 Monday, February 3, update 1

Is it Monday Already? Uh-oh, time for Comedy Monday.
Daily Affirmation with Stuart Smalley
Stuart Smalley.....Al Franken
.....Al Gore
.....Tipper Gore
Stuart Smalley V/O: I deserve good things. I am entitled to my share of happiness. I refuse to beat myself up. I am attractive person. I am fun to be with.
Announcer: "Daily Affirmation with Stuart Smalley".
[ open on Stuart giving himself a pep talk in his full-length mirror ]
Stuart Smalley: I'm going to do a terrific show today! And I'm gonna help people! Because I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and, doggonit, people like me!
[ turns to camera ]
Hello, I'm Stuart Smalley, and it's great to be back! As some of you probably know, I was hit, uh.. by a bus. And, um.. I'm grateful for all the cards.. and letters. Um.. I'd like to start the show.. by making an amends, uh.. to the bus driver, uh.. Luis Calogne, uh.. who felt terrible about the whole thing. Luis, uh.. it was not your fault. I was, uh.. having a horrible week.. I was in a horrendous chain spiral, and.. I essentially let.. the bus.. hit me. I, uh.. I guess I just wanted some drama, which.. I got in spades. And, so, uh.. Luis, I'm.. I'm sorry.
Well! We've got a great show today. Because my guests are Al and Tipper G., who have two books out - two books! Good for you! Good for you!
Tipper Gore: Thank you, Stuart.
Al Gore: We're delighted to be here.
Stuart Smalley: I hear the book is about family?
Tipper Gore: The book is about..
Together: family!
Stuart Smalley: Which is terrific, because family is huge! A huge, huge issue.
Al Gore: Absolutely. And, in the books, we-
Stuart Smalley: [ interrupting ] My family's extremely dusyfinctional. Mt father is an active alcholic.. big, stinking drunk.
Al Gore: Well.. in the book, we do profile families dealing with stress.
Stuart Smalley: Oh, yes.. and the stories are very inspiring.. wonderful.
Tipper Gore: Thank you.
Stuart Smalley: Well, I think you might have left out one family trauma that I think you two could have written very.. eloquently about.
Al Gore: Uh.. I'm not sure I follow you.
Stuart Smalley: Well, it's something that happened to.. your family. [ a beat ] Tipper?
Tipper Gore: Honey? I think it's about the.. election?
Al Gore: Well, sure.. that was a disappointment. But I wouldn't describe it as.. "traumatic".
Stuart Smalley: [ glances at Tipper again ] Tipper?
Tipper Gore: Well.. it was difficult.
Stuart Smalley: Al? do you hear what Tipper is saying?
Al Gore: Yes. That the outcome of the election was very hard for.. her.. and the children.
Stuart Smalley: [ glances at Tipper again ] Tipper.
Tipper Gore: Um.. well, honey..
Stuart Smalley: Go ahead, you can say the "E" word.
Tipper Gore: The eating.
Al Gore: Okay! I was a bit down, and I took some solace in.. food.
Stuart Smalley: Al? Tipper gave me this picture that she took about three months after the election. Now.. I think it's pretty clear that you were in a humongous chain spiral.
Al Gore: Well, as you can see, I lost the weight, and I'm over it!
Stuart Smalley: [ glances at Tipper again ] Tipper? Is he over it?
Tipper Gore: [ faux crying, grabs a Kleenex from Stuart ] Oh, thank you.
Stuart Smalley: Tipper?
Tipper Gore: It's been difficult..
Stuart Smalley: Yes. Do you think that Al has feelings.. about not being President.
Tipper Gore: Yes.
Al Gore: Well, of course I have! I-
Stuart Smalley: Al, I'm talking to Tipper. [ turns to Tipper ] And, do you think that Al is maybe in denial about his feelings?
Al Gore: Oh, for goodness sakes!
Tipper Gore: Maybe a little.
Stuart Smalley: Do you think it might be good for the whole Gore Family if Al dealt with his.. his feelings?
Tipper Gore: Well.. sure, I do.
Stuart Smalley: You're doing good work! Good work. Al?
Al Gore: [ fuming ] What?
Stuart Smalley: You are in.. denial. But we are going to trace it, face it, and erase it. I want you to look at the mirror - come on, don't look at me, only you can help you. [ Al looks into the mirror ] Look at the mirror. Come on. That's it. Okay. I want you to say.. "Hi, Me!"
Al Gore: [ relunctant ] Hi, Me.
Stuart Smalley: "I am sad.. about not being President." Come on.
Al Gore: I am.. sad.. about not being.. President.
Stuart Smalley: "And that's.. okay."
Al Gore: And that's okay.
Stuart Smalley: "I don't have to be the most powerful man in the world."
Al Gore: I don't have to be the most powerful.. man in the world.
Stuart Smalley: "I don't have to be able to.. [ thinking ] ..bomb a country any time I want."
Al Gore: Look, I would never arbitrarily bomb..
Stuart Smalley: Okay, okay.. I-I-I'm sorry. Uh.. "All I have to do is be the best Al I can be."
Al Gore: All I have to do is.. be the best Al I can be.
Stuart Smalley: "Because I'm good enough.." Come on! "I'm good enough.. I'm smart enough.. and, doggonit, people like me!"
Al Gore: Because I'm good enough.. I'm smart enough.. and, doggonit, people like me!
Stuart Smalley: Feel better? You feel better?
Al Gore: Actually, I.. I do feel better!
Stuart Smalley: You do? You do feel better?
Al Gore: Yes. Actually, I do.
Stuart Smalley: Hug? [ holds arms out ]
Al Gore: No.
Stuart Smalley: Well! It's been a great show, I want to thank the G.'s. You've been terrific. Goodbye! See you tomorrow.. I guess.
Transcript courtesy of JT.org
"Everyone is still talking about the State of The Union Address. This is a true story. Only one out of the nine Supreme Court Justices showed up to the president's speech the other night. When the Justices were asked why only one of them showed up they said, "Look we made that guy president, what more does he want?" " Conan O'Brien
"Well folks, the ratings are in, it seems a record number of Americans watched the president's speech the other night. Well sure they watched it, it's not like they had anything else to do. It's not like they have jobs to get up early for the next day." Jay Leno.
"Every major network aired the speech last night. But NBC had the highest ratings. The NBC viewers said that the speech was good but Martin Sheen looks horrible." Conan O'Brien
I've been thinking of switching over to 'movable type' but the damn thing is so confusing that I've already given up. I was stuck trying to find where this 'PERL' thing on my server is ... and I think that's step one. Well, if anyone would be kind enough to help me, you know where to shoot an email ...
Seeing the Forest on voting machines ... Talk Left on "Drug War Refugees"
... Nate Newman on "Creating Tax-Free Heirs"
... Frog n' Blog on space, Babylon 5, and a bunch of other stuff
...
-Eric. Link.
 Friday, January 31, / Weekend update 6

Atrios links us to this hilarious article on the African American Republican Leadership Council:
Kevin said the AARLC was happy with the results of the November elections, and the Web site confirmed it: "AARLC Candidates Sweep in November Elections," it said. So I checked the victorious AARLC candidates for Congress and governorships: They are all white.
Begala Scores Another Knockout:
BEGALA: It concludes with a suggestion -- not a suggestion, an allegation that Democrats are guilty of treason for insufficient applause when the president talked about missile defense.
COULTER: Correct.
BEGALA: Let me test your definition of the word treason. I gather that's the name of the new book, by the way.
COULTER: It is.
BEGALA: Let's check out another -- just to test your definition of treason. Take a look at this from "The Washington Post."
"According to oil industry executives and confidential United Nations records, Halliburton held stakes in two firms that signed contracts to sell more than $73 million in oil production equipment and spare parts to Iraq while Cheney" -- that would be Dick Cheney, now vice president -- "was chairman and CEO of the Dallas-based company. Two former senior executives of the Halliburton subsidiary say that as far as they know, there was no policy against doing business with Iraq."
Is that treason too?
COULTER: We weren't at war with Iraq.
BEGALA: So that's not a problem. He wasn't a bad guy two years ago?
COULTER: In fact to the contrary -- no, to the contrary it was actually quite useful to have Iraq and Iran fighting one another, I might add.
BEGALA: But they weren't. This was 1998, Ann.
COULTER: No, but I'm just saying...
BEGALA: 1998.
If it's Friday ... It must be 'The Wit and Wisdom of Rush Limbaugh.'
"There are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived or at any other time in history. Does this sound like a record of genocide?"
There are more American Indians alive today than during Columbus's time?! Well color me purple and call me Skippy, the white man didn't slaughter the Indians after all!
Save some BioGems? Ahh, we would all like that. But guess who's trying to get rid of them?
Regis T. Sabol sticks it to AM radio demagogues:
"How dare you ask me that question?" I shot back. "I'm every bit as much an American as you are. I believe in America. I believe in democracy. I also believe we have the right to free speech, the right to disagree with government policy, the right to protest against the government when we don't agree with it." Then I remembered a sign I frequently saw in Washington. "Dissent is patriotic," I declared. "This country was founded on dissent by men and women who believed they had a right to criticize their government's policies."
Email Regis and thank him for standing up for America.
Speak Out. Musician Rob Moitoza was nice enough to send me a copy of his new CD and it was a hoot. Good stuff all around. Includes tracks such as, "CHICKEN HAWKS," "GREAT AMERICAN SMOKEOUT," and "GEORGE BUSH NATIONAL PARK." Visit Rob's website to learn more, or order the CD here.
Thanks to the 20-30 or so of you who bought Amazon.com books from this site in the past 4 months, contributing mucho dinero to the Hamster fund. Remember: when buying books, never buy anything linkless.
New links up in the link section, including Frog n' Blog, politicalstrategy.org, onegoodmove and Grassroots Recycling Network. I need more links, so if you have some, mail me.
.
I got an email back from Scotttrade re: my Rush Limbaugh boycott letter:
Dear Customer
Thank you for the email. Scottrade Financial Services has advertised on
radio programs to market our
on-line financial services. Our advertisement is not an endorsement for
opinions or views expressed on any respective program.
If you have any other questions please let us know.
Added a "DC" section to the blog ... yeep, not all of them are 'good liberals,' but I tend to agree with most of them.
Something that bothers me about Joe Millionaire: True, when the 'lucky gal' get picked and then faces the reality that Joe Millionaire is just a $19,000 construction worker, she might be disappointed, but does anyone really believe he'll continue to be a 19,000/year construction worker after this Fox show completes its run? I highly doubt it. More likely, he'll be rich and famous.
Alterman reminds us:
Some genuinely funny news from Amazon: One person recommended "Atlas Shrugged" instead of "What Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias and the News ."
Actually WLM is a lot shorter and the characters are more credible. The WLM? media tour is scheduled to start on Tuesday, the book's pub date. These things are always subject to change, particularly with an unnecessary and potentially counter-productive pre-emptive war being planned and lied about. But here is the schedule as of now. Check the site for updates.
"The O'Reilly Factor," Fox News, Tuesday 2/4, 8:00 p.m.
"Crossfire, CNN, Wednesday, 2/5, 7:00 p.m.
"The Big Story with John Gibson" Fox News, Thursday, 2/6 5:00 p.m.
"Nachman" MSNBC, Friday, 2/7 5:00 p.m.
The O'Reilly interview is bound to be hilarious. I think I'll try to attend the 'Crossfire' episode, since it's two blocks from me ... maybe I'll even ask a question during the 'Fireback' segment.
Alan Colmes, He is Not. Georgetown Prof and Crossfire Host Paul Begala:
"Now, in defense of the elder Bush, he inherited a fiscal mess from Ronald Reagan. Bush Jr., of course, inherited the largest surplus in history from President Clinton, and then he blew it. Which is really a surprise because I thought if Junior would be good at anything, it would be at inheriting things. I was wrong."
"It was many of the new spending initiatives the president called for the first half of the speech ... He spent $18 billion a minute, Senator, last night. Over a trillion dollars."
"Senator, let me ask you about this matter of the aluminum tubes. First off, earlier in the year, our president say the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency, had a report that said Saddam Hussein would have a nuclear weapon in six months. The IAEA said, "With respect, Mr. President, that's false. There's no such report."
Then he told us that there were these aluminum tubes that were going to be used to make nuclear weapons. The U.N. inspectors said that's not the case. The British intelligence, our closest allies, say that's not the case and the American intelligence agencies say that is not the case.
Doesn't our president need to level with us instead of making things up?"
-Eric. Link.
 Thursday, January 30, update 1

