Response from Senator Durbin

Senator Dick Durbin's response to the email about impeachment I sent to his office a few days ago:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the actions of the Bush
Administration and proposals to impeach President Bush and Vice
President Cheney. I appreciate knowing your views on these matters.

Removal of the President, Vice President or other federal officials by
impeachment is one of the most serious constitutional responsibilities
delegated to the Congress. Impeachment procedures are used very
infrequently. This legislative mechanism has been reserved for
carefully investigating and trying allegations of serious misconduct on
the part of the President, the Vice President and civil officers of the
United States. The House of Representatives has the Constitutional
authority to determine whether to impeach and to draft articles of
impeachment. Should the House vote to impeach an official and specify
the grounds upon which impeachment is based, the matter is then
presented to the Senate for trial.

I am troubled by many of the actions of this Administration. The
American people are also concerned, as demonstrated by the mid-term
elections. The new leadership in Congress is working for a new
direction for our nation while reinstituting the Congressional oversight
of the Executive Branch that has been sadly missing in recent years.

I will keep your views in mind as the fact-finding continues. Thank you
again for sharing your views. Please feel free to contact me again with
any concerns you wish to share.

Ya sas!

Hello from Greece! I am typing this from a cafe with a view of the Acropolis.

What do other countries think of us? Here is an excerpt from an Athenian newspaper:

All of this changed with President George W. Bush. Suddenly all the reactionary, dark instincts of “Middle America” came to the fore. The arch-conservative evangelical Christians began to determine the superpower’s foreign policy. America the extrovert with its pop culture became frightened, wary, almost paranoid. September 11, which brought an outpouring of sympathy from the world, proved to be the start of an unbelievable and silly “crusade” with tragic results in Iraq. Osama could not have expected a better outcome, as Bush undertook al-Qaida’s recruitment campaign.

Everything indicates that the average American understands the dark path it entered seven years ago. The next president will have to turn to realpolitik. But Bush has caused irreparable damage. History will be merciless with him, because, for no reason, he set fire to the planet’s most crucial region, because he isolated America and because, in the end, he brought Osama bin Laden into every last hovel in the Islamic world. Who said history is not determined by personalities?

A dare for you

Try to read this article and remember that it's 2007.

Excerpts:
ASHBURN, Georgia (CNN) -- Students of Turner County High School started what they hope will become a new tradition: Black and white students attended the prom together for the first time on Saturday.

In previous years, parents had organized private, segregated dances for students of the school in rural Ashburn, Georgia, 160 miles south of Atlanta.

Adkinson's sister, Mindy Bryan, attended a segregated prom in 2001.

"There was not anybody that I can remember that was black," she said. "The white people have theirs, and the black people have theirs. It's nothing racial at all."

Another tradition that ended this year -- having two separate homecoming queens.

In the past, two queens were chosen -- one white, one black.

But not everyone in the town of 4,400, famous for its peanuts and Fire Ant Festival, was breaking with the past.

The "white prom" still went on last week.

"We did everything like a regular prom just because we had already booked it," said, Cheryl Nichols, 18, who attended the dance.

Nichols said while her parents were in support of the integrated prom, some of her friends weren't allowed to go.

"If they're not coming tonight it's because either they had to work and they couldn't get out of it or because their parents are still having an issue because they grew up in south Georgia," she said.

"I've asked, 'Why can't you come?' and they're like, 'My mommy and daddy -- they don't agree with being with the colored people,' which I think is crazy," she said.

Well, it is a true statement

"The president's record on climate change is very strong, [White House spokeswoman Dana] Perino said.

Yes, yes it is. Just like, say, Dan Quayle's record on spelling, George Wallace's record on civil rights, the Chicago Cubs record on winning the World Series, or Dick Cheney's record on, well, anything. Strongly negative is still strong, right?

He who must be impeached

I've been planning a post on the stunning idiocy expressed by some on the right in the wake of the tragedy at Virginia Tech, but there's another topic that just won't let me ignore it.

George W. Bush, Oct. 15, 2001: "Let me say a few words about important values we must demonstrate while all of us serve in government. First, we must always maintain the highest ethical standards. We must always ask ourself not only what is legal, but what is right. There is no goal of government worth accomplishing if it cannot be accomplished with integrity."

In a statement today, Chimpy said this of his Attorney General, Torture Boy: "As the hearings went forward, it was clear the attorney general broke no law, there's no wrongdoing."

This echoes comments Mr. "The Geneva Conventions are Quaint" made during his pathetic appearance before Congress last week, when he too argued that he hadn't broken the law, so nothing he did was improper.

With all due respect, Mr. President and Mr. Attorney General (and you can be sure that I bear none for either one), perhaps no statement sums up your contempt for this country more than that one. I mean, it's a huge step forward that you even acknowledge that there are laws, and you conceivably could break them, but are you really trying to tell us that as long as what you have done isn't illegal, it can't be improper? That it isn't beneath the dignity of your offices? That's an awfully low standard to hold onesself to, much less the people charged with serving this nation in such important positions.

Chimpy, you may remember, famously joked that he was the C student who became president. Now, he was a C student at schools that give students A's for showing up sometimes, which should tell you something, and I think that his teachers were far too generous. This president is not a man who wants excellence or who wants to meet a high standard. He thinks that if if a person meets the minimum possible requirements to remain in office, then that's good enough. Actually, it's enough to have "increased his confidence" in Gonzalez.

After the election, I distanced myself from politics for a while because I couldn't take it anymore. But the more I see, the more it pulls me back in. There are no words to describe the contempt I hold for the man who currently serves as the president of my country, nor for the men and women who work for him and enable him to spend every day as an incompetent, ignorant, lying simulacrum of a human being, insulting every day what I, and hundreds of millions of others, hold sacred. He is a man who cheats and lies and kills, not for greatness, but for a D-.

