyze it, we're going to continue to absolutely scrutinize our elected officials and administration officials who, in some cases, are not being straightforward about the national security interests and the reasons motivating this deal.

Tomorrow is Ciro Day

If you're in a position to do anything constructive, please try to do so.

Sodomized Religious Virgin Exception

The lunatics that rule us.



Iranian Democratization Foundation

My guess is that Mitch Wade just saw an opportunity to get his fingers into the inevitable wingnut slush fund.

THE war in Iraq is her father's business, but Elizabeth Cheney, the US Vice-President's daughter, has been given responsibility for bringing about a different type of regime change in Iran.

Ms Cheney, a 39-year-old mother of four, is a senior official in the US State Department, which has often been regarded as hostile territory by Dick Cheney's White House team.

However, father and daughter agree it would be better for the mullahs' regime in Iran to collapse from within rather than be ousted by force.

The question is whether democratic reform can be achieved before Iran becomes a nuclear power. That is the younger Cheney's job.

In the State Department, she is referred to as the "freedom agenda co-ordinator" and the "democracy tsar" for the Middle East. "She's fantastic and dynamic," said a colleague.
Her official title is deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, and she is in charge of spending $US85million ($114million) -- up from $US10 million last year -- recently allocated to promote democracy in Iran. Much of the money will be spent on broadcasting the views of exiles, dissidents and reformers inside Iran.


I never really understood the meaning of the world until I discovered the lovely Ann Althouse.

More Sex

From PZ Myers.

Images of Image of Images

Damn ferrets. C&P the link if you're interested.

Maverick McCain

Is jealous of the fact that the governor of South Dakota just declared all uteruses state property. Wants in on the action.

Yelling At Your Customers

The worst bit last night was the stern little lecture we were given about how we must watch movies on the big screen because watching them little screens is awful. I'm a fan of seeing movies on a real screen but it's really stupid to tell people how they should and shouldn't enjoy your product.


If wingnuts weren't opposed to anyone who wasn't fully on board their cowardly authoritarian cultist agenda they'd be applauding Jon Stewart's performance last night. Stewart repeatedly mocked Hollywood and not in the Billy Crystal "ha ha we're so cute and funny" way but by puncturing its self-importance in a way which wasn't entirely well-received by the audience. It's what his brand of comedy, especially on the Daily Show, is about - skewering the pretensions and authority of the powerful. On the Daily Show the primary focus is the media, with a secondary focus on politics and politicians, and it was fitting that he aimed his guns at the pretensions of Hollywood during his hosting duties.


Amy Sullivan writes:

A sign that Democratic leaders are beginning to get it is the plan—promoted by leaders such as Harry Reid and Hillary Clinton—to lower abortion rates by preventing unwanted pregnancies. Full-throated support of this effort, and a recognition that abstinence education plays a role in lowering teen pregnancy rates (along with birth control), puts Democrats alongside the majority of voters on this difficult issue, and it is especially appealing to moderate evangelicals.

This is a rhetorical sleight of hand which entirely ignores the relevant policy debate. The question is whether sex education in public schools should be "abstinence only," which involves telling teenagers that they shouldn't have sex and not providing them with any actual information that might be useful should they decide to actually go ahead and do it, or whether sex education should be more comprehensive and actually include information about contraceptive methods. I'm happy to be corrected but I'm not aware of any evidence that "abstinence education plays a role in lowering teen pregnancy rates (along with birth control)" because I don't believe there's any sex ed program in this country which doesn't include, in part, abstinence education.

I'm not especially convinced that a "full-throated" effort to package all this stuff as a way to reduce unwanted pregnancies is really going to swing this voting bloc. I could be wrong. But there's nothing new about "we'll tell kids not to have sex but also tell them about condoms." That's pretty much how sex ed worked until the abstinence crowd showed up and decided without evidence it was much more effective to just make shit up.