Skipster:
showing up all the nay-sayers, bush's numbers jumped a whopping 3 percent after last night's state of the union speech, confirming his status as the most incredibly influential speaker that the media has ever created.
the lastest abc news poll puts bush in the high 60's (assuming anything over 1 is high), thus assuring the corporate media and all other brown-nosers once again that bush is the best president that the united states ever has, and gee, we might as well just make him emporer while we're at it.
after hearing mr. bush make it all the way through an hour long speech without stumbling, his job approval ratings went from an already-incredible 59% rating, to an astounding 62%, giving everyone who works for rupert murdoch cause for rejoicing.
this is proof that the american people are totally behind bush and his policies, if you don't count 4 out of every 10 americans ... according to the abc poll of 781 americans held after the speech, a whole 1% more think invasion is a good idea than just the day before, proving once again that when it comes to speechifying, bush has no clone.
" 'With a new national commitment, our scientists and engineers will overcome obstacles to taking these cars from laboratory to showroom.' Those obstacles? His administration." Jon Stewart
Talk Left on "Shoe-Bomber" Richard Reid:
We think this c/ase shows that our criminal justice system is well equipped to handle terror cases. There is no need to keep the suspects in military custody, cut off from lawyers --or to try them in military tribunals. Reid pleaded guilty to all counts and received no promises of leniency or other sentence concessions. This is a case we don't have a lot of complaints about. Reid had excellent counsel and a U.S. District Court Judge.
Lieberman 2004?
MadKane links us to this Joe Lieberman site.
Powerful Debate. Alan Colmes Gets Tough on Peggy Noonan.
Question 1) "ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: I was wondering if you would be at all critical of him tonight. I was just really wondering about that."
We all were curious as to what Colmes was really wondering, now we know. And he said it twice! I was really wondering about that.
2) What do you think of Gary Locke's response? There's so much to ask you about Bush. You know it's interesting. It's always like the other party's in the garage somewhere. The pomp and circumstance goes with the president. The other party is in some, you know...
NOONAN: It's always true, sure. The president is on stage at the garden and the response from the other team is like a garage band tuning up. So that's the way it always goes.
COLMES: Yes, exactly right. Like a grunge band in Seattle.
So ... Gary Locke was like a punk rock band in Seattle. Yeah. That's exactly what I thought when I was watching him.
3) COLMES: Now you are famous for, among other things, the phrase "thousand points of light." Last year we heard "axis of evil." And David Frum was here recently who created that phrase. Did you hear any phrases in this particular speech that might down the road have that kind of life span?
Colmes asks which Bush phrase was her favorite. Awww ... it's like picking a puppy in a window.
4) COLMES: One gets the sense -- and there was a theme of god and spirituality throughout the speech ... And one gets the sense that he feels he is in a sense ordained by god -- is on a mission to do what he's doing. It's almost as if he's chosen at this time -- and there are many people ... No. I just wonder if there are people in this country who believe that. And so I'm wondering if in a sense he may believe that.
Don't play too much hardball, Alan. Alan is doing more wondering.
5) To be fair, Alan did get out this: "I don't agree with everything he said. I mean, I think on the issues I have some issues. His tax plan I think is wrong. You know he talks about it being about jobs. He's lost jobs for the American people ... But when you look at some of the things he said, the environment, he's not been strong on the environment, not nearly as strong as Clinton has been. But people will -- I wonder, if people want substance as much as they want style in a situation..."
"Think," "wonder" once again. Not very assertive. Pundits are paid to tell people what to think. It's hard to be persuaded by Alan Colmes when he himself doesn't even know what he thinks.
6) And now Colmes gets to the pick sendoff, the last question. He says this stumper: "All right. You know I think President Bush did a magnificent job in terms of style tonight. I thought he was really on message. I thought he was very focused ... He did a good job selling himself, which is really what this is."
Whatever Fox is paying Alan, it's not enough. If you watched the interview, Alan looked and sounded like a little child, asking the mighty and smart Peggy Noonan, in her infinite wisdom, what she thinks of his buddy Bush. Yup, that's powerful debate. Colmes does a better job of selling the Right than Hannity.
I wonder what actual liberal Paul Begala thinks of Bush's speech? Hmmm ...
BEGALA: He's at 53. In last year's State of the Union Address our president said that his economic plan could be summed up in one word, jobs. Since then 668,000 fewer Americans have jobs. And in all, 2.7 million Americans have lost their jobs under President Bush.
Last year Mr. Bush also promised more money to aid local police and firefighters in the war on terror. He pledged better border security, safer air travel, better tracking of foreigners in the United States. Two weeks ago his party voted down funding for those exact projects in order devote for money for another tax cut for the rich.
Mr. Bush also promised last year to fully fund education, another promise he broke. And he promised to increase veterans health care, which, in fact, he later cut. Perhaps our straight-talking president is really just a man of his most recent word. And that was just in the intro! Imagine what Begala or Carville will say tonight ... transcripts up tomorrow.
-Eric. Link.
 Wed, January 29, update 3

