I found out today that a good friend of mine was killed in a car accident while traveling in Moscow. She was bright and witty and well-spoken - a professor who specialized in British literature. She also browsed our little blog here from time to time and marched as one of the "Billionaires for Bush," a satirical group which pointed out the gross inequities in Bush's financial plans. She was 34.
Goodbye Lana, you will be missed.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
What do you think?
From The Onion:
Congress Approves Surveillance Measures
The Democratic-controlled House passed a bill that will allow wide-ranging domestic and foreign eavesdropping that would be authorized by a secret court. What do you think?
Ed Albaugh, Elevator Repairman
"You won't need to eavesdrop to hear this: I voted for you assholes because you said you were against shit like this."
Congress Approves Surveillance Measures
The Democratic-controlled House passed a bill that will allow wide-ranging domestic and foreign eavesdropping that would be authorized by a secret court. What do you think?
Ed Albaugh, Elevator Repairman
"You won't need to eavesdrop to hear this: I voted for you assholes because you said you were against shit like this."
Hey Steve, did you ever notice that Dennis spelled backwards is "Sinned"?
Taking his rubber stamp and going home - Dennis Hastert, not seeking re-election in 2008.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Hat tip to David Corn--and F. Scott Fitzgerald
In his column today, David Corn of The Nation makes a nice literary reference to W and Rove, conjuring up this one from The Great Gatsby:
It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy -- they smashed up things and then retreated into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made ....
It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy -- they smashed up things and then retreated into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made ....
Monday, August 13, 2007
Congrats, Varmint Hunter!
So Mitt, our favorite varmint hunter who equates his kids crossing Iowa in an RV with military service and then says that he "misspoke," "wins" the Iowa "straw poll," edging people you've never heard of.
Let's see--the Iowa "straw poll" costs $35 to participate in (it is a fundraiser for the Iowa GOP), you have to be there in person in Ames andEva Braun Laura Ingraham is the moderator, and we have what the Iowa GOP says is "the most important event on the 2007 calendar for the Republican candidates seeking the Republican nomination for President." Seriously.
I am torn on this. I look around and see debacle after debacle, I remember the Family Guy line of the "two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change," and think we can't lose, and then one word comes to mind--Diebold.
Let's see--the Iowa "straw poll" costs $35 to participate in (it is a fundraiser for the Iowa GOP), you have to be there in person in Ames and
I am torn on this. I look around and see debacle after debacle, I remember the Family Guy line of the "two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change," and think we can't lose, and then one word comes to mind--Diebold.
On the Turd, Part Deux
I really have been struggling to get my head around this one.
First of all, with all due respect to my family--NOBODY wants to spend more time with their family! (and read about Rove's family, odd this comes when a kid is leaving for college)
Der Chimpenfuhrer will protect him to his dying breath, trying to promote a narrowly-drawn privilege crafted by the courts for national security purposes into allowing Goodfellas in Washington.
Rove and Bush are already toxic for GOP hopefuls.
My only thought? We all know the media is (are) lazy and stupid. Note how quickly so many reports seized on the New York Times (you know, the LIBERAL NYT, the paper that let Judy Miller cheerlead us into war) piece by Brookings Institute writers Michael O’Hanlon and Ken Pollack (Ken Pollack, who wrote The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq--yeah, he's a good source) Note a teeny presidential approval rating bump. Note America's short attention span.
But still-I don't get it.
First of all, with all due respect to my family--NOBODY wants to spend more time with their family! (and read about Rove's family, odd this comes when a kid is leaving for college)
Der Chimpenfuhrer will protect him to his dying breath, trying to promote a narrowly-drawn privilege crafted by the courts for national security purposes into allowing Goodfellas in Washington.
Rove and Bush are already toxic for GOP hopefuls.
My only thought? We all know the media is (are) lazy and stupid. Note how quickly so many reports seized on the New York Times (you know, the LIBERAL NYT, the paper that let Judy Miller cheerlead us into war) piece by Brookings Institute writers Michael O’Hanlon and Ken Pollack (Ken Pollack, who wrote The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq--yeah, he's a good source) Note a teeny presidential approval rating bump. Note America's short attention span.
But still-I don't get it.
Taking an early lead
I haven't talked much about the 2008 Presidential election yet, because it's too damned early. I have my opinions, of course, but I'm in no rush to get hip-deep in that race yet.