Frankly, he's not that good. I have spent a long time arguing that now is not the time for impeachment, that it's more important to govern and marginalize our incurious president. But he's made it clear that he will not go gentle into that good night, no, instead he will whine and pout. He will claim victory when everyone else sees defeat. He will hold his employees to the lowest possible standard, and cheer them when they fail pathetically and publically.

Mr. President, you have failed in every way at your job. We must fire you. For the good of the country, for the good of Iraq, for the good of the world, for the future of every person living or not yet born. You, and Darth, and Torture Boy, and Ms "No one could have anticipated an attack on the towers", and the rest of them. You must do the only possible thing you could do to make the world a better place and go away.

Impeach.

I will be sending slightly modified versions of this to my senators and congressman.

Democracy

Democracy, from the Greek for "rule of the people."

I am leaving from here, where democracy died, to head for Greece, where it was born. See you in May.

Who watches the watchers of the watchers?

On the Bob Edwards Show on XMPR this morning, I heard an excellent interview with Bill Moyers (although that's probably redundant - all the interviews I've heard from Bill Moyers are excellent, and the Bob Edwards Show alone is worth a sizable chunk of my monthly payment to XM) about the first episode of his new PBS series, Bill Moyers' Journal, entitled "Selling the War." The show is about the failure of the media between 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq to do anything even vaguely resembling their jobs.

To me, the most telling story was about at time when Darth appeared on Meet the Press. That morning, there was a story in the New York Times which supported the administration's claims about Iraq and WMD's, and Cheney slyly referred to the article as "independent" confirmation of his claims, although he didn't want to discuss it. Where did the Times get its information, you ask? That's right, Cheney's office. So he leaked a story to a newspaper which he had demonized as liberal, and when it ran the story, used it to confirm what he had been saying. Good ol' Timmy didn't question how any of it happened, and the Times let itself be used.

If you get a chance, check your local listings to see when the show will air. Journalism is always improved when Bill Moyers weighs in. Here's an excerpt.

Just remember

A horrific day in Blacksburg is a decent day for Baghdad

Retard America

Americans' knowledge of national and international affairs has changed little in two decades despite the emergence of 24-hour cable news and the Internet as major news sources. People surveyed in February were slightly less able than those polled in 1989 to name the vice president, their state's governor and the president of Russia but slightly more able to answer other questions correctly about national politics, according to a poll released Sunday by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.Of the 1,502 adults survey in February, 69 percent correctly answered Dick Cheney when asked who was the vice president, compared with 74 percent who correctly responded Dan Quayle when the same question was asked in 1989. Two-thirds correctly named their state's governor in February compared with three-fourths who got that right in 1989.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070415/news-knowledge-poll

Really?

[Editor's note: I almost hate to post something to move Doc's wonderful piece below down.]

Alberto Gonzalez said ""I have nothing to hide," in a statement released Sunday.

Really, Al? Then why are all those emails missing? Why did your various stories keep changing? Why did your White House LIE-ason become the first Justice Department official (why a 33-year old from Pat Robertson's "law school" was in such a high position in the Justice department is another story, one that pisses off those of us who went to real law schools) in history to plead the 5th, which is a virtual admission of criminality?

And that whole torture thing...

The sad and frightening part is that he really DOESN'T have anything to hide, because he and this administration have been so brazen with their lawlessness, they flaunt their criminality.

Jackie

On April 15th, 1947, Jackie Robinson played in his first game in Major League Baseball and changed the world.

America was different in the late 1940’s than it is now. We had just won World War II, and there was a sense of optimism and joy that the struggle was over. But many of the things we were fighting for overseas – freedom, the end of Nazi Germany’s racial elitism – were still problems back home. There had been huge numbers of African Americans in the military, but it was still segregated. Some people started asking why, if blacks could go off and get killed to defend their country, why were they treated any differently once they returned? But that wasn’t true everywhere, especially in the South, and the increased acceptance of blacks in some areas just made the hatred and violence that much worse.

Nowhere was this division more starkly seen than baseball. Baseball was, at the time, truly the national sport. Football had its followers, but it didn’t really take off as a national phenomenon until television. Basketball was in its infancy. Hockey was played in 6 northern cities (two of which were in Canada). Auto Racing was a niche sport. But baseball was everywhere. The country hadn’t yet been linked by television, and while radio carried the big league games, small towns all over the country had their own teams. Young boys didn’t grow up trying to decide if they wanted to be Michael Jordan or Joe Montana – they all wanted to be Ted Williams or Joe DiMaggio. Or, if they were black, Josh Gibson or Satchel Paige.

From the 1920’s up through the early 1950’s, African Americans owned and operated a parallel set of baseball leagues to the American and National Leagues in organized (white) baseball. In their own way, they were the linchpin of the black business community – often the owners were the wealthiest blacks in town. The play was excellent, and the community supported the teams as much as they were able. Unfortunately, because of the racial divide in the country, that just wasn’t that much. Young black children knew who DiMaggio was, but young white kids didn’t know who Josh Gibson was, or that he may have been the best catcher ever. The industry that surrounded white baseball – the recordkeeping, the radio broadcasts, the baseball cards – existed in a much more rudimentary form in the Negro Leagues. While the black players were every bit as good as the white, there was no mistaking which league was on top.

White teams and black teams had played exhibition games against each other for years, with the white teams usually losing. They weren’t trying to prove anything, and it showed. But that meant that the white players knew how good their counterparts were, and a large majority (80% by some polls) had no issues with the idea of playing with black teammates. However, the opposition was nearly 100% in the owner’s boxes. A combination of racism, conservatism, and the fear of what would happen if there were any changes kept things the way they’d been since 1884, when Moses “Fleet” Walker became the only black player ever to play in a major league game (under the guise of being a dark-skinned Cuban).