Powerful Debate. Alan Colmes Gets Tough on Peggy Noonan.
Question 1) "ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: I was wondering if you would be at all critical of him tonight. I was just really wondering about that."
We all were curious as to what Colmes was really wondering, now we know. And he said it twice! I was really wondering about that.
2) What do you think of Gary Locke's response? There's so much to ask you about Bush. You know it's interesting. It's always like the other party's in the garage somewhere. The pomp and circumstance goes with the president. The other party is in some, you know...
NOONAN: It's always true, sure. The president is on stage at the garden and the response from the other team is like a garage band tuning up. So that's the way it always goes.
COLMES: Yes, exactly right. Like a grunge band in Seattle.
So ... Gary Locke was like a punk rock band in Seattle. Yeah. That's exactly what I thought when I was watching him.
3) COLMES: Now you are famous for, among other things, the phrase "thousand points of light." Last year we heard "axis of evil." And David Frum was here recently who created that phrase. Did you hear any phrases in this particular speech that might down the road have that kind of life span?
Colmes asks which Bush phrase was her favorite. Awww ... it's like picking a puppy in a window.
4) COLMES: One gets the sense -- and there was a theme of god and spirituality throughout the speech ... And one gets the sense that he feels he is in a sense ordained by god -- is on a mission to do what he's doing. It's almost as if he's chosen at this time -- and there are many people ... No. I just wonder if there are people in this country who believe that. And so I'm wondering if in a sense he may believe that.
Don't play too much hardball, Alan. Alan is doing more wondering.
5) To be fair, Alan did get out this: "I don't agree with everything he said. I mean, I think on the issues I have some issues. His tax plan I think is wrong. You know he talks about it being about jobs. He's lost jobs for the American people ... But when you look at some of the things he said, the environment, he's not been strong on the environment, not nearly as strong as Clinton has been. But people will -- I wonder, if people want substance as much as they want style in a situation..."
"Think," "wonder" once again. Not very assertive. Pundits are paid to tell people what to think. It's hard to be persuaded by Alan Colmes when he himself doesn't even know what he thinks.
6) And now Colmes gets to the pick sendoff, the last question. He says this stumper: "All right. You know I think President Bush did a magnificent job in terms of style tonight. I thought he was really on message. I thought he was very focused ... He did a good job selling himself, which is really what this is."
Whatever Fox is paying Alan, it's not enough. If you watched the interview, Alan looked and sounded like a little child, asking the mighty and smart Peggy Noonan, in her infinite wisdom, what she thinks of his buddy Bush. Yup, that's powerful debate. Colmes does a better job of selling the Right than Hannity.
I wonder what actual liberal Paul Begala thinks of Bush's speech? Hmmm ...
BEGALA: He's at 53. In last year's State of the Union Address our president said that his economic plan could be summed up in one word, jobs. Since then 668,000 fewer Americans have jobs. And in all, 2.7 million Americans have lost their jobs under President Bush.
Last year Mr. Bush also promised more money to aid local police and firefighters in the war on terror. He pledged better border security, safer air travel, better tracking of foreigners in the United States. Two weeks ago his party voted down funding for those exact projects in order devote for money for another tax cut for the rich.
Mr. Bush also promised last year to fully fund education, another promise he broke. And he promised to increase veterans health care, which, in fact, he later cut. Perhaps our straight-talking president is really just a man of his most recent word. And that was just in the intro! Imagine what Begala or Carville will say tonight ... transcripts up tomorrow.
State of Disunion. "But I often think about my grandfather, arriving by steamship 100 years ago. He had no family here; he spoke no English. I can only imagine how he must have felt as he looked out at his new country. There are millions of families like mine, people whose ancestors dreamed the American Dream and worked hard to make it come true. They transformed adversity into opportunity." Gov. Locke.
Yep, with a last name like 'Hananoki,' I can relate. Creating opportunity for citizens is the name of the game. It's too bad Bush is proposing tax cuts for the rich,
Robert Kuttner: The proposal is bad economics and irresponsible budget policy. Two-thirds of the benefit would go to the wealthiest 5 percent. About half of all Americans have some money in the stock market, but most small investors have their money in IRAs, Keoghs, and 401(k) plans, which are already tax exempt. Bush is betting that small investors will misunderstand the law and identify with big investors.
The administration also claims that dividend income should be exempt from the income tax because corporations already pay taxes on their profits. "It's unfair to tax money twice," the president has declared.
But why special treatment for dividends? Workers pay income tax on wages and salaries, and then they pay sales tax at the store and property taxes on their homes and excise taxes on tickets -- all on spending from earnings that have already been taxed once.
killing the economy,
DNC: In just one year, President Bush and congressional Republicans have managed to undo eight years of hard work and fiscal discipline. Bush's policies have already wiped out our hard gained surpluses, returned the nation to deficit spending, put Social Security in danger and slowed down efforts to pay down the national debt. One year into the Bush Administration, more than one million jobs were lost, the unemployment rate increased by 1.8 percent and about 2.6 million more people became unemployed. Now that the country is in a recession, President Bush and Republicans have proposed an economic plan that does little to stimulate the economy and consists mostly of giving profitable corporations and wealthy individuals $100 billion in tax cuts.
ruining the environment,
Vermont independent Sen. James Jeffords, who will give up the gavel of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee when Republicans take over the Senate in January, said Bush is rolling back protections for clean air and water, cutting Superfund site cleanups and clearing new oil and gas drilling on national lands.
"Unfortunately, on environmental issues our president is moving us backward instead of leading us forward," Jeffords said, delivering the weekly radio address on behalf of Democrats.
Jeffords also said provisions in the new law creating a Homeland Security Department will make it harder for people to learn of dangerous chemicals near their homes ...
Bush's "departure from the Clean Air Act will prolong the life of out-of-date power plants belching out pollution, not only contributing to growing rates of childhood asthma, but also to the unsightly haze that taints the beauty of our magnificent parks and scenic vistas," Jeffords said ...
For the second year in a row, the Bush administration undermined America's landmark environmental laws, as federal agencies announced -- on almost a daily basis -- regulatory changes to weaken safeguards for our air, water, forests, wildlands, wetlands, wildlife, and public health. That was the principle finding of a new report by NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), which details more than 100 anti-environmental actions over the past year and highlights the fact that the administration intensified its assault after the November mid-term congressional elections.
packing the courts with people who'll restrict our freedom,
PFAW: And President Bush most certainly will not admit that if he succeeds, his court-packing plan would:
-eliminate a woman's constitutional right to reproductive freedom and privacy
-dismantle vital environmental protectionss for clean air and clean water
-gut civil rights laws that undo the effeccts of past and present discrimination, and
-tear down the wall separating church and state.
screwing small biz,
Krugman: For example: On Saturday, in his weekly radio address, George W. Bush declared that "the tax relief I propose will give 23 million small-business owners an average tax cut of $2,042 this year." That remark is intended to give the impression that the typical small-business owner will get $2,000. But as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, most small businesses will get a tax break of less than $500; about 5 million of those 23 million small businesses will get no break at all. The average is more than $2,000 only because a small number of very wealthy businessmen will get huge tax cuts.
and gutting his own homeland security
Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley:
"Americans are not a greedy and selfish people. They understand that homeland security costs money, and we are willing to pay any price to protect and defend our country. We know that wars are won by service and sacrifice not by tax cut on top of tax cut. Mr. President, America's homeland security is weak, only because our leaders have failed to make our defense at home a funding priority. Your Administration forced a $2.5 billion cut for homeland security efforts and Congressional Republicans cut an additional $1 billion. And now you propose eliminating 1,200 FBI agents. Do your priorities truly reflect our country's needs? To protect America, we must invest in America. Where is the urgency? Where is our federal government? What has happened to the most fundamental Constitutional duty of all - "to provide for the common defense"?

From Atrios.
-Eric. Link.
 Tuesday, January 28, update 5

Sigh.
Mama, why do they hate us? *cry*
Yeaahh, that's the ticket. Ari Fleischer bares a striking resemblance to Jon Lovitz , according to Media Whores Online. "The inspectors, in the eight weeks that they have been in Iraq have found 16 chemical warheads. At the pace that Iraq is cooperating with the inspectors, it will take the inspectors another almost 300 years to find the remaining weapons the United Nations says Saddam Hussein possesses." 300!? Weelll, I guess we better invade!
The Druge Report, yes The Drudge Report, writes:
EXCLUSIVE: MSNBC SHAKES UP SKED; PLAN FOR SAM DONALDSON TO ANCHOR NEW LINEUP: MSNBC is on the verge of shaking up its schedule, again, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal... MORE... ABC NEWS veteran Sam Donaldson will soon take direct aim at CNN's LARRY KING -- in the 9 pm ET slot, sources reveal. [ABC NEWS executives on Tuesday grudgingly gave Donaldson the green light to pursue any MSNBC opportunity. Donaldson will continue at ABC NEWS RADIO.] Chris Matthews HARDBALL demoted to 7 PM ET; afternoon talkers Bill Press And Pat Buchanan upgraded to 8 PM ET, according to one blueprint. Phil Donahue, it appears, has been removed from prime hours. At 10 PM, former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura's will try a daily show... Developing...
Though it seems MSNBC will never improve, pulling Donahue to daytime is the right move. Donahue didn't fit into the primetime schedule but his show is just starting to click, and it would be a mistake to can him now. Moving Press to primetime is also wise. It'll be nice to have an actual liberal in primetime. There are too many conservatives like Alan Colmes and Bill O'Reilly out there.
The Horse also offers this ancedote:
Wolf Blitzer featured a poll on Monday's program:
When it comes to Iraq, whom do you trust more: The Bush administration or the UN?
The result:
Bush administration: 32%
UN: 68%
After reading the results, Wolf introduced Lou Dobbs, whose program follows Wolf's. Lou made a point to ask, "Wolf, let me ask you a question...Do you trust that poll?"
Wolf responded, "no," and a good laugh was had by all.
Why did Lou Dobbs single out this poll among all others for ridicule?
All I can say is ... What Liberal Media? Imagine if CNN asked, "Do you think abortion should be legal?" and those two pulled the same stunt.
Non-Politics. This isn't related to politics, but Wil Wheaton from Star Trek has a blog and it's fascinating stuff ...
Racists and Cattle. Daily Kos on racists and "Cattle Call 2004."
It seems the more popular my site becomes, the more I get attacked from the Right. It comes with the territory. But in this case, it gives me an opportunity to blog one of my favorite topics -- the fact that the modern GOP is built upon a foundation of racism ...
His high name ID continues to serve him well in national polling, but at the state level, he barely registers in Iowa, NH, or SC. It's hard to see how he could do well in either MO or DC (assuming it moves up its primary to the head of the pack). Lieberman knows this, hence his "this is a marathon, not a sprint". However, no amount of cash will offset the negative press he will get if he strings together four or five straight solid losses. At that point, the media glare will be on the winners and surprise finishers.
From his initial lofty perch in the polls, Lieberman only has one direction to go. Down.
Of course, the GOP is the party of Lincoln, created in part to oppose slavery and Southern Democrats. But that was in the 19th century. The last party realignment in the 1960s happened because Democrats like LBJ supported civil rights and it pissed off Republicans. Hence, the GOP is no longer the party of Lincoln. It's the party coalition consisting of disenfranchised ex-Democrats like Strom Thurmond who bolted the southern Dems because of opposition to civil rights programs. Or, as the Republicans like to say, 'state rights.'
-Eric. Link.
 Monday, January 27 , update 1

