The kind of "mind" we're dealing with

From Glenn Greenwald, on Salon:

Neoconservative and war supporter John Podhoretz:
What if the tactical mistake we made in Iraq was that we didn't kill enough Sunnis in the early going to intimidate them and make them so afraid of us they would go along with anything? Wasn't the survival of Sunni men between the ages of 15 and 35 the reason there was an insurgency and the basic cause of the sectarian violence now?

From Crooks and Liars:

Ann Coulter:
These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever - and they still haven't finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?

This is truly a war in which we have absolutely no interest.

Georgie, you have to stay in for recess

First of all, see Doc's hilarious post before.

In that vein...

I almost never call for amending the constitution for dealing with the various issues of the day. If you look at the history of constitutional amendments, you see precious few changes over the course of more than two centuries.

You see the first 10, that almost can be considered part of the original document, the Civil War amendments, some that are housekeeping in nature and others that make profound changes.

However, an amendment is necessary--NOW.

We have this provision in Article II, Section 2:

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

The reason for this in 1789 was obvious. When the Senate was out of session, and vacancies occurred, it might take weeks for the Senate to convene again, and people were needed in those VERY FEW leadership positions.

In this instance, the Senate was adjourned for ONE WEEK and the president used SEVEN DAYS to short-circuit the confirmation process to name a piece of human filth (Sam Fox) that would not have been confirmed to an ambassadorship for the life of this Senate. That MUST end.

I read 'em, so you don't have to

I was browsing some righ wing blogs today when I came across this howler - "No President of one party ever tried harder to get along with the other than Bush - no one."

I mean, just, wow.

Spellcheck is sick

I just sent a note to my wife about the Greek cruise ship sinking off of Santorini. Spellcheck on my version of Outlook suggested that I replace my vacation destination:

with (YIKES!!!)

The "I have no idea what I'm talking about" defense

Orrin Hatch: "My comments about Carol Lam's record as a U.S. Attorney were accurate, but I misspoke when making the point of discussing politically connected U.S. Attorneys. I accidentally used her name, instead of her predecessor, Alan Bersin, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton."

In other words, it would be accurate, in Senator Hatch's mind, to say "Orrin Hatch raped and murdered dozens of young boys in the late 1970's and early 80's. Oh, wait, I accidentally used his name, instead of convicted and executed serial killer John Wayne Gacy."

Does he have any idea how mind-numbingly stupid he sounds?

From the "Pants on Fire" File

The cretinous, reptilian Orrin Hatch on "Meet the Press:"

"Take Carol Lam, for instance. Carol Lam was raised on your program, Tim, by Schumer. Carol Lam, it’s amazing to me she wasn’t fired earlier because for three years members of the Congress had complained that there had been all kinds of border patrol capture of these people but hardly any prosecutions. She was a former law professor, no prosecutorial experience, and the former campaign manager in Southern California for Clinton, and they’re trying to say that this administration appoints people politically?"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17857501/page/3/

Interesting, except that Carol Lam had never been a law professor, was a career prosecutor, was appointed by W, was lauded by immigration officials and had never been anyone's campaign manager.

These people are scum.

Ever hear of Pearl Harbor? The Vikings?

Blogging is like going to the gym. It is all inertia. It is easy to keep going while going, and it is very easy to not go once you stop. I'll try to do better.

If you can stomach it, it is funny/frightening to read our petulant 5-year old tantrum-throwing "president" at the base in California (where we used to train troops for desert combat, no time for that "training" stuff anymore.)

He actually brought out this old chestnut:

See, what changed on September the 11th is oceans can no longer protect the people in the United States from harm.

Good God, man. The Vikings didn't even have a compass, and did oceans protect Ireland and England from them? Ever hear of the War of 1812, or Pearl Harbor?

And then he goes all tech-y on us:

I had a meeting, a SVTS -- what they call a SVTS, it's a real-time video conference -- with Prime Minister Maliki.

Wow, that's inspiring.