Baseball was ruled with an iron fist by Kenesaw Mountain Landis, the Commissioner (for life) that the owners had appointed after the Black Sox scandal (which had nothing to do with race, but involved the 1919 Chicago White Sox deliberately losing the World Series in exchange for payoffs from gamblers). Landis wanted no part of integrating baseball, and he blocked any attempts to do so until his death in late 1944. There had been attempts – most notably from visionary Bill Veeck, who wanted to buy the worst team in baseball and stock it with black stars, but the sale was blocked, and the leagues stayed separate. After Landis died, the new commissioner, A. B. “Happy” Chandler was discreetly approached and made it clear that he did not share the attitude of his predecessor.

That opened the door for Branch Rickey and Jackie Robinson to step through. Rickey ran the Brooklyn Dodgers at the time, after an amazing career that had already made him a legend in baseball. He had worked in baseball all his life, and had been running teams for 30 years. Rickey knew that a successfully integrated team would make money, as attendance in the African American community would rise sharply. He was also a bit of an idealist, having been struck by the anguish a black player had gone through on his college team forty years earlier. However, even though there was nothing preventing integration, and there was one team willing to try it, they still needed to find the right person.

Whoever took on the mantle of “the first black player in the modern major leagues” not only had to be a good enough player as to make people accept him on that level, he also had to be strong enough to endure the vicious hatred that was sure to come. Not only would he be forcing his way into new territory, he’d be taking someone’s job, and if he succeeded, more white players would lose their jobs as well. And he couldn’t just be tough, he had to be smart – a hothead who fought back against the abuse would have only brought more upon himself, and it was a fight no single man could win.

Jackie Robinson was a good young player in the Negro Leagues, although far from a star. He had been an excellent athlete at UCLA, especially in football and basketball, and had served in the military for three years during the war. While in the Army, he had been court-martialed (and found not guilty) for refusing to sit in the back of a transport bus. He was married to a strong woman, Rachel, and whatever hatred he faced, she dealt with as well.

When Rickey decided that Robinson was the best man for the job, they had an extraordinary meeting in which they discussed the realities of what lay ahead. Rickey taunted Jackie with every racial slur he could think of – vile, nasty, incredibly rude things. He’d hear those things, and worse, from thousands of people every day. He made Jackie agree that for three years, he wouldn’t retaliate against a single player, for any reason. Jackie was to play first base, instead of second, because it would reduce the risk of someone sliding in with their spikes up (players back then were known, from time to time, to file the tips of their spikes when playing against guys they didn’t like). And then they signed the contract.

Robinson actually broke the color barrier in the minor leagues first, playing for the Montreal Royals in 1946. His manager didn’t want him, asking Rickey “Is [he] even human?” But Jackie’s play, and his determination, won over his harshest critics, even that same manager – by the end of the year, he was calling Jackie one of the best players he’d ever seen. The game was played differently in the Negro Leagues than in white baseball – it was faster, with more stolen bases and more energy. Watching film of Robinson play, you can see that he was always hustling, always running, always doing everything he could to beat the other guy, even if it was by an inch.

And then on April 15th, 1947, Jackie finally played his first game with the Dodgers. He, figuratively, carried the weight of the entire black community on his back. Failure meant that it would be that much harder for someone else to try it. It would validate all of the hateful things that the racists said to make themselves feel better. And it would break the hearts of black people everywhere – from the kids who looked up to Jackie as their idol to famous black musicians and entertainers, who told him that he was their hope. As popular as baseball was, if he could successfully lead the way for African Americans into the majors, then the entire black community would feel like it was part of the national pastime, and hence the national fabric. To succeed at baseball, hyperbolic as it sounds, meant succeeding as an American to many people. Rookies have enough trouble trying to succeed for themselves, much less millions of people.

Jackie Robinson not only succeeded, but he was a star. He changed the game, not just from the standpoint of who played it, but how it was played. A rookie at age 28, he was in the top 15 in Most Valuable Player voting his first 7 years in the league, winning in 1949. The game got faster and more exciting. He kept his promise to Branch Rickey, and turned the other cheek for years whenever he’d hear epithets or taunts coming from the stands or the other dugout. He won skeptical teammates over with his excellent play, and became the idol of kids across the country, both black and white.

After he retired, he became a ceaseless advocate for racial causes. Martin Luther King, Jr., said that if Jackie hadn’t done what he did, both on the field and off, then it would have been unlikely that he could have done what he did. By playing a game, hitting and throwing a ball, first as the only black man among hundreds of whites, and then just as a star, he opened minds all over the country. People who’d always looked at blacks as inferior had that view challenged. People from segregated communities who really didn’t know what to think about blacks saw him succeed with grace and humility, and had their minds opened. The country didn’t immediately become a panacea of racial equality, but because baseball truly was part of so many lives, Jackie’s success in the sport truly led the way for change for millions of people.

Unfortunately, the stress of dealing with the hate took its toll on Jackie, and he died at 53. His widow, Rachel, continued to work for the same causes he always did, and today, nearly 35 years after his death, the country continues to recognize his contributions. He was posthumously given the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Congressional Gold Medal. The Rookie of the Year award in baseball is the Jackie Robinson Award. In 1997, on the 50th anniversary of Jackie’s first game, his number was retired, not by the Dodgers (who had done it years before), but by every team. And today, to mark the 60th anniversary, players from around the league who want to pay tribute to his achievement will wear his number, 42. First, it was Ken Griffey, Jr., who asked for permission to honor Jackie, and then the invitation was spread to all 30 teams. More than 150 players will take the field wearing the number 42, including five entire teams, including the Dodgers.

Some consider the tribute to be watering down the meaning, but to me, it’s a celebration. Athletes are often called heroic or courageous just because they play a game well. But Jackie really was a hero. He displayed incredible courage against hate and bigotry and opened the way for change not just in baseball, but in the world. The other day, my wife ordered Dodgers T-shirts with “Robinson 42” on the back, and we will join with countless others in saying thank you to a man who not only made the game I love one worthy of respect, but who truly made the world a better place.

Two for the price of one!

Yessiree, folks, step right up! Double your pleasure!