The George Washington University mail server is down, so if you sent an email and are expecting a reply, you may have to wait a couple days. Thanks.
In one week:
What Liberal Media?
Atrios links us to this from CNN's Reliable Sources. I wasn't aware Garofalo was so politically active, though a lot of the movies she does reflects political ideology (she did a biopic of Abbie Hoffman):
KURTZ: Now, obviously, you open yourself up to a little bit of criticism of being a cause celeb, since you're not famous as a Middle East policy expert...
GAROFALO: Right.
KURTZ: But that has not deterred you.
GAROFALO: No. You know, I don't know that I would need to be famous as a Middle East policy expert to see that unilateral imperialism is bad policy.
But I also -- if I am uninformed, like a lot of citizens in this country are, that is the fault of the White House and the mainstream media. We don't get enough information. We don't get enough news with our news. And how can we function as a democracy without information?
We are given disinformation and White House propaganda all the time. We have no history to our news, no context to our news, no global perspective. We don't see people outside our borders as humans. And if I am uninformed, which I'd like to think I work very hard not to be, uninformed, it is the fault of the White House and the mainstream media.
Wow. Yeah, it's NY Times readers, but look at this:
Is George W. Bush a centrist or a conservative?
Centrist:
9%
Conservative:
89%
Don't know:
1%
If there was ever a doubt ...
"Reject Bush's Court-Packing Plan"
If It's Monday, It's Comedy Monday.
[ open on a quiet forest. Gunshot rings out. ]
Voice: Over here! It went this way!
[ George W. Bush, dressed in hunting gear and pointing rifle runs into a clearing, followed by his father, George Bush ]
George Bush: Well, did you get him, or what? [ looks ] Ah, looks like you missed it.
George W. Bush: I missed it! Dammit! I think I scared it off. I'm gonna run after it!
George Bush: Ah, it's okay, son. Why don't we just stop, and sit on this old log for a minute? Your old man's getting tired. Have a seat, come on now.
George W. Bush: We gotta get out after that deer. I wanna kill it!
George Bush: Sit down! Come on, son, have a seat.
George W. Bush: Alright. [ sits next to his father ] I'll tell you something - that deer is gonna be one dead dog by the time I get to it! [ laughs ]
George Bush: Alright, son, settle down. You know, Babs and I used to come up here. In fact, you, Jeb, and your sister were.. I made all of you right over there in that dirt! Yeah, those were funky times, know what I mean, son?
George W. Bush: Shh.. I hear something. [ holds up his rifle and points ]
George Bush: Forget about the deer for a second, son! Come on, relax, would you like a little Lifesaver or something?
George W. Bush: Yeah, sure.
George Bush: Alright, buddy. [ takes out roll of Lifesavers ] There you go.
George W. Bush: [ pulls antlers out of his hunting jacket ] I'm gonna play with these antlers, too. [ starts clapping the antlers together ]
George Bush: Put the antlers down! Come on! [ separates the antlers from George W.'s hands ] Put 'em down, there's your Lifesaver. I wanna talk to you, man to man, for a minute.
George W. Bush: Sure thing, Dad. What's up?
George Bush: Well.. it looks like it's really gonna happen. Unbelievable. You're ahead in the polls, you look really good in those debates.. I tell you, I think we really got a shot.
George W. Bush: [ mind wandering ] I wish I'd shot that deer!
George Bush: Son, you know what it means to be President, President of the United States? Everybody looks up to you, you're the leader of the most powerful nation in the whole world.
George W. Bush: It's gonna be cool, Dad, I'm pretty psyched!
George Bush: It's more than just "cool". That hippy language you're still prone to.. It's honorable. The highest office in the land - none higher! People look to you to make their lives better, and you'll be in a position to really help.
George W. Bush: [ thinking ] Cool. Very cool.
George Bush: Well, when I was in the White House, there wasn't a day that went by that I didn't feel proud of what I'd acheived. But more than pride, I felt responsible. A lot of crazy stuff comes at you - world problems, problems at home.. [ George W. starts clapping the antlers together again ] Get these down, will you! [ seizes the antlers from George W.'s hands, then smacks him across the face ] Now, think about it! You're gonna be Commander-in-Chief. The most potent military in the world. That's a heavy burdon for any man to bear.
George W. Bush: Wow. Well, we should be getting after that deer.
George Bush: Look.. I know you're not quite right in the head, son. Maybe it's this dyslexia they keep talking about. Back when you were born, Babs and I called it "retardation". I guess no one says that any more. Whatever the doctors wanna call you, I just want you to know I'm proud of you, son. I really am. Your mother and I love you very much.. I just hope..
George W. Bush: Shh.. quiet! [ points rifle ] I got a beat on him! [ camera shows view from the scope of the rifle, deer grazing in the grass ] That's right.. look over here. I'm sorry, Rudolph, looks like the Governor will not grant you a reprieve! One.. two.. three..
George Bush: [ pushes rifle down ] Now, hey, hold up, come on now. How about letting this one get away, what do you say, son?
George W. Bush: Sure, Dad, I know what you're saying. But it ain't gonna happen. Nighty-night, Bambi! [ fires rifle ] Man! I dropped him! How about that? A whole deer! Wow! The buck stops right there, huh, Dad? Am I right? Say.. Dad? If I get to be President, are we gonna go hunting any more?
George Bush: [ sighs ] Sure, son. You know, son, why don't you go up there and check on your kill? Well, go on. I'm just gonna sit for a minute..
George W. Bush: Alright! That's a good idea! [ jumps up and runs to bag his deer ]
George Bush: [ stands up, points rifle towards George W., then lowers it ] Nah.. can't even think about it. First of all, it's against the law. Babs wouldn't like it.. Well.. it's probably just four years.. Hey, wait for me, son! I'm right behind ya!
[ George Bush runs after George W., as scene fades to black ]
Courtesy of SNL Transcripts.
-Eric. Link.
 Friday / Weekend January 24-6 , update 6

The Wit and Wisdom of Rush Limbaugh. "Have you ever noticed how all newspaper composite
pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?"
Aren't you glad you're not a conservative? Or ... are you?
Weekend Hamster Homework: Send letters to sponsors, asking for a boycott of Rush. TakeBackTheMedia
Let me get out my violin. Colmes Feels Sorry for Himself on National Television. And He Wonders Why Liberals Think He's Ineffective and Window-Dressing.
I cannot believe Alan Colmes. He could at least pretend to make some attacks against Bernard Goldberg, like Al Franken or Mario Cuomo did. Instead, what does Colmes do? 1) He agrees with Bernard, then censors himself. And then 2) He throws a pity-parade for himself because liberals are mean to him for not doing his job and attacking conservatives. Oh, the irony. Check this full transcript between Colmes and Goldberg ...
ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: We're back on HANNITY and COLMES.
It's been more than a year since the release of his tell-all book on the media's distortion of the news. Is there anything new that this insider can tell us? Joining us now, the author of Bias, Bernie Goldberg.
You know, Bernie, welcome and congratulations on the success of your book.
BERNIE GOLDBERG, BIAS AUTHOR: Thank you.
COLMES: Now in paperback.
GOLDBERG: Comes out tomorrow morning.
COLMES: You know, I'm not supposed to like you, you know, because some (UNINTELLIGIBLE.) But that's not true. And I think that for some reason, you struck a chord with people.
GOLDBERG: Yes.
COLMES: And your book did better than I think a lot of people, maybe even yourself, imagined.
GOLDBERG: Right.
COLMES: But why do you think that is?
GOLDBERG: Because I think most people in America listening to us tonight certainly understand that there's a liberal bias in the news. The fact that the media elites either ignored the book or ignored the subject or deny it, it doesn't resonate with the American people. They just feel as if it exists. And I'll tell you something. That is a large reason for the success of Fox. They've deserted the mainstream media.
COLMES: Yes.
GOLDBERG: And they've come to something that they feel more comfortable with.
COLMES: Look, I get yelled at by liberals for being on Fox, where there's a strong conservative voice. They often give me -- this guy -- they often give me a harder time than conservatives do.
GOLDBERG: Yes, you know why?
COLMES: Because I'm not -- go ahead.
GOLDBERG: Because they think you're a sell-out. That's part of it.
COLMES: I get that all the time.
GOLDBERG: That's part of the problem. We can't have an honest discussion about this...
COLMES: Right.
GOLDBERG: ...without somebody on the left, if they agree, God forbid...
COLMES: Right.
GOLDBERG: ...being called a traitor. I was called a traitor because I was on the inside, but they call people like you a traitor...
COLMES: Right.
GOLDBERG: ...because perhaps you see the point. Can I say something very quickly? I made a New Year's resolution, Alan, to reach out, seriously, to reach out to open minded, fair, decent, honorable liberals like yourself.
HANNITY: Why would you want to do that?
GOLDBERG: Well, because I...
COLMES: Hey, let him speak.
GOLDBERG: ...have nothing else to do. And I made the resolution.
And here's the point. Are journalists the only people on the planet who could take their biases and their prejudices and set them aside and not let it affect their work? Journalists say cops can't do that.
COLMES: Right.
GOLDBERG: If a cop has biases, it's going to come out. If a corporate executive has biases, it's going to come out. Everybody in the south who's white and over five years old, their biases are going to come out. But journalists, this is interesting, they're the only people on the planet earth who could take all the baggage that they bring with them, all their life experiences, all their prejudices, and somehow set them aside. I don't think that's true. And I don't think a lot of liberals think that's true either.
HANNITY: Hey, I know Alan's good, because he gets under my skin nightly. So...
COLMES: It means I'm doing my job.
HANNITY: Yes, he is. Congratulations.
Where's Stuart Smalley? I think Alan needs some Daily Affirmations.
For the longest time, I sort of doubted myself for writing several articles about Alan Colmes in which I criticize him for 'window dressing.' Colmes has read those articles and he often refers to them, indirectly, on his show. I wondered, maybe I'm being a little too hard on Alan. And, considering the small amount of liberals on television, maybe I should take what I can get. Maybe he really is just a liberal and he's doing his best on the show.
But this isn't AYSO, this is national television ,and Colmes looks like he's doing amateur hour. Here you have one of the biggest idiots in the conservative media, and you have Alan Colmes completely oblivious to attacking him. Colmes spends all of his time defending himself on an irrelevant subject matter, and then has the audacity to wonder why "They often give me -- this guy -- they often give me a harder time than conservatives do." The entire interview answered Colmes's own question. He got a grand total of 0 attacks / tough questions off Goldberg. Down goes Goldberg! Down Goes Goldberg! No ... wait.
Well gee, Alan, I don't mean to state the obvious, but the purpose of Hannity and Colmes is to "debate" the issues. How does you crying over being called a window dresser or ineffective push the liberal cause or poke holes in Goldberg's theory?
And by the way, Alan, you're not a traitor. Being a traitor implies you were actually involved in liberal / progressive politics and then went to Fox News. But as I pointed out in my Alternet article, this is "a man who isn't even an ardent support of liberal or progressive philosophies (he once The Tampa Tribune that he's "never really thought much about" his political orientation, "but my positions tend to fall left of center) and ... has never written for any liberal publications or is well-regarded on the left."
Colmes was never a traitor. He pretend to be a liberal to get on television. Fox News was looking for an actor that wanted someone to play the punching bag of Sean Hannity and Colmes, looking for a job, took the offer.
Want to know how to debate Alan? Read a transcript from a real liberal, Al Franken.
"How to piss off credit card companies".
Two things: One, I'm glad that as a society we've gotten to the point where if someone is homophobic, there'll be an active campaign to discredit that person. Thus, it's a good thing that Thacker withdrew his nomination.
Two, on the other hand, it's still disappointing that people like him are actually being nominated in the first place. You'd think Bush would do his homework on nominations, but we all know how good Bush is at homework, or any type of work for that matter. If bloggers can find dirt on this guy, I'm sure the Bush administration can. Then again, with the Republican Party, if you threw out all the homophobes, you'd be left with a small pool of candidates. How many Republicans would be left in Congress if we threw out those who are homophobic? Just look at the fact that ENDA (employment non-discrimination act) never passed, and you have a pretty good idea that there's still a lot of work to be done. Getting rid of Thacker is but a small victory for civil rights.
Kevin at Cowboy Kahil writes about the other war:
Then there's the question of war. Not that one, though. Dan Gillmor brings up the weakening of proposed SEC rules for accounting firms.
Is anyone surprised by this?
Consider this administration's trend:
1) Repealed the estate tax. Calling it the 'death' tax instead of the
'millionaire' tax, this rebate went to the top 2%.
2) With approximately half the country investing in the stock market, the greatest weight of nearly 3 years of losses was on those invested in tech companies because many are not yet profitable. A smaller number of investors takes the less risky approach of buying the stock of profitable companies. They collect dividends. Guess who gets the biggest tax break, again.
3) Lower level government employees get their cost of living increases scaled back while the Administration justifies the awards of bonuses of $10K and $20K to selected members in upper management.
4) Congressional leaders raise the amounts lobbyists are permitted to spend when wining and dining Congress. Guess which party the leaders come from.
5) And though the SEC arrived late to the game after folks lost their shirts from the corruption at Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia, Arthur Anderson, Tyco and others, this administration signals its determination to crack down on the crooks that really hurt America.
Masters of propaganda use the Big Lie approach when they say Democrats or liberals are practicing 'class warfare'. But the alarms being sounded do not attack the rich nor cause them any harm. The Dem and liberal target is the administration that champions compassionate conservatism, which only demonstrates compassion for the well off.
There is a war going on. But the real name of it is The War on the Poor. And it ain't very funny.
Daily Howler: "YELLING QUOTA! Rich Lowry recited a spin-point for Bush. The press has no quota on toadies."
MyDD:
The Hardball "Daily Briefing" from MSNBC's Chris Matthews says that the official Hardball water cooler Buzz gave the nod to Dean in exciting the base last night at the dinner...
This at a dinner commemorating the 30th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision making abortion legal on Tuesday, hosted by NARAL Pro-Choice America, and attended by 1,300 people, featuring Democratic presidential candidates, including former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri and Sens. John Edwards of North Carolina, John Kerry of Massachusetts and Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut.
Dean is up in NH again today, campaigning in the University of New Hampshire community of Durham, N.H.
-Eric. Link.
 Thursday, January 23, update 1