Here's an oldie but a goodie:

Part of our doctrine is if you harbor a terrorist, you're equally as guilty as the terrorists.

Hmmm--Pakistan? Saudi Arabia?

If you get this one, please explain it to me:

You know, after the Korean War, if you had asked somebody, can you imagine an American President being able to stand up in front of some troops and say the Far East is peaceful, a part of the world where we lost thousands of our troops in World War II and Korea is now a relatively peaceful part of the world, they would have said what a hopeless idealist that person is.

[confused dog look]

And of course, a half-dozen references to September THE 11th.

Why is this "news"?

From CNN.com's front page:

Collins: Why this scientist believes in God. I'm a scientist. I know lots of scientists who believe in God. This is just another of those pointless stories designed to feed the belief that there must fundamentally be some gulf between those who choose to be religious and those who choose to believe in science. Wacked out fundamentalism? That's an issue. A belief in God? There's no way to prove or disprove a matter of faith, so science cannot speak on the topic. This pretend idea that if one believes in God, one cannot believe in science, or vice versa, is ignorant, and fuels divisions between people in this country. Stop it.

Disappointing the Chimp

So the 15 British soldiers are getting released by Iran. This is unequivocally a good thing. My worry is that Chimpy will be upset - he didn't get to bomb anyone.

'Nuf Ced

Harry Reid: "If the president vetoes this bill, he will have delayed funding for troops and kept in place his strategy for failure."

Follow up question

to Texas State Senator Dan Patrick, who is proposing that the government pay women $500 if they give a child up for adoption instead of having an abortion.

Senator Patrick - How much money will you give to the parents who adopt that child, or any of the many children who need adopting but will grow up in foster care, or any of the children who grow up with one parent, or in poverty, or who are at risk for disease, or crime, or violence? How much money would you withhold from a President killing thousands of people in the name of ego and idiocy? How much money will you contribute to medical research that could save or immeasurably improve millions of lives? How much money will you allocate to people working to ameliorate the damages done to our environment by our civilization? How much money will you give to schools? To the un- or under-insured? To the elderly who can't find jobs to support themselves and still need to work at 70?

How about this - when you and your party begin caring about the living, call me.

Theater of the Absurd

President Bush recently decried the vote by the House imposing even a minimal timeline as "political theater."

Hmm..I've done a lot of theater. It generally involes a SET, PROPS and an AUDIENCE.

Follow Up

A couple of posts below, Peter mentions that DoJ aide Monica Goodling has announced that she is going to invoke the 5th amendment and not testify in front of Congress. Ignoring the debate about whether or not the 5th amendment applies in this case (since I'm not a lawyer), the following question must still be asked:

If she's concerned that she could incriminate herself if she testifies, then there must be some, what's the word for it, oh, yes - crime, that has been committed that she's afraid she could be implicated in, right?

The only other option is that she's afraid that if she lies, and is caught in the lie, that's grounds for perjury.

So we're left with one of two options:

1) A lawyer who works for the Department of Justice knows that a crime has been committed, and knows that if she testifies she could be implicated

-or-

2) She knows that she would not tell the truth, and doesn't want to be caught committing perjury.

That's special.

When you're right, you're not paying much attention

(h/t Crooked Timber) Earlier this year, the right-wing blog Right Wing News sent out a survey to 240 right-wing blogs asking them about a variety of topics. They only got 63 responses, most from marginal blogs, but the results are telling.

First of all, there's the 61 (out of 63) who think the surge should go forward. Of course. If we don't Win In Iraq (TM), then their entire worldview, centered on the idea that the US can go beat the crap out of anyone we don't like, any time we want, especially those who are "different", fails.

Then there's the 53/63 who think that Democrats want us to lose in Iraq for political reasons. Yes, because this disastrous war has been nothing but a political and personal boon for all of us Haters of America. Those of us who have been against the war from the beginning have really been motivated by a desire to lose and weaken our country, rather than any connection to reality or that we thought that Iraq was a distraction from the real danger.