First of all, we have Susan Petrarca of Lemont, a regular in the corner, a right-wing harpy with a room temperature IQ. This dim bulb opines:

Regarding Nancy Pelosi, they used to have a word for people who consorted with our enemies during wartime, and it wasn't "diplomat." The kindest word I can think of to describe her attempt to set up a parallel foreign policy is "stupid."

Well, Little Susie, 1) we are not at war (if so with whom?) 2) we CERTAINLY are not at war with Syria, 3) she wasn't CONSORTING, she was part of a CONGRESSIONAL delegation and 4) even during a real war, diplomatic contacts take place.

And then we have constitutional scholar Mitch Johnson of Western Springs. This modern-day Justice Story apparently missed freshman civics, and seems to think that there is a right to life, liberty and a radio show, as he pronounces from the bench:

The 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights guarantees us freedom of speech. With all the uproar about Imus and others recently, we should add an asterisk to the Bill of Rights that reads: "As long as it is politically correct."

I would like to thank Mitch for proving that half of America graduated in the bottom half of the class, and to both Susie and Mitch:

In Memoriam: KV

I was raised on Kurt Vonnegut, I've grown to middle age with him. I feel as if I know him better than my own father, who died shy of his 50th birthday, when I was in my mid 20s. It was easy for me to adopt Vonnegut after my dad's death. I was drawn to his ethos, which insisted that human beings can be decent, kind, and loving to one another independent of group-think organized religion and lockstep nationalism. He was the first important author with whom I fell in love (I can't include Poe, who scared the pants off me at age 9, or the transcendent William Blake - who had a profound influence on Vonnegut, but who I didn't learn to love until I was much older). So at some level his death represents a kind of re-enactment of my father's death, as it might have hit me had he lived til now. I will miss Kurt because he STILL had important things to say to me. He was still relevant, years after his "literary prime." As with the aftermath of my father's death, I know that I will be able to take solace in happy memories and lessons learned. I can revisit old works, still vibrant and full of ideas I've yet to ponder as I move closer to being an old man. But it'll not be the same.

Listen, Kurt Vonnegut is dead. So it goes.

He really didn't say that, did he?

Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), who describes himself as "a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order," said after joining the ever crazier John McCain in his market "stroll" that

I candidly was not prepared for to find a marketplace where thousands and thousands of Iraqis were moving about like in normal everyday life. Like a normal outdoor market in Indiana in the summertime.

See if you can guess which one is Bloomington, Indiana, and which one is Baghdad?


or

Much ado about nothing

Well, the mass media has made a seamless transition from Anna Nicole to All Imus All Day, with a detour at American Idol and a kid with bad hair. A morning knucklehead racist says something characteristically stupid and America forgets all about that hell and handbasket thing. So the Justice department fired US Attorneys both to get rid of troublemakers now and install stooges for later, in key swing states for the 08 election. LARRY'S THE FATHER OF ANNA NICOLE'S BABY! The combat deployments of all army units in Iraq have been extended for three months. HE SAID HO! DID YOU HEAR THAT?

An entire nation is fascinated by small shiny objects.

Yosemite Romney

Mitt Romney has checked his dignity at the door and backtracked on every principled stand he has ever taken in order to appeal to the GOP's "Deliverance" wing. This one though is my personal favorite, his bizarre explanation of his new-found love for the NRA and the fact that he has never had a hunting license:

I've always been a rodent and rabbit hunter. Small varmints, if you will. I began when I was 15 or so and I have hunted those kinds of varmints since then.More than two times.

Come outta there ya flea bitten varmint before I blast the fir clean off a your carcass!

And on a lighter note

Washington's beautiful cherry blossoms--and some kid.

The time has come to do as commanded/requested

Some events have transpired over the past 7 months, and then again in the past 7 weeks, that have prompted be to come forth and blog. I changed jobs, which to a great extent removed the gag shackles of typing an opinion. No longer am I forced to sit by silently out of fear of clever retribution. Though while I have some specific insights on matters this doesn’t mean that I’m about to spout forth in some type of cathartic purge.

What happened more recently is that I’ve witnessed a blog-like website slip into obscurity as its' hosts lost interest and creative focus, and its visitors/contributors took a free run of the asylum. Kind of like what happens in the suburbs when someone is away from home for an extended period and the young person who lives down the street figures the empty house would be a great place to hold a good party.

This doesn’t mean I’ll be joining the "President is an idiot" choir. The lead singer here is a good one, and there are a couple of others here who can hold a tune as well. Which leaves pretty much any and every thing else open. Local politics? The mayor may wear Teflon compliments of the local major media outlets but the proposed Olympics bid will be the kind of boondoggle/white elephant that will forever change Chicago at the expense of anyone with a 606 zip code. Sports? I’m the one last September who was picking the Bears to be in the Super Bowl, and my sports depression over their losing (expected) lifted two weeks ago. There are a lot of other things going on that can be blogged and hopefully worth reading.

Anyway, as the moniker suggests I probably live on the other side of town from you, across the tracks or across the river. Does this afford me a better perspective than yours? More likely a different perspective. And when you sit far enough away there are some things you can see so clearly its’ scary. Other things from that same distance just might not matter much at all, it depends on if you’re thinking about it, or just sitting there.

And the Lord said..

According to the Gospel of Luke, Jesus condemned the arrogant braying pharisee for his self-centered public prayer in the temple. Jesus said that "everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted."

Laura and I just had the honor of celebrating Easter Sunday with members of our Armed Forces. I had a chance to reflect on the great sacrifice that our military and their families are making. I prayed for their safety, I prayed for their strength and comfort, and I pray for peace.

You pray for their safety yet send them needlessly to battle. You pray for their strength, yet you don't supply them properly, serve them tainted food and putrid water provided by your corporate owners, and cut back on their care at home. You pray for peace yet continue a pointless war. Looks like there is a double order of humbling coming your way.