USPIRG:
U.S. industries discharge several billion pounds of toxic chemicals linked to cancer, reproductive and developmental disorders, and other chronic health problems each year, according to a new report released today by U.S. PIRG. The report, Toxic Releases and Health, summarizes air and water pollution reported by industry from 1987 to 2000 and identifies significant gaps in information on health impacts of such pollution.
"Polluters across the country discharge billions of pounds of toxic pollution linked to serious health impacts each year," reports U. S. PIRG environmental health associate Meghan Purvis. "But without adequate public health systems for tracking environmental exposures and potentially related disease, we don't know how this pollution is affecting our health."
The report finds:
• More than 1 billion pounds of chemicals suspected to cause neurological problems were released in 2000, with Texas, Tennessee and Louisiana ranking first through third for these releases ...
• Over 1.7 billion pounds of suspected respiratory irritants were released into the air and water in 2000, and the states of Ohio, North Carolina and Georgia ranked first through third in these releases.
Read the report at USPIRG.org ...
Sign the Petition. Help save the Arctic. http://www.SaveArcticRefuge.org.
Defenders of Wildlife Reports:
A radical crusader against wildlife protections -- Congressman
Richard Pombo of California -- has been elevated to the chairmanship
of the important House Resources Committee. Pombo is a committed foe
of the Endangered Species Act. He even advocates hunting elephants in
Africa for their ivory tusks. The Resources Committee oversees
hundreds of millions of acres of public lands in the West as well as
the Interior Department, Forest Service and many environmental laws.
"With the selection of Representative Pombo, the House leadership
appears to be giving its most anti-environmental members the green
light to pursue their agenda," said Robert Dewey, our vice president
for government relations. "We can only hope that the American public
and supporters of common-sense environmental policies in the House
can put the brakes on the new chairman's agenda."
PragProgressive Notes:
Joe Lieberman is being buoyed and carried along by the high name recognition incumbent in his being on the ticket in 2000. I note that he out paces all of the candidates with news stories for the second week in a row. In the recent MSNBC Frank Lutz focus group he was only one of two candidates to receive votes from the panel (Kerry-17, Lieberman- 3). People within the party are comfortable with Lieberman at this point because he is a known quantity. This gives Lieberman an early lead in the first primary, which is of course fund raising.
John Edwards, the only candidate to poll equally well with both women and men. Doesn't appear to suffer from any gender gap. This speaks to his electability. His fast rise to name recognition is also indicative of a highly electable candidate. With that said, Edwards has looked nothing like the retail political wunderkind I know he is. For some reason his telegenic appeal is minimized by his looking unsure and a bit gawky. It is in small groups that Edwards really shines, and I think the grassroots of the party, as Edwards makes the "living-room" fundraising circuit rounds, is starting to recognize this.
Howard Dean, still for me shines as telegenic, "real", interesting, and skilled intellectually. This has not translated to the voters; it has not translated to fund givers. It's a shame, because Dean really does have the goods. It is clear that every cycle political analysts overestimate at least one guy. Perhaps, this is my guy to overestimate. It's still real early.
John Kerry has been impressive. He really exudes a statesman like quality that is palpable to voters. Level headed, honest, they might not agree with all of his positions but they admire the courage of his convictions. I'll have to move John Kerry to the head of the class of playoff candidates, if he continues to perform at such a high level.
Dick Gephardt, is the same candidate he was last time he ran, and we all know how that turned out. What do people in the party see in this guy?
More on Jerry Thacker:
Thacker has spoken at Bob Jones University, saying,
"What is homosexuality? The dictionary defines it as exhibiting sexual desire toward a member of one's own sex. It is not about love between men and men, or women and women, because there is the love of a father for a son, or the love of brothers for one another. It is sexual activity with the same sex.
The media tries to present this lifestyle in a good light. When a supposed homosexual man was murdered by two young men, it was front-page news. But when two homosexual men in their 20's and 30's raped and tortured a thirteen-year-old boy for two days before killing him, you didn't hear anything about it. It didn't get reported. There is a huge cover-up where homosexuals are concerned ...
Be compassionate to those caught up in this sinful deathstyle. Let them know you care, but at the same time let them know homosexuality is a sin. Most people find the homosexual behavior vile and disgusting. Only when homosexuals know it is sin can they repent (I Corinthians 6:9-10).
God judges and condemns all sin because He is holy. He hates the sin, but loves the sinner. These people are looking for love. They have been hurt by the past and are trying to compensate for the lack of love in their homes and lives. We need to show them the love of Christ. Help them to understand that only Christ can forgive sin.
But here's the odd thing, and I'd like to know something about this ... Bob Jones University has appeared to DELETE Thacker's speech from its website. That's right, they have deleted his hateful speech from their website.
See Google's cache of the page ... Now see the actual page. You'll see September 24 and 25 have been ERASED. Is it possible Thatcher or Bush's cronies didn't want his connection to Bob Jones University to get out? Considering how racist and homophobic the institution is, and how such a speaking engagement would derail his appoint, I'd think so ....
UPDATE: Atrios has also noticed this deletion and, by the date of his post, the first to notice! Ohhh, the power of Google. The truth is getting out!
-Eric. Link.
 Wed, January 22, update 4