On the other hand, one sure way to win my support is to insult Karl Rove. John Edwards' statement about Rove's announced resignation:
"Goodbye, good riddance.”
h/t CNN.com's Political Ticker
On the other hand, one sure way to win my support is to insult Karl Rove. John Edwards' statement about Rove's announced resignation:
"Goodbye, good riddance.”
h/t CNN.com's Political Ticker
Turd Blossom to resign
Anyone who believes he'll just fade into that Good Night is welcome to continue living in the land of make-believe, but Karl Rove is resigning at the end of August.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Der Chimpenfuhrer on Accountability
THE PRESIDENT: Lewis Libby was held accountable. He was declared guilty by a jury and he's paid a high price for it.
Al Gonzales -- implicit in your questions is that Al Gonzales did something wrong. I haven't seen Congress say he's done anything wrong. As a matter of fact, I believe, David, we're watching a political exercise. I mean, this is a man who has testified, he's sent thousands of papers up there. There's no proof of wrong. Why would I hold somebody accountable who has done nothing wrong? I mean, frankly, I think that's a typical Washington, D.C. assumption -- not to be accusatory, I know you're a kind, open-minded fellow, but you suggested holding the Attorney General accountable for something he did wrong.
Move along, nothing to see here...
Al Gonzales -- implicit in your questions is that Al Gonzales did something wrong. I haven't seen Congress say he's done anything wrong. As a matter of fact, I believe, David, we're watching a political exercise. I mean, this is a man who has testified, he's sent thousands of papers up there. There's no proof of wrong. Why would I hold somebody accountable who has done nothing wrong? I mean, frankly, I think that's a typical Washington, D.C. assumption -- not to be accusatory, I know you're a kind, open-minded fellow, but you suggested holding the Attorney General accountable for something he did wrong.
Move along, nothing to see here...
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
On the road
So I'm spending a week or so out in the greater Seattle area, which is why I've been quiet on the latest attacks on our civil liberties. I find vacation to be a useful thing - I get far less worked up about the horrible things that go on than I do when I'm at home (of course, there will be something new next week, so I've got that going for me).
A couple of days ago I took a trip to a cute little town in the San Juan Islands, and since I wasn't feeling well that day, I visited a number of places that regularly have graffiti on the walls. All except one had profoundly anti-Bush graffiti, and the one that didn't had something saying "F___ the GOP". It was enough to make an ill drmagoo feel a little better about the world.
A couple of days ago I took a trip to a cute little town in the San Juan Islands, and since I wasn't feeling well that day, I visited a number of places that regularly have graffiti on the walls. All except one had profoundly anti-Bush graffiti, and the one that didn't had something saying "F___ the GOP". It was enough to make an ill drmagoo feel a little better about the world.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
On the comments below
If you read colonial history, you will find that one of the driving forces behind revolution was the concept of the "general warrant." These odious documents authorized the king's agents to search anyone at any time for any reason.
Taxes? Hardly. A popular shibboleth, granted, but colonial leaders knew that 1) the taxes levied were consumption taxes, which individuals could control and avoid, 2) the colonists were taxed far less than inhabitants of the home islands and 3) representation wouldn't have changed a damn thing.
But the searches? Those were VERY real and incredibly offensive to both revolutionary leader and the everyday blacksmith. In the view of the framers, such interferences with privacy justified what we now call "regime change." [Editor's note: another key concern was the tendency of European princes to make war for sport. To deal with that, the framers gave warmaking powers to Congress and required a war expenditure vote AT LEAST every two years, thanks for ignoring that part, folks.]
On this bill, Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago Law School [Editor's note: Yours truly was admitted to the U of C Law School, but 1) I couldn't afford it and 2) there is an underground tunnel from the law school to the law dorm. I never would have seen the sun!] said that the
So, if Mrs. Pete goes to Europe (as she always does) and calls me, our conversation is now fair game. Thanks guys.
Taxes? Hardly. A popular shibboleth, granted, but colonial leaders knew that 1) the taxes levied were consumption taxes, which individuals could control and avoid, 2) the colonists were taxed far less than inhabitants of the home islands and 3) representation wouldn't have changed a damn thing.
But the searches? Those were VERY real and incredibly offensive to both revolutionary leader and the everyday blacksmith. In the view of the framers, such interferences with privacy justified what we now call "regime change." [Editor's note: another key concern was the tendency of European princes to make war for sport. To deal with that, the framers gave warmaking powers to Congress and required a war expenditure vote AT LEAST every two years, thanks for ignoring that part, folks.]