What the Imus flap is NOT about

You have probably heard about Don Imus and his idiotic "nappy-headed hos" comment about the Rutgers women's basketball team. Please remember that the one thing about this episode though. It does not involve "freedom of speech." The free speech we treasure refers to freedom from governmental suppression and prosecution. It does NOT involve a relationship with a private employer or access to a microphone.

Was it ignorant, racist and insulting? Of course. If I owned a radio/TV station, would I fire him? certainly. Should NBC fire him? I DON'T CARE. Why? I don't listen to him, and I don't invest in NBC's corporate family. It isn't my business. His employers will resolve it one way or the other, presumably based on rational business concerns. If he is dismissed, however, remember that no harm will have been done to "free speech."

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

From the "Oh Really?" File

Halliburton will move headquarters from Houston to Dubai

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Oil services giant Halliburton will shift its headquarters from Houston to the Mideast financial powerhouse of Dubai, chief executive Dave Lesar announced Sunday.

Taking any corporate records with you out of reach of U.S. subpoenas? Just askin'.

Gun-sanity

Well, it finally happened. A federal appeals court (District of Columbia Circuit, http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf, issued a precedential ruling (unlike the 5th Circuit's Emerson decision, where the 2nd Amendment talk was dicta) holding that the 2nd Amendment guarantees private ownership rights.

I had always worried that neocon administrations would lead to an ideologically active federal judiciary, and here we see it in full bloom. The decision is bizarre on both ends, both in the majority and the dissent. The majority opinion (this is a three-judge panel) completely misses the historical basis of the 2nd amendment.

Firearms in a pre-Industrial Revolution America were made by hand and were quite expensive--it is doubtful that individual ownership would have been a concern to the framers. For example, individual rights advocates fondly quote Patrick Henry with well-placed ellipses, as he states "the great object is that every man be armed...every one who is able may have a gun." Unfortunately, the excised portion reveals that Henry is referring to the STATE purchasing weapons for militia use rather than Skeeter owning a squirrel rifle: "The great object is that every man be armed--but can the people to afford to pay for double sets of arms? Every one who is able may have a gun. But have we not learned by experience, that necessary as it is to have arms, and though our assembly has, by a succession of laws for many years, endeavored to have the militia completely armed, it is still far from being the case. When this power is given up to Congress without limitation or bounds, how will your militia be armed?"

The description of the "Magazine" at colonial Williamsburg further states that "The night of April 20, 1775, Lieutenant Henry Collins stole toward the capital with a squad of royal marines from the H.M.S. Magdalen anchored in Burwell's Bay on the James River. Their orders, straight from Governor Dunmore, were to empty the arsenal and disable THE MUSKETS stored there. In 1715, the magazine "safeguarded shot, powder, flints, tents, tools, swords, pikes, canteens, cooking utensils, and as many as 3,000 Brown Bess flintlocks--equipment needed for defense against Indians, slave revolts, local riots, and pirate raids"--weapons held collectively for the MILITIA to keep and bear.

The frightening part of the opinion lies in their conclusion that "Once it is determined—as we have done—that handguns are `Arms' referred to in the Second Amendment, it is not open to the District to ban them." Think about that. No arms may be banned under the 2nd. Historically speaking, as the archives of the militias show, during the colonial period, "arms" included not only rifles and pistols but artillery and ordnance as well. Need a howitzer, anyone?

The dissent is equally bizarre. She doesn't attack the majority for completely botching the notion of "keep and bear"--rather, she seizes on the first clause, the security of a free state notion, and says that the 2nd does not apply to DC because the district is not a state! A rather perverse exercise of the dynamic of federalism there.

First of all, let us note what this opinion does NOT do--it does not have any impact outside the district. First of all, jurisdictionally, it is only binding within that circuit. In addition, as far as persuasive authority goes, gun cases involving the states are decided under the 14th amendment rather than the 2nd.

What it does do, for the first time, is to set up a clear split among the circuits. Perhaps the Supreme Court will address this question once and for all.

Editor's Note: This opinion may also be subject to review by the entire court (known as an en banc review.)

From the "Well duh" file

Here's the front page headline in this morning's Chicago Tribune:

Iranian influence soaring in Iraq

Shiites, Sunnis say Tehran is winner of U.S. invasion

Gosh, who could have seen that coming? I mean, besides your average college sophomore in an intro-level middle eastern history class? I found the quote below particularly disturbing:

America handed Iraq to Iran on a golden plate," says Sunni politician Saleh al-Mutlaq. "Everything Iran fought for in the Iran-Iraq war, America gave to it when it invaded."

In God we trust?

Apparently some of the new dollar coins are circulating without the "In God We Trust" legend (link) This excites the coin collectors as did the famous "inverted Jenny" stamp:



But this is more than just a screwup at the mint. This is an opportunity to examine something that is just flat-out wrong. The "In God We Trust" line dates from the Civil War. It has withstood constitutional challenge on the incredibly shaky ground that it is "ceremonial" or "patriotic" rather than religious.

In effect, the federal courts are allowing it to stay because it is meaningless. So if it is meaningless, then why not just get rid of it?

I don't want to see poor municipalities like Zion in Illinois forced to spend tax dollars that could be used to teach kids and fix potholes to sandblast religious symbols off public building or re-order all the village stationery, etc. This one is simple. The next time we need to update the die for minting coins or the template for printing bills--just remove it. Almost no cost would be involved and we would honor the Constitution and the nation we are today.

Moment of Silence

Winemaker Ernest Gallo dies at 97

Thank you Ernest for helping America understand that wine is a food and proof that God loves us.

I've been one poor correspondent..

Work's been hell and adjusting to having Peggy back from another European boondoggle, but--so little time, so much stuff.