Fox News is Hard News. AP: "Fox is moving quickly to capitalize.
Its newsmagazine, "The Pulse," comes back to the schedule next week and its top two stories are an interview with "Joe Millionaire" Evan Marriott's family and interviews with the previous night's "American Idol" contestants."
60 Minutes 3!
NARAL:
As the nation marks the 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation today released a comprehensive report detailing a state by state review of abortion and reproductive rights laws.
"The state of reproductive rights in America is cause for grave concern. Today, at Roe's 30th anniversary, women have fewer reproductive rights than their mother's had in 1973," said President of the Foundation Kate Michelman.
The report finds:
Overall, the nation earns a D+ grade for the state-imposed burdens on access to reproductive health services;
Women in 17 states could face sweeping criminal bans on abortion if the Supreme Court reverses Roe and allows states to re-criminalize abortion;
States enacted 34 new anti-choice measures in 2002, bringing the cumulative total to 335 since 1995.
Only three states, California, Connecticut and Maine, have pro-choice legislatures and pro-choice governors.
Every state except Maine that had a regular legislative session in 2002 considered at least one anti-choice bill.
Kos:
In the US, poll after poll has shown a public unwilling to launch an attack on Iraq without UN and solid allied backing. Watch as the Bush starts to demonize the UN, France, Russia, and any other country and international institution that stands in the way of its unwarranted war against Iraq. The ultimate goal -- a public conditioned to accept a unilateral (and probably illegal) invasion of Iraq.
I have maintained from Day 1 that war was not inevitable. The forces now arrayed against Bush are powerful -- domestic public opposition, international opposition, lack of international mandate, lack of allies, poor logistic lines (assuming Saudi Arabia and/or Turkey don't concede), difficult urban warfare, increased terrorism, an expensive war in the era of ballooning deficits, and an expensive rebuilding process (and after Afghanistan, who can claim this administration can carry out the task?).
On Bush's side -- pride, and a fear that "backing down" would make the US look weak in the eyes of the world. I have said before, and say again -- Bush can always claim victory and say "by threatening war Iraq was forced to readmit inspectors and take disarmament seriously". And in that case, Bush would actually be right. But it's clear that anything short of fireworks over Baghdad won't satiate.
After all, his approval ratings are in the low 50s.
Seeing the Forest has this prediction:
I expect that President Bush will use the State of the Union speech to do everything he can to scare the crap out of the American people. Rather than use his position of leadership – the "bully pulpit – to calm a frightened public, Bush will continue to use language intended to whip up fear.
This is their tactic. Our fear has been so useful to them. A terrified public will rally behind their leaders for their own protection. When we're under attack we must stand together. We will support our leader and will not tolerate breaking ranks.
They terrify us and then they harvest the results.
Talk Left on Gary Hart ... Both are from Colorado, as a side note.
Let's go to war!



From WhiteHouse.org
-Eric. Link.
 Tuesday, January 21, update 3

Second day of my experiment of doing periodic updates instead of daily updates ... I'll probably try this periodic system this whole week. Let me know if you like it or not...
I was in Senate office buildings today and I noticed one thing: an incredibly high amount of Republican US Senators have Fox News in their offices. Democrats? CSPAN.
Eric Alterman has this counterpoint on the demonstrations:
It is a little-known fact — I discovered it while researching my senior honors thesis in 1981-82 — that the anti-Vietnam demonstrations may have actually increased support for the war. Nobody was more unpopular with the country than the demonstrators. Even people who opposed the war, according to Gallup data, disapproved of the demonstrators by vast proportions. (The alternate argument — equally unprovable — is that the movement helped end the war because it scared the Nixon administration into suing for peace for reasons of domestic tranquility. But this is belied by the collapse of the movement following the end of the draft.)
Some demonstrations are effective because they show Americans that people just like them care passionately about a cause and are willing to show up in person to support it. This was certainly true of Martin Luther King's demonstrations and I think it's also true of Equal Rights Amendment and abortion rights demonstrations, and it seemed true of the nuclear freeze demonstrations I attended in the 1980s.
But radical rhetoric denouncing America and everything it stands for — which is what I heard from the A.N.S.W.E.R.-chosen speakers in D.C. over the weekend — does more harm than good. They harden the other side's resolve and turn away "normal" non-political people from a cause they might otherwise support. Ramsey Clark may have been a good attorney general way back when, and might have made a good senator, but he took a wrong turn somewhere and his political analysis is now about on par with that of Alexander Cockburn or Andrew Sullivan. I hope most of the people in that freezing crowd disagreed with it, but there's no way to know.
In other words, by allowing A.N.S.W.E.R. to take over the peace movement, protesters are focusing America on their worst features, and almost daring them to side with Bush and company. It's a tough quandary because the left needs bodies and these Stalinist types are the best demonstration organizers — just as they were in the sixties. And the Left has never solved it.
Far more effective, from the standpoint of stopping this foolish, unnecessary adventure, I think, would be more publicity for stories like this one, which was in my inbox Sunday morning: "As many as 1 in 3 senior U.S. military officers question the wisdom of a pre-emptive war with Iraq, one officer estimates in TIME's Special Report on Donald Rumsfeld's Blueprint for War." Also this one: "The military's assessment of the chances of success are less optimistic than those of the Administration's theologians, TIME's Mark Thompson and Michael Duffy report." See Time.com for details.
Matthew Yglesias:
I have a hard time believing, however, that the American right is some kind of endless comedy hour that I've somehow missed out on. How funny is Tom DeLay? Or Trent Lott? Or to avoid begging any questions here, how funny is the more respectable leadership team of Hastert and Frist? Does President Bush's fondness for abstinence-only sex education bespeak of his love of fun, or would that be his religiously-motivated aversion to alcoholic beverages? Or was it the Attorney-General's religiously-motivated aversion to not only beer, but also dancing that we were thinking of?
I too have a hard time believing the American Right is somehow funnier than the left. Let me name some names: Al Franken, Michael Moore, Jon Stewart, Robin Williams, Tom Tomorrow, Doonesbury, Bill Maher, Chris Rock, Boondocks, hey, even Skippy I believe has done some standup.
Who does the Right have? Ann Coulter? Woot.
-Eric. Link.
 Monday, January 20, update 1

Instead of doing one-time daily updates, I'm going to start doing periodic updates ... in other words, the blog and link sections will start near empty at the beginning of the day and start filling up as time allows.
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." Plato
I attended the antiwar march in Washington DC on Saturday afternoon and, needless to say, it was a success.
The speakers at the protests emphasized that because of the blistering cold temperatures a lot of people thought there would be a small and timid turnout. As seen, those critics were wrong. All people, from toddlers to grandmas; hippies to military veterans; capitalists to Marxists; lesbians to college frat boys attended the rally in support of America against a disastrous foreign policy called the Bush doctrine.
The Bush doctrine is a ruinous plan that calls for American solders and Iraqi civilians' lives to be exchanged for the capitalist pursuit of oil. As many signs at the protests read, this proposed war was nothing more than 'blood for oil.'
These are the people that care about America. There were the grandparents I met who were afraid that their grandsons would die for a chicken hawk administration. There were the humanitarians and idealists who were concerned about the havoc another war would bring to Iraq. There were also liberalists who believe that international institutions like the United Nations are the answer, and not the enemy, in American foreign policy.
There was opposition, of course. Perched on a Citibank balcony were people claiming they stood in support of America's soldiers, and subsequently in support of American foreign policy. The Georgetown College Republicans, in all their infinite wisdom, held banners proclaiming their patriotism. As one protester, upon seeing the suit-wearing Republicans remarked, "I think they're sipping wine-glasses."
At times the message of the rally got off topic. Some people used the rally's large audience to lobby for other causes. At one point, an Israeli and Palestinian got into a verbal confrontation. Yet these deviations were slim and few. The people who descended on DC came to march for peace, and save this country, and its soldiers, from an endless and unnecessary Bush war that will take American lives.
To learn more about what happened at the march, and what the future of anti-war protests will be, go to the following links.
NY Times
Intervention Mag: In Washington Demonstrating Against War
Intervention Mag: Surfing TV News For Antiwar Demonstrations
IPS-Inter Press Service
International Answer
IAC: 500,000 Anti-War Protesters Demonstrate in Washington 200,00 March in San Francisco; Hundreds of Thousands More Demonstrate Around the World To Oppose U.S. War With Iraq
Alternet: A Serious Protest for Peace
MichaelMoore.com writes:
Since its inception in 1979, the Alliance for Justice has worked to promote a fair and independent judiciary and strengthen public interest advocacy. Their work on judicial nominations is now more critical than ever before with President Bush's plan to pack the courts with extremist in full swing. Particularly troubling, and representative of a large slate of Bush's highly problematic nominees, is the renomination of Judge Charles W. Pickering, Jr., and Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen, both of whom were rejected by the Senate Judiciary Committee last year. Check them out.
Gee, it's strange. Michael Moore says Democrats and Republicans are the same. Then why, oh tell me why, did those Republicans in the Senate vote against Pickering and Owen!? Oh wait, those were Democrats. But Michael Moore says Democrats ARE Republicans and there's no difference? Funny, I didn't see any Senate votes by the Green Party blocking the nomination. I guess water comissioner, or whatever offices the Green Party holds, doesn't get oversight of the judiciary.
You know what, if Paul Wellstone had run under the Green Party label, do you know what we would be saying about him today? Nothing, because he would have never been Senator.
-Eric. Link.
 Friday, January 17