On this bill, Geoffrey Stone of the University of Chicago Law School [Editor's note: Yours truly was admitted to the U of C Law School, but 1) I couldn't afford it and 2) there is an underground tunnel from the law school to the law dorm. I never would have seen the sun!] said that the
amendment authorizes the government to wiretap or intercept any international communication, even if one of the participants is an American citizen on American soil, as long as the intercept is undertaken for foreign intelligence purposes and is "directed at a person reasonably believed to be located outside of the United StatesThink about that. Gone is "probable cause," that must be found by a judge. Now it is the ATTORNEY GENERAL who REASONABLY BELIEVES that the intercept is for "FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PURPOSES." And those are WHAT?
So, if Mrs. Pete goes to Europe (as she always does) and calls me, our conversation is now fair game. Thanks guys.
Monday, August 06, 2007
I hate Will Rogers
Or at least that "I belong to no organized political party" line because it is so damned accurate.
Question #1 for the Democratic leadership: You have a rogue administration that has shamelessly broken statutory law and flouted constitutional guarantees of privacy and personal security in the name of "terrorism." Why on earth do you give him MORE power?????
Question #1 for the Democratic leadership: You have a rogue administration that has shamelessly broken statutory law and flouted constitutional guarantees of privacy and personal security in the name of "terrorism." Why on earth do you give him MORE power?????
Saturday, August 04, 2007
The Republican YouTube Debate
It looks like that stellar cast of GOP presidential hopefuls isn't warming to the idea of their own YouTube debate. You know those questions from...ummm...people?
Well, I want them to be comfortable in the format, so I have suggested some questions that would put them at ease:
1) Should we kill all the brown people or just the A-rabs?
2) How would you help Jesus to stop boys from kissing?
3) Which one of you is the most Reagan-y?
4) On global warming, is the earth warmer than when the Lord God created Adam in Eden 6000 years ago? And if it is, doesn't God want it that way?
Please add your own...
Well, I want them to be comfortable in the format, so I have suggested some questions that would put them at ease:
1) Should we kill all the brown people or just the A-rabs?
2) How would you help Jesus to stop boys from kissing?
3) Which one of you is the most Reagan-y?
4) On global warming, is the earth warmer than when the Lord God created Adam in Eden 6000 years ago? And if it is, doesn't God want it that way?
Please add your own...
Thursday, August 02, 2007
He knows where the bodies are buried...
Alberto Gonzalez will never voluntarily give up his position, and Chimpy will never ask him to step down. There are two inter-related reasons (actually hundreds, but two I'll write about):
1) Fredo knows WAAY too much about the inner workings/dark side of GWB (remember DUIs and jury duty?), and knows that he himself is a parasitic little worm that has no value other than where he sits. Gonzalez doesn't want to go out in at least official disgrace, and he knows that Chimpy has his back.
2) Der Chimpenfuhrer cannot risk appointing a new AG. He couldn't get another crony confirmed, and the Senate would demand someone with at least a modicum of integrity. Those pesky types tend to investigate, you know, impeachable offenses?
AG for Life Fredo. All hail.
1) Fredo knows WAAY too much about the inner workings/dark side of GWB (remember DUIs and jury duty?), and knows that he himself is a parasitic little worm that has no value other than where he sits. Gonzalez doesn't want to go out in at least official disgrace, and he knows that Chimpy has his back.
2) Der Chimpenfuhrer cannot risk appointing a new AG. He couldn't get another crony confirmed, and the Senate would demand someone with at least a modicum of integrity. Those pesky types tend to investigate, you know, impeachable offenses?
AG for Life Fredo. All hail.
Wut?
So, we here at The Thinker just got an entirely unsolicited email from some guy who runs a political blog, asking us to vote for his blog for some award, and offering to trade links. On his blog, he interviews some woman who admires James Inhofe.
Thanks, but no.
Thanks, but no.
Stupid quotes from stupid people
From Salon's War Room: Asked today about a new Congressional Budget Office report that puts the price tag of the war on Iraq at more than $1 trillion, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said: "Well, if you take a look at what happened on September 11th, 2001, it's estimated that the aftershocks of that could have cost up to $1 trillion."
First of all, what "aftershocks"? Secondly, your boss still hasn't gotten around to do anything with the whole in the ground, so we have no idea what it will cost. Third, and I can't stress this enough - the response to an attack that cost us a vast amount of money was to spend a vast amount of money on a totally irrelevant and illegal war? There wasn't anything better that could have been done with that money?