First of all, Merry Fitzmas! Kudos to Patrick Fitzgerald, the prosecutor's prosecutor. He is truly our generation's Untouchable, a ruthless yet fair and honest prosecutor. He has no agenda other than justice. He is a media superstar with a J.D. from Harvard and could have any partnership he desired, but no--he's a prosecutor. A Washington Post reporter interviewed him over breakfast and was going to pay for Pat's doughnut and coffee and he said no, even $10 (at DC prices) for breakfast would have compromised his integrity.

Guilty on four out of five, and the "not guilty" had a jury vote of 11-1 for conviction. These are serious charges ABOUT A SERIOUS MATTER. I use the caps for the Clinton comparison. Bill Clinton was deceptive under oath. One could make a fine legal argument that he did not "lie" because the other side's definition of "sexual relations" actually did not include happy humming.
It included touching this and touching that, but VERY TECHNICALLY it did not include the flute sonata.

That notwithstanding, Clinton did not commit perjury under applicable federal law. The federal statute criminalizes lying about MATERIAL matters. Material means something important that could impact a decision. For example, if I swear under oath that I was married on May 28, 1982, when in fact I was married on May 29, 1982 (note that this will be the 25th, presents accepted) I have lied under oath but not committed perjury under federal law unless my wedding date was an issue in the case (some states vary, a lie is a lie) Given that the Monica stuff wasn't even admitted into evidence, it is immaterial as a matter of law.

Scooter Libby lies and lies about outing a CIA operative TO DISCREDIT HER HUSBAND'S ANTI-WAR MESSAGE. A tad bit different from a blowjob.

A quick quote from the Washington Post:

Prosecutors contended that Libby tracked down and told reporters about Plame's CIA job as part of an administration strategy to discredit her husband by insinuating that the agency had dispatched Wilson to Niger because of nepotism.

Nepotism? NIGER? OK, if you give me a business trip to San Diego, Vegas, Orlando, Paris, London etc. but NIGER????No.

And isn't revenge a dish best served cold? Remember when the Dems said "BLOWJOB" and the Repubs answered with "rule of law?" PERJURY, JUSTICE! Enjoy that one!

Walter Reed? Need I mention, except to quote from the first Republican president:

to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle

Let's get right on that!

The North Korea screwup surfaces, U.S. Attorneys are fired and Scooter goes stripey and the White House says all is good.

Go with that.

Merry Fitzmas, one and all

Lewis "Scooter" Libby:

Count 1 (Obstruction): GUILTY
Count 2 (Perjury): GUILTY
Count 3 (False Statement): NOT GUILTY
Count 4 (Perjury): GUILTY
Count 5 (Perjury): GUILTY

Guilty on 4 of 5.

The world is a little brighter today.

March, march on down the field for old DePauw..

News from my alma mater:

Sorority Evictions Raise Issue of Looks and Bias

By SAM DILLON, New York Times

GREENCASTLE, Ind. — When a psychology professor at DePauw University here surveyed students, they described one sorority as a group of “daddy’s little princesses” and another as “offbeat hippies.” The sisters of Delta Zeta were seen as “socially awkward.”

Worried that a negative stereotype of the sorority was contributing to a decline in membership that had left its Greek-columned house here half empty, Delta Zeta’s national officers interviewed 35 DePauw members in November, quizzing them about their dedication to recruitment. They judged 23 of the women insufficiently committed and later told them to vacate the sorority house.

The 23 members included every woman who was overweight. They also included the only black, Korean and Vietnamese members. The dozen students allowed to stay were slender and popular with fraternity men — conventionally pretty women the sorority hoped could attract new recruits. Six of the 12 were so infuriated they quit.

“Virtually everyone who didn’t fit a certain sorority member archetype was told to leave,” said Kate Holloway, a senior who withdrew from the chapter during its reorganization.

This is particularly troublesome story for DePauw, even though the university was not involved. Why? Because some 85% of the students are involved in the Greek system (hey, it's an Indiana town of 6500 people!)

The system has always been screwy. I never could have been a Beta or a Phi Psi (rich face men), I didn't want to be a Sigma Nu (the offensive line) or a Delta Upsilon (stoner losers). I found my perfect niche at Alpha Tau Omega, the book jocks, the guys that girls wanted to study with but not go out with. This "bias" was built into the often insidious process known as rush.

But this story is devastating to the university at just the wrong time. First of all, high school seniors are making their final college decisions now, and beyond that, the obvious--even though it is an outside entity, the national sorority, the stories create the image of shallowness and elitism.

Sight Seen

Yup, a bumper sticker on a pickup truck this morning:

George Allen for President 2008

There's a collector's item for you!

The enemy of my enemy

is a bad shot.

I'm sure you've all heard about the bomb that went boom near Shooter in Afghanistan. Frankly, I don't know why the Taliban would try to kill him - after all, they both hate freedom and are slaves to fundamentalist idealogies. Not to mention, this will only piss off people (ie, Shooter and McFlightsuit) who are known to have invaded Iraq partly because Saddam tried to kill McFlightsuit's dad, who have access to the world's largest supply of nuclear weapons, and who believe that they are subject to no laws. I'm sure that somewhere, there's a wingnut arguing that this means that we should nuke Tehran, just to prove a point. (The point being, of course, that America is run by psychopaths.)

Now, one could say (and I'm going way out on a limb here) that if we had finished the job in Afghanistan, the Taliban would have been weakened, Al Qaeda would have lost a huge revenue source (the larger-than-ever opium fields), and we'd have a military capable of responding to threats. Don't expect to hear that from anyone associated with the administration or the media, though - it requires actual thought.

It also provides us a lesson as to why growing the national debt at a rate so fast that mathematicians have had to invent new ways of counting to deal with it is a bad idea. Lead story on CNN.com - "Dow tumbles after China selloff: U.S. stocks plunged today after stocks in China and Europe slumped and investors digested the news that Vice President Dick Cheney was the target of a Taliban suicide bombing attack in Afghanistan. Cheney wasn't hurt. The Dow was down more than 133 at one point. China's stocks fell 9 percent, the worst one-day selloff in a decade."