Edwards Trying to Stop Bush's Assault on the Environment. The big news today in the environmental community was a proposal by John Edwards that would help thwart Bush's assault on the environment, more specifically a program in the Clean Air Act called New Source Review.
New source review (NSR) rules require that updating or expanding facilities, such as coal power plants, install state of the art emissions controls. In other words, if a power plant makes changes to its facilities, it needs to install environment-friendly technology in order to decrease harmful emissions. Without such a provision, power plants would be forever 'grandfathered' from having to install modern pollution-control technology. Such harmful air emissions from power plants cause 30,000 premature deaths a year, hundreds of thousands of asthma attacks, lung and other serious health problems.
Bush is changing the rule because NSR imposes too much of an economic burden on polluters. In other words, Bush's campaign contributors don't want to pay money to modernize their plants and Bush got them off the hook.
John Edwards will be offering an amendment to an appropriations bill that would prevent the final rules from taking effect until the National Academy of Sciences completes a study of the rules' effect on pollution levels. The hopeful effect will be delaying any changes to NSR. With a Republican majority against the environment and clean air, however, the amendment faces a poor chance.
I'm adding a new section, "Reports," to the left side of this page. This will contain links to liberal interest group reports. If you have reports you'd like to contribute, email me.
Nate Newman writes in about stock dividends:
Microsoft announced its first ever dividend of 16 cents per share and a 2-for-1 stock split.
For Bill Gates, who personally owns 611,749,300 shares, this will give him a dividend $97.9 million. .
Normally, this would be taxed at a 38.6% rate, but with Bush's new tax plan, Gates will save and the Treasury will lose $38 million.
A $38 million tax cut for the richest man on earth, while almost half of all tax filers would receive less than $100 in benefits.
Atrios writes in about AA:
Bush Observes Martin Luther King's Birthday
There is a principled case to be made against affirmative action generally, and definitely against particularly implementations of it. However, I echo what many others have said in stating that the motives of those who put solving the "problem" of affirmative action above solving the very real problems it is intended to address are more than a little suspect.
Bush has declared that being an African American doesn't qualify as a "life experience," ignored the affirmative action of legacy admissions, justified his position by exaggerating his support for the "separate but equal" Historically Black Colleges (many of which have affirmative action - in hiring and admissions - for white people), and misrepresented the Michigan system by referring to it as a quota system and claiming that being African American gets you 20 points, and one fifth of the way to the necessary 100. The truth is you can get 20 points for any one of "membership in an underrepresented minority group, socioeconomic disadvantage, attendance at a predominantly minority high school, athletics, or at the Provost's discretion." All of these things can be a "decisive factor" that Bush ascribes only to race, as can Michigan Residency (10 ponts), "leadership or personal achievement" (10 points total), being from an "underrepresented Michigan county" (six points for being from a white rural area), or by getting the up to 110 points purely through academic acheivement. There is no magic cutoff at 100, with subjective evaluation on top of the points system entering into the admissions decision as well.
Add all of this to the timing - Martin Luther King's birthday - and one can only conclude that Bush is engaging in the worst kind of race-baiting. He made his supporters mad over Trent Lott, and it's time to get them back.
Friends don't let friends fly drunk. CNN:
Thousands of drunks are smashing into windows at Karlstad University, but it isn't students blowing off steam.
Instead, birds feasting on fermented berries are getting drunk and playing chicken with the glass.
Thousands of waxwings began gathering in the trees outside the university late last week to feast on ripening rowanberries. The birds haven't learned to say when.
Yeah, I've seen drunk people walk into glass ... but birds? I'm not sure how to tell if a bird is drunk.
MWO takes on Post media critic Howie Kurtz:
MISTAH KURTZ: LET THE SLIMING OF DEMOCRATS BEGIN!
Tabloid Sleaze Attacks AOK at WashPost
"Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink, Know What I Mean..."
Howie "Mistah" Kurtz is outdoing himself these days. Now he has announced the official beginning of character assassination season against the Democrats, with a smarmy column of "nudge, nudge" about Sen. John Kerry.
Not that Mistah Kurtz has the guts to say outright, "Let the sliming begin!"
He just thinks it's all part of the game, the show, the effort by the press to dig up the dirt on anyone so presumptuous as to want to be president. And he's the first off the mark.
Nothing that Howie would condemn, of course. After all, he's written more than one glowing profile of Matt Drudge. In fact, he'll use his own little column to start spreading a little muck about what he calls the Democrats' "quirky behavior," and inciting the tabloids to pay women to tell whatever sordid story they can concoct about Kerry and others.
More at MWO
Seeing the Forest offers insight into the TownHall's scaring of America into voting for Bush in this blog entry:
Bush and the rest of the right-wingers have been working hard to scare the hell out of the public for some time now. And they have been harvesting the results politically. Now they're harvesting cash, too ...
I used to write direct mail, so I understand how this is being used. TownHall sent it out - so it's approved. Their approval demonstrates that they recognize how this "wartime Presidency" crap is about selling stuff to the rubes.
Bush formula: Terrify, then harvest.
The Right-wing is well-funded and motivated by scaring citizens into believing this country is on the brink of national disaster and the only person who can 'save' us is Bush with his holy war against the Arab world. When thinking about Right-wing gropus, remember, that the underlying motivation of each is $$$. That's why they're so well funded. They are made for making money for their rich Republicans. Liberal groups like PIRG, Sierra Club, PFAW, ACLU, are motivated by PUBLIC INTEREST. Want good politics? The choice should be clear.
-Eric. Link.
 Thursday, January 16

The Onion Reports: Bush on North Korea: 'We Must Invade Iraq.' :
With concern over North Korea's nuclear capabilities growing, President Bush reassured the American people Monday that "extreme force" will be used to remove Saddam Hussein from power if the Iraqi president fails to give up suspected weapons of mass destruction.
"For years, Kim Jong Il has acted in blatant disregard of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation Of Nuclear Weapons, and last week, he rejected it outright," Bush told reporters after a National Security Council meeting on North Korea. "We cannot allow weapons of mass destruction to remain in the hands of volatile, unpredictable leaders. Which is exactly why we must act quickly and decisively against Saddam Hussein."
The Hamster on Social Security: We must reduce carbon emissions.
Ted Barlow's going nuts with lightbulb jokes :
Q: How many Al Sharptons does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Why? Because I'm black!?
Q: How many Bjorn Lomborgs does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: You're revealing your left-wing bias by asking.
This seems like a headline from the Onion: "GOP leaders meet with black conservatives"
. Where did all of them meet? The backseat of a Pinto? And note this from the article: there is not a single black Republican in Congress
ADA Watch on Jeffrey S. Sutton :
Ohio Attorney Jeffrey S. Sutton is known for his work towards weakening the Americans with Disabilities Act and other civil rights laws in several recent Supreme Court cases. Through the coordination of ADA Watch, disability rights organizations across the United States are joining together to oppose the U.S. Senate confirmation of Sutton who has been nominated by President Bush to become a federal court judge in the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ...
Individuals with disabilities would be segregated in institutions despite professional opinion that they would be better served in the community.
Impoverished children and adults denied the basic medical care guaranteed to them under the Medicaid program would be unable to enforce their rights.
State governments would be free to exclude people with disabilities from their programs and services, including health care, education, roads and streets, public buildings, and welfare benefits, without fear of having to compensate those individuals for the discrimination they suffered.
Sutton has already ensured that state employees with disabilities can no longer seek compensation from their state employers for violating ADA.
Jesse
@ Pandagon writes re Affirmative Action:
Republicans who oppose affirmative action rarely offer workable solutions to address the problems that it causes. "Affirmative access", the plan that Bush favors, does nothing to increase minority fortunes in college admissions, and in fact, hurts the overall ability of the colleges to choose who they want. The thing we always told people in Swarthmore's admissions office is that we will reject somebody with a 4.0 who was the valedictorian of their class in favor of someone who's more interesting, who's more well-rounded. Affirmative access makes state-run universities (some of which, like UM and parts of the UC system, are phenomenal) automatically offer admission to a certain top portion of the students - 10%, 5%, whatever. It takes the power to decide who is admitted into a college largely out of the college's own hands - instead, the state mandates that a certain portion of people will be able to go to certain schools, regardless of whether or not the college wants them ...
Affirmative action is a stopgap. A remarkably effective stopgap, but a stopgap nonetheless. Until the root inequities and problems of the system are fixed, we can't afford to get rid of it - and those who the most tireless crusaders against its existence are exacerbating the problem. Short on answers, long on blame, and able to consign generations of American students to underperformance and disappointment with a shrug of the shoulders and a reminder that they're also getting pregnant because of condoms.
Al Franken once described himself as part of the 'mushball middle' in regards to affirmative action: he can see both sides of the argument and thus is planted in the 'mushball middle.' Affirmative Action is an interesting issue ... It seems that most people aren't sure what AA entails: if it's 'quotas,' in other words, 'We need 1000 black students, let's get 1000,' people have a problem. I certainly don't like quotas, and most people don't. But what if AA is defined as preferences, in other words, if everything is equal, a college accepts the black applicant? Mushball middle.
NeptuneWorld observes:
Howard Dean is unlikely to to win the nomination for the democratic party. The main reason is because he doesn't have enough money to win. (This is a very sad fact about the state of American politics. He who has the biggest campaign chest wins, while the interest of the people loses). Another reason I think he is unlikely to win is because people get easily spooked whenever you talk about government health care. He has a very bold, yet reasonable plan that will expand Medicare and provide health insurance for everyone who needs it
It is true: since 1980, the person who won the major party nomination has had the most campaign funds raised. Steve Forbes had the most money when he ran, but that wasn't funds raised. The reason, of course, is if you can convince people to open up their pocketbooks and give you money, you're probably doing something right. Still, correlation doesn't always equal causation, but it's a pretty safe bet that whoever has the most funds will end up with the primary win in 2004.
Pragmatic Progressive writes in with his PragPro Power Index 1/15/03
:
Joe Lieberman - $4.3 raised, 24 articles, 15% CIP – 43.3, Change +20.5
John Kerry - $14.6 raised, 7 articles, 13% CIP – 34.6, Change +10
John Edwards - $11.2 raised, 7 articles, 10.5% CIP – 28.7, Change -4
Dick Gephardt - $5.8 raised, 3 articles, 10.5% CIP – 19.3, Change -7
Bob Graham – $4.6 raised, 3 articles, 4% CIP – 11.6, Change -7
Howard Dean - $.136 raised, 7 articles, 3% CIP – 10.1, Change +2
The large spike in Lieberman's PPI number is in large part due to his official announcement this week of his candidacy and therefore a greater amount of media attention. John Kerry's spike is due to adjusted fundraising capability numbers.
It's way too early to say that this means anything, since primary season hasn't started ... still, it's good data. If we were to go solely by funds raised, Kerry would win. However, most of Kerry's funds came from his unopposed 2002 reelection campaign. The most impressive funds raised is by John Edwards who, despite few years in the Senate, has over $10m raised, nearly more than Gephardt, Dean and Lieberman combined. If I were to predict the outcome of the primaries now, just looking at money as the deciding factor, I'd put good money on Edwards.
-Eric. Link.
 Wed, January 15