First of all, what "aftershocks"? Secondly, your boss still hasn't gotten around to do anything with the whole in the ground, so we have no idea what it will cost. Third, and I can't stress this enough - the response to an attack that cost us a vast amount of money was to spend a vast amount of money on a totally irrelevant and illegal war? There wasn't anything better that could have been done with that money?
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
While on that topic...
Ah, the Wall Street Journal editorial page...
Not long ago they brought back one of their favorites, law professor, authoritarian, author of the Bush administration's torture memo (and as Glenn Greenwald accurately states, "the most partisan and intellectually dishonest lawyer in the country"--think about that...) John Yoo. They needed to dredge up SOMEONE who would defend the ridiculous administration claims of "executive privilege," so who? John Yoo.
The afore-mentioned Glenn Greenwald is all over the shocking hypocrisy of John Yoo. He was against executive privilege (insert "Bill Clinton"here) before he was for it, saying that Clinton could fairly be impeached for refusing subpoenas and then lo and behold in 2007, secrecy is the key to the survival of the republic.
Let's look at what Yoo wrote on the law, though. He shamelessly cites Barenblatt v. U.S. (a House Un-American Activities Committee case, by the way) and says that "The Supreme Court held in 1959 that, `Since Congress may only investigate into those areas in which it may potentially legislate or appropriate, it cannot inquire into matters which are within the exclusive province of one or the other branches of the Government.'"
Excuse me, they didn't HOLD that. The opinion said that IN DICTA. It's not a HOLDING. Beyond that, Congress may certainly "legislate" on voter caging matters, and WELL beyond legislating, they certainly are constitutionally empowered to ACT--on impeachment.
Not long ago they brought back one of their favorites, law professor, authoritarian, author of the Bush administration's torture memo (and as Glenn Greenwald accurately states, "the most partisan and intellectually dishonest lawyer in the country"--think about that...) John Yoo. They needed to dredge up SOMEONE who would defend the ridiculous administration claims of "executive privilege," so who? John Yoo.
The afore-mentioned Glenn Greenwald is all over the shocking hypocrisy of John Yoo. He was against executive privilege (insert "Bill Clinton"here) before he was for it, saying that Clinton could fairly be impeached for refusing subpoenas and then lo and behold in 2007, secrecy is the key to the survival of the republic.
Let's look at what Yoo wrote on the law, though. He shamelessly cites Barenblatt v. U.S. (a House Un-American Activities Committee case, by the way) and says that "The Supreme Court held in 1959 that, `Since Congress may only investigate into those areas in which it may potentially legislate or appropriate, it cannot inquire into matters which are within the exclusive province of one or the other branches of the Government.'"
Excuse me, they didn't HOLD that. The opinion said that IN DICTA. It's not a HOLDING. Beyond that, Congress may certainly "legislate" on voter caging matters, and WELL beyond legislating, they certainly are constitutionally empowered to ACT--on impeachment.
RIP Wall Street Journal
Sorry, been one poor correspondent....
It looks like Rupert Murdoch has squared away control of the Wall Street Journal. It has always been a bizarre paper, with rock-solid business reporting on one side, and bat-crazy editorial page screed writers on the other. It was always my theory that the news group never even told editorial where the Christmas party was. Now, that the paper will be Fox-ified, what do you think stays..rock-solid business reporting or bat-crazy editorial page screed writers? The Murdoch virus can't help but infect the newsroom, and the paper is history.
It looks like Rupert Murdoch has squared away control of the Wall Street Journal. It has always been a bizarre paper, with rock-solid business reporting on one side, and bat-crazy editorial page screed writers on the other. It was always my theory that the news group never even told editorial where the Christmas party was. Now, that the paper will be Fox-ified, what do you think stays..rock-solid business reporting or bat-crazy editorial page screed writers? The Murdoch virus can't help but infect the newsroom, and the paper is history.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Oh, for crying out loud
I would be willing to have a reasoned argument with anyone about the practicality of impeaching either President Bush or his puppeteer - not whether they deserve it, mind you, but whether pursuing it would accomplish anything. On the other hand, all politics aside, why does Alberto Gonzales still have a job? He's apparently unaware of virtually everything that has occurred under his watch in the Department of Justice. If I knew that little about the way my department functioned, I'd be fired. Even if you completely agree with everything the Decider has done, how is it a good thing for the country for the Department of Justice to have an Attorney General who is utterly clueless about, well, everything?
Note: A similar version of this was sent to Congressman Tim Johnson (IL-15)
Note: A similar version of this was sent to Congressman Tim Johnson (IL-15)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