There's an assassination attempt against the US VP, China goes nuts, and our stocks tumble.

And hey - if Americans want a personal reason (other than the dead people, of course, since they're depressing) to oppose the war in Iraq - the failure to finish the job in Afghanistan just made retirement portfolios all over the country tumble.

Smart Man

"I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it." - John Stuart Mill

They write headlines

From AP: White House opposes war authority limits

If I was the editor, I'd leave a comment like "Omit needless words."

White House opposes war authority limits

Tip your servers, Part II

"Well, I look at it and see it is actually an affirmation that there are parts of Iraq where things are going pretty well"

Darth Cheney on the British withdrawing from areas of Iraq that are "stable" because they are firmly in the control of the Shi'a militias who have engaged in horrific ethnic cleansing.

I'm here all week, tip your bartender and drive home safely!

From standup comic Condoleezza Rice: "The coalition remains intact."

What? What "coalition?" Albania? Estonia? My grandfather's birthplace, Denmark, which has announced it's leaving (cutting off the supply of beer and porn.)

Can these people PLEASE go on MapQuest and find directions to reality?

My Life is Over...

I open up the mailbox and find the world's most dreaded missive...

The AARP mailing.

Goodbye cruel world.

The Supremes

No, you can't hurry love, you just have to wait...

Wait, wrong Supremes.

I'm referring to the Supreme Court, which came down with a remarkable decision vacating a punitive damage award against a tobacco company. I find it remarkable for many reasons.

1) First of all, I can't believe they took this case. The Supreme Court is the only federal court that can control its docket. In most instances, the Supremes can pick and choose what cases to hear. Yes, this one did involve a staggering amount of money, but it is really a routine matter of state tort law that just doesn't present constitutional issues. It is a HUGE stretch by the majority to bring this case within a due process ambit and scare court resources could have been better spent sorting out real issues.

2) I also think they are wrong on the basic legal point, about what harms the jury can consider in assessing punitive damages, and

3) Talk about strange bedfellows, Scalia and Thomas joined in a dissent by GINSBURG, where she wrote quite logically that "I would accord more respectful treatment to the proceedings and dispositions of state courts" than did the majority.

From Worst to First, Redux

First of all, let me apologize the "Presidents' Day" mistake!

Then we have the Idiot-in-Chief saying about that first president

George Washington's long struggle for freedom has also inspired generations of Americans to stand for freedom in their own time. Today, we're fighting a new war to defend our liberty and our people and our way of life. And as we work to advance the cause of freedom around the world, we remember that the father of our country believed that the freedoms we secured in our revolution were not meant for Americans alone.

Ahem, we are NOT fighting to "defend our liberty and our people and our way of life." WE are not fighting. Volunteers are stuck in a hellhole because of you. WE are not fighting, they are, because of you.

You stumbled on that "we remember that the father of our country believed that the freedoms we secured in our revolution were not meant for Americans alone."

Umm..no. George Washington said that

Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other....So, likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

He hardly would have supported external war to change the form of government of foreign states.

As I wrote on Schmidlap,

I stole James Thomas Flexner's ever-so-accurate description of Washington as "the indispensable man."

Was he a great general? No, not in a classical sense. He had little experience and no training in military tactics, and he won no major victories during the revolution. The legendary "crossing the Delaware" was a Christmas Eve raid on drunken Germans who didn't want to be there, and let's face it, the French won Yorktown.

However, he was the "indispensable man" because he was THE leader that held the revolution together. You will also note that Washington didn't win big battles, but he didn't lose them either. He almost by force of will kept the Continental Army together as a fighting force.

Let's compare Washington with his fellow Virginian (and step-in-law many times removed) Robert E. Lee. Lee was a much more accomplished tactician and fought and won set-piece battles. However, Lee's "wins" involved a casualty count and loss of equipment that ultimately doomed the South. Washington kept his revolution alive in the field long enough to negotiate a settlement, and Lee bled his to death.

And as president, again, he was not a master politician, but his very presence solidified the republic. We saw a tremendous amount of opposition to the new "constitution" but even the anti-federalists agreed to much because of "the indispensable man."

From worst to first

He

went here

to observe President's Day.

The "Indispensable Man" meets the "Incredible Buffoon."

Doc will love this one

Doc, please visit here and share your thoughts with the class!

Goodbye, old friend

Team members disagree with me on this one, but I would like to bid a fond adieu to an old friend:




Oskee-wow-wow, Chief.

In vino veritas

The president looked particularly blotchy, drinky and stumbly in his press conference this week. As the Latin phrase above says, though, "in wine, there is truth."

THE PRESIDENT: It's an interesting question. One of the problems -- not specifically on this issue, just in general -- let's put it this way, money trumps peace, sometimes.

Now add this in with this, and yes, 2 and 2 still equal 4.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. government is at risk of squandering significantly more money in an Iraq war and reconstruction effort that has already wasted, overcharged or poorly tracked $10 billion in taxpayer money, federal investigators said Thursday....David M. Walker, comptroller general of the GAO, Congress' auditing arm, said his agency has been pointing out problems for years, only to be largely ignored or given lip service with little result..."There is no accountability," Walker said. "Organizations charged with overseeing contracts are not held accountable. Contractors are not held accountable. The individuals responsible are not held accountable....People should be rewarded when they do a good job. But when things don't go right, there have to be consequences," he said.

Pardon me!

Well, Scooter-palooza is just about over.

I have never been a trial lawyer, and trial strategy is not my strong suit, but this seems fairly obvious. Libby's team meekly put forth two "defenses," the "I'm too busy and I forgot" claim and the "They threw me under the bus to save Turd Blossom" angle.

The problem is, Defense #1 effectively required Scootie to take the stand and #2 needed Darth Vader under oath to make it fly. Why do you think the words "Libby," "Cheney" and "under oath" don't fit together here?