Does "reducing unwanted pregnancies" trump "sex is evil and icky" among a big group of evangelical Christian voters who vote Republican but could be convinced to vote for Democrats if only they'd improve their messaging? I'm pretty skeptical. And making this argument by trying to brush the sexual morality issue under the rug doesn't help to convince me. The point is not that there isn't an evangelical Christian Left, the point is I just doubt that there's a big bunch of evangelical Christians who currently vote Republican and could be persuaded to switch sides over stuff like this. The concept of abstinence education doesn't appeal to people because it actually reduces unwanted pregnancies, it appeals because they have serious sexual morality issues. We're talking about appealing to the "sex is icky" crowd by pointing out that "sex is icky but abortion is ickier so your daughter should know how to get a birth control prescription just in case she has icky sex." This doesn't sound like much of a winner.

The women on the left I know aren't single issue voters, they're concerned about a whole range of issues. But the ones I know who are politically active in a serious way are active in large part because of sex and reproductive rights. Perhaps we should start pandering to them a bit more. There are a lot of unmarried single women who aren't much interested in hearing about how icky sex is.


Think Progress is suffering under the strange delusion that the cowardly authoritarian cultists that comprise the conservative blogosphere actually care about reality. They don't, they just need little stories from Daddy Bush that maintain their bizarre fantasy existence.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Toy Soldiers

The things people spend their times worrying about...

Wanker of the Day

Lord Saletan.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Sunday, March 05, 2006

Is John Hinderaker Nuts?

Not sure, but a dishonest coward at the very least.

Oscar Dudes

Try to let your female co-winners speak a bit more next time.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.


Like an increasing number of things it's apparently become just another excuse for conservatives to whine about whatever the hell they're whining about. Do they ever do anything else these days? Aside from pissing themselves with fear, I mean.

As for best picture, I didn't think any of them were sublime but the 4 out of the 5 that I saw were all high quality movies. Crash was doomed to be somewhat of a failure as I think all such movies are, but nonetheless pulled it off much better than is usually the case. Brokeback Mountain was good for a lot of reasons, though ultimately long romantic movies get a bit boring no matter who is involved. Capote had great acting and was well made though the story and theme didn't interest me all that much. Good Night and Good Luck was the best to me, a deceptively small-seeming movie made extremely well, and anything that gets conservatives defending their pal Joe McCarthy from liberal smears is good for chuckle or two.


Just close your legs!

Echidne has more.

Words Speak Louder Than Actions

Blaming the media less about deflecting ownership and more due to their own inability to see Iraq as an actual place, instead of as a square in their personal game of risk or some sort of k000l virtual reality game, and their own belief that words on the page are more important than actions on the ground. It's what allows MSNBC columnist media outsider Instapundit to write he's "tired of the war" and the thinking that allowed Andrew Sullivan to write:

The men and women in our armed forces did the hardest work. They deserve our immeasurable thanks. But we all played our part. By facing down the evil, the cowardly and the simply misguided, we have done a great good.

Of course by participating in the public discourse one plays a part in something, but typing away from one's basement does not involve "facing down" anything. Not a single person who opposed this war was "cowardly" as it takes no actual courage to send other people off to kill and die. One does not get to bask in the reflected bravery of those who are actually doing what you send them to do. There was nothing courageous about supporting a war which was supported by the US government and almost the entire punditocracy, and aside from helping to stifle debate and demonize people who quite sensibly opposed the war their contribution to their noble cause was precisely zero.


With too many candidates on the ballot it's hard to imagine the DeLay will be booted out on Tuesday, but they can get him below 50% it'll get pushed to a runoff in April...


Of course, that very media will oblige them by inviting them on CNN, FOX, and MSNBC to explain this.

Next week on Reliable Sources: The failed Iraq war, are the media to blame?


Murtha on Face the Nation.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.


Bush sez India can have as many nukes as it wants but Pakistan can't. The only explanation is bigotry.

Wanker of the Day

Falafel Bill.

Connecticut College Students

For those college students who are registered to vote in Connecticut and who are unlikely to be in town in August for the Lamont-Lieberman showdown, don't forget to request your absentee ballot.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.

Open Thread

Yeah, yeah, another stupid open thread.