But then we get to the fourth question.

Do you think mankind is the primary cause of global warming?

Yes (0) -- 0%
No (59) -- 100%

You may need to pause and read that one slowly. Yes, the anti-intellectualism of the right continues to grow, and continues to invalidate a whole body of scientific knowledge. Remember, this is an issue over which there is essentially no debate in the scientific community. Every major national or international scientific organization which has released a report about climate change says that the evidence is incontrovertable - the activities of the human race have contributed to changing the climate of the planet. And not one of these neocons believes it. Not one. This isn't an argument about the uncertainty of what the results of climate change will be. This isn't an argument that, while we're affecting the environment, there is a reasonable debate about what we should do in response. This isn't a question of how it affects the economy. This is a flat-out rejection of science, of the knowledge that is gained through the rigorous exercise of the abilities of the human mind.

What makes this weirder is that there's no significant religious component to this debate. It's not evolution, or the Big bang, where religious fundamentalists choose to rely on no textual authorities other than the Bible. Hell, even the Liar in Chief admitted that there might be something behind the science in his last SotU. This is willful ignorance, determined incuriosity, and an unshaking attachment to a belief, not because there's any evidence supporting their side and not because God told them to think a certain way. The culture of anti-intellectualism, of instinctively rejecting any information that comes to them from a source that isn't FoxNewsApproved, that might cause them to question, well, anything, has so taken root that these Luddites are willing to ignore mountains and mountains of data, just to remain in their safe little bubbles.

Their safe, little, warming bubbles.

Scandal scorecard, redux

And now for a blast from the past. Former Reagan budget director David Stockman, supply side boy wonder who made up the numbers then is still doing so now, indicted and also charged civilly with securities fraud.

Stockman personally directed fraudulent schemes to inflate C&A's reported income by accounting improperly for supplier payments. In furtherance of those schemes, the complaint alleges that Stockman and other defendants obtained false documents from suppliers designed to mislead C&A's external auditors. According to the complaint, when aspects of the schemes were discovered in March 2005, Stockman embarked on a public campaign to mislead investors, potential financiers and others by minimizing the extent of the fraudulent accounting and hiding C&A's dire financial condition.

The more things change.....

The truth hurts? (or at least incriminates)

"The potential for legal jeopardy for Ms. Goodling from even her most truthful and accurate testimony under these circumstances is very real."

That is a shocking statement from the attorney (John Dowd, known to sports fans as the author of the Pete Rose gambling dossier) for Monica Goodling, Alberto Gonzales' counsel and White House liaison.

Think about that. Truth and accuracy by a senior "Justice" aide = criminal jeopardy.

"Get your scorecards here, can't keep the GOP scandals straight without a scorecard!"

I am now a Gator fan!

Congratulations and a hearty "Well Done!" goes out to the University of Florida:

Jeb Bush denied honor at U. of Florida

The [faculty] Senate voted 38-28 Thursday against giving the honorary degree to Bush, who left office in January (more).

We had a similar problem at my alma mater where they were reluctant to so honor one J. Dumbforth Quayle. Unfortunately, they caved for the money, as his grandpappy was a HUGE donor and a life trustee.

From the White House

The White House
Washington, D.C.
Executive Order

.

The White House does not intend to comply with any subpoenas from Congress directed at senior executive officials in connection with the U.S. Attorney dismissals.

However, the individuals named will be made available for interviews from Congress if:

1) No White House official will be sworn or take any oath;
2) No transcript of any kind will be taken or provided
3) All Congressional questioners must be naked
4) All interviews will take place in inner tubes in a "lazy river" water park ride.

I couldn't have said it any better myself

From Crooks and Liars:

Air America's Rachel Maddow (one of my favorite hosts) speaking on CNN about using torture to get information:

"You can't say it doesn't matter what we're doing cause we're trying to get Al Qaeda. It matters what we do. We're America. That's more important than Al-Qaeda."

Insert your own caption