So here's the drill. The jury HAS to convict based on the evidence presented and then, lo and behold, for being the good soldier, here comes a freshly-minted pardon.

Hate and Conservatism

In the comments to the previous post, Jimbow8 quoted Tim Hardaway, easy runaway winner for Humanitarian of the Year, saying "You know, I hate gay people, so I let it be known. I don't like gay people and I don't like to be around gay people. ... I'm homophobic. I don't like it. It shouldn't be in the world or in the United States."

First of all, I'm glad that Tim distinguishes being the United States from being in the world, since it shows that he is not part of the reality-based community, and thus a conservative. I've heard this topic being discussed in multiple forums, and one thing that radio show hosts try to do (to avoid alienating their audience), is say things like "I don't care whether you agree with him or not, I'm not here to argue right versus wrong." Well, I don't care if I alienate people who hate like this, so I'll tell you right here - if you agree with Tim, you are a moron. Hating a whole group of people for a genetic characteristic is just dumb. Hating someone because they're gay is like hating someone because they're black. Or a woman. Or Arabic.

Wait, I'm seeing a pattern here.

I find it interesting that conservatives like to hate those who are "different". Their worldview is so narrow that opening their lives up to people with different backgrounds, body parts, etc, scares them into hatred. Of course, this is because conservatism is about selfishness and power. "I want my share to increase, I want to only deal with the things I want to deal with, and perhaps most importantly, I don't want you to have something that I otherwise could have had. Those who do not have power are a threat to me, because they could take mine away. And that scares me, so I must fear them. Then I must hate them, because they are out to hurt me."

To a conservative, it's all about distributing a finite set of resources, and making sure that they get the biggest share they can. There's no sense of working together to grow the resources, so that more people can share more things. It's about the haves and the have-nots, and convincing the have-nots that the only way they can get more is to take from others (while those with more power take it right back). It's about creating images of Us vs. Them, so that when we take from someone else, especially that damned woman, or gay guy, or furriner, we're not taking from someone as important as we are. We're not taking from someone as human as we are. We're taking from someone who is lesser than us, somehow, someone who wants what is rightfully ours. Someone we can hate with impunity. Someone we can kill, and feel no sorrow.

And that's how you start a war.

Spraying to all fields

The Straight Talk Express John McCain trainwreck spirals further out of control, as he speaks to the Discovery Institute, those intelligent design/the world is 6,000 years old folks.

May I say how annoyed I am about Iran possibly meddling in the Middle East? The nerve?

I would like to congratulate the Rev. Ted Haggard , head of the National Association of Evangelicals, for being "cured" of his homosexuality. All I can say is. "FABULOUS!"

Memo to the U.S. Senators from Illinois--STOP APOLOGIZING FOR BEING RIGHT.

How damned guilty is Scooter Libby?

Down on the corner...

We haven't visited for a while, but we must pause and reflect upon the wisdom of John E. Groskopf of Vernon Hills, Illinois, who gave us this gem:

Comparing Obama to Lincoln borders on hubris. Lincoln freed the slaves. Obama is willing to see millions of fetuses destroyed. Lincoln fought the war to win. Obama wants to withdraw in defeat. Lincoln suspended habeas corpus to save the country. Obama wants to grant it to enemy combatants determined to destroy the country. What do they have in common? Did they both smoke? Bridge the gap? Not with millions of gun owners. Not with those who see failure in the backbreaking commitment to entitlements. Not with those who do not want socialized medicine. Not with those seeking permanent tax relief for all taxpayers (not just those who pay no taxes). Can't we all just get along is not a policy.

Besides being an anti-abortion gun nut, 1) Johnny celebrates the suspension of fundamental legal rights as a virtue in a fashion rarely seen among the breathing and 2) obviously has no idea what "hubris" means.

So John...

Good to be home, Part II

Brief reflections on my trip to the nation's capital (for those of you that know me from another particular forum, hat tip to Rambler Boy!):

First of all, I was completely divorced from the news. I didn't touch a computer and saw very little TV. About all I could gather was that I am the only man in America who claims not to have fathered Anna Nicole's baby.

My kid is amazing. She basically curated the show that opened Friday night at the gallery where she's interning. My little girl's all grown up!

I am always moved and awed when I see the White House. This time, though, my thoughts turned to how much we're going to have to pay one of those disaster recovery companies that clean up after fires and floods to remove the neocon stench from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

At the National Archives, I caused a security guard to laugh out loud briefly before returning to palace guard seriousness when I said they should put a "Repealed Effective 9/12/2001" label over the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

For all of you DC area dwellers who complain about the Metro, come to Chicago! On Sunday morning, I left the hotel in Silver Spring at 8 AM. Walked to the Metro, took the train, changed lines, and by 9:10 was checked in and past security at National Airport (I will not use that other name.)

Finally, how's this for an appetite killer. I took the daughter out for dinner to a restaurant close to the White House that is a favorite of Congress creatures and the K Street crowd. I excused myself to visit the facilities, and yes, got to stand at the necessary next to former Senator Man on Dog. Just try going back to eat after standing next to Rick and his Santorum.

Good to be home!

Yes, it is deliciously true. The author of this:

is the new pastry chef here:

Whatever happened to "up or down" votes?

Washington: A long-awaited Senate showdown on the war in Iraq was shut down before it even started yesterday, when nearly all Republicans voted to stop the Senate from considering a resolution opposing President Bush's plan to send 21,500 additional combat troops into battle.

So much for that good for the goose is good for the gander nonsense.

Excuses, Excuses….

I know, I haven't written much lately. The Bears, work, the car's been in the shop forever, it's too damned cold, etc. And tomorrow, I'm off to the nation's capital for a conference and to see my kid, who is spending the semester there. I may have some random thoughts before the very early departure tomorrow, but I leave you in good hands, and will see you all Monday.

Sometimes you don't even need to read the article

Headline: "Pentagon big winner in Bush budget plan"

Really? I am shocked.