I started my first internship in DC at USPIRG ... the group used to be headed by Ralph Nader, so in the wake of the 2000 elections, USPIRG lost a lot of members and support, perhaps rightfully so. The irony is Nader cost the election and now the groups he created, like PIRG, have to help clean up Bush's mess. Still, a lot of members and people within former Nader groups did send letters to Ralph, asking him to layoff in battleground states like Florida. Nader, of course, said no. I pray to God that Ralph doesn't run again in 2004 ... if he does, he's really screwing up his 'legacy,' or at least what's left of it.
I'm working on Clean Air, and I'll update you if anything interesting happens with my internship ... you know, all the 'fun' stuff with clean air and the Bush administration.
Talk Left writes:
Charges Dropped Against Man Who Shot Four Officers in No-Knock Raid
Check out this article in the Baltimore Sun about the decision not to charge Lewis S. Cauthorne, who shot four police officers when they barged into his house, with a crime.
"Investigators concluded detectives did not announce that they were police just before smashing down Cauthorne's door with a battering ram and rushing in to look for drugs."
The authorities believe Cauthorne acted in self-defense. In an interview given the night of the incident, Cauthorne said, "I didn't know you guys were police. I thought I was getting robbed."
The police were required to knock and announce themselves before entering the house. None of the officers suffered serious injuries. "The raid yielded six bags with trace amounts of marijuana, empty vials, a razor with cocaine residue and two scales, documents show."
Nor has Cauthorne been charged with any drug crimes. Nonetheless, he spent six weeks, between the date of the incident on Nov. 19 and January 7 in jail.
Damn ... Hey, someone was talking left on Fox News Wire ... here's a partial transcript:
JARRETT: Jeralyn Merritt what do you think?
JERALYN MERRITT, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I applaud Governor Ryan. I think he's a hero. The system in Illinois is broken and it's broken beyond repair, and if you want somebody to blame for what happened today, you should look to the Illinois State Legislature and you should look to the system that tried these people. These people have not been tired fairly.
JARRETT: And you're a defense attorney and the governor also criticized incompetent defense attorneys who were in way over their heads. You guys are to blame.
MERRITT: And he's right. Well, it's not all of us but yes he is right and he established a commission after he entered the moratorium to study what went wrong in Illinois, and that commission came up with 85 reforms. Most of them, almost all of them, should have been enacted by the legislature and you know what the legislature didn't enact a single one.
The system in Illinois is the same today as it has been for the past however many years. We have seven people who have been exonerated from death row in that state.
JARRETT: Right.
MERRITT: And since 1973 when the death penalty was re-instituted, only 12 have been executed. It's broken.
JARRETT: All right, Lis Wiehl wants to jump down your throat Jeralyn.
WIEHL: No, Jeralyn, look the system is broke. You and I will agree. I am not a proponent of the death penalty. But there is a -- there are ways to go about it. Here the courts and the legislature are the proper place.
The governor's constitutional obligation or liberty to commute a sentence like this is very, very narrow, and for him to do a blanket pardon two days before leaving office it is what he thought was morally right but it smacks of being more of a political comment or political statement than a legal one.
MERRITT: I think all you had to do was listen or watch him today.
WIEHL: I did.
MERRITT: And you would see it was not a political move. That man lives and breathes this issue.
WIEHL: He believes it, yes.
MERRITT: It has transformed him. He has been studying it for three years and his clemency hearings have been going on for months.
WIEHL: But it's -- I don't disagree with you but it's not his right to take the power away from where it really belongs here...
MERRITT: Oh, yes it is, Lis.
WIEHL: ...which is in the court, the legislature, and the sentencing commission. If we want to change the law, we can change the law. We can't have governors in all states --
MERRITT: He has the power, Lis. Illinois has one of the broadest clemency statutes in the country. Four hundred and twenty-six legal scholars wrote Governor Ryan and told him there was legal precedent for what he was doing and it was legally valid.
WIEHL: (UNINTELLIGIBLE.)
As for the rest of the transcript, couldn't find a permanent link for the transcript at FoxNews.com, so pulled this from Lexis-nexis. If you want the complete transcript, email me.
A reader writes in and suggests Mike Ruppert's www.fromthewilderness.com. Some of it appears subscription based, but the site looks pretty good.
Get Donkey writes:
You know, my wife yells at me when I shout, "Those damned Christian Conservatives!" everytime I read something like this piece. As an ex-Christian conservative herself, she claims that it is not very liberal of me to judge an entire group of people by the acts of a few idiots on the fringe. On the one hand she's correct, but when that idiot-fringe controls nearly the entire freaking Federal and, in TX anyway, state governments, they are no longer
granted the benefit of my "live and let live" and "accept all others even if they are different" liberal worldview. Especially since their worldview is "live as we do or die, you heathen scum".
What the hell is wrong with these people that they are so petrified of sex and willies!?
Religious conservatives ... don't get me started. Fact is, a lot of Christians hate religious conservatives ... most people don't believe that religion and politics mix. Catholics, Jews, Episcopalians, now even Muslims, and a whole bunch of other religions vote Democratic ...
Big Blogger JMM writes:
Meanwhile, we have another example of the administration's incompetence and disorganization which played a major role in getting us to this point in the first place. Yesterday, as we just noted, Jim Kelly laid out the possibility of a new aid-for-nuclear-cooperation agreement with the North. In this morning's Washington Post, however, an unnamed administration official from the hawk camp says "Kelly went off the reservation" and that "he should not have planted that seed."
Here's the point: if your chosen Korea point man (Kelly) goes to the region and makes a major announcement and is then undercut or repudiated by other officials back home, by definition, that's a screw up. Whoever's right, whoever's got the right policy, it's a screw up. One hand doesn't know what the other's doing. The administration can't negotiate effectively with its allies or 'talk' with the North Koreans because it hasn't even gotten to the bottom of its negotiations with itself.
Bob Fertik from Democrats.com writes in:
Bush's 'Re-Elect' Poll Drops to 36% - That's BELOW Poppy!
Bush's "approval" rating is down to 58% in the latest Gallup Poll, but
that's not the number that matters to political professionals. The
important number is his "re-elect", and that stands at a dismal 36%, with
32% "definitely" voting for someone else, and 31% undecided. W's 36% puts
him BELOW the 37% of the vote that Poppy got in losing to Bill Clinton in
1992 - the lowest re-election vote in 80 years. W's "re-elect" numbers are
dismal, and if it was a Democrat they'd be saying he's "toast." Hey
Charlie Cook, Stu Rothenberg, Bill Schneider, etc. - quit hiding Bush's
dismal "re-elect" numbers!
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm
W. is playing games with the American public. He played games with the environment, the war with Iraq, the UN and NATO, the economy, and a host of other issues. Guess what, Bush, this is not some Frat party ... If you keep playing games with the American public, your party's going to end in 2004 ...
-Eric. Link.
 Tuesday, January 14

School started again ... As a result, blogging might go down a little ...
Let me be the first to say that if Joe Lieberman wins the Democratic nomination, I'll be leaving my presidential ballot empty this 2004.
You'll note that in yesterday's Wash Post there was a frontpage article about the conflict between the environment and Defense Department.
"The Pentagon plans to ask Congress next month for relief from environmental regulations that protect endangered species and critical habitats on millions of acres of military training ranges across the country, saying those controls impede crucial exercises and combat readiness.
Defense officials said last week in interviews that their plan is designed to strike a "common sense" balance between environmental stewardship and wartime readiness. For example, environmental regulations prohibit military maneuvers on some ranges during certain mating seasons and dictate which California beaches the Marines can storm in practice, they said."
Ultimately, in America's current state, the Defense Department will beat the environment. That's an unfortunate part of America. Public opinion rates national security higher than the environment. And our current President and EPA Head? Don't get me started. But another problem lies in voter's memory: environmental damage has long-term effects, while national security is short-term. Carbon emissions will hurt us ten, twenty, maybe fifty years from now. A big bomb or a terrorist attack against the US will hurt us at that instant. Don't cleanup a superfund site? You'll just get cancer, maybe ten years from now. Ecosystem change? Wait 15 years. Voters have a short-term memory and want what's good for them now.
Therefore, environmentalists and liberals need to show how environmental damages affects us now. If they don't, and the message doesn't get out, the environment will continue to take a back seat until it's too late ...
Here's an example: The 21st Century Blues. Kenny Ausubel, AlterNet: "Our greatest security menace isn't terrorism, it's the deteriorating environment. The good news is that most of the solutions to our problems are already present."
Congrats!

MWO:
Contrasts were drawn between the intrepid, power-challenging, authority-questioning Watergate investigative reporter of the 1970's, and the obscenely slavish, weasely celebrity-reporter of the New Millennium, who relies on bizarre and dishonest devices (inventing facts) to achieve the outcomes his powerful patrons desire.
For this year's voters, the extreme and tragic transformation of Bob "Woody" Woodward - and his decadent journey from "All the President's Men" to "Ten Days in September" - represents a poignant microcosm of the national mainstream media's deterioration over the last thirty years.
So take a walk around the winner's circle, Bob Woodward.
You're the new MWO Media Whore of the Year - 2002!
Alterman writes:
I think radicals should run in Democratic primaries, so I can't really go after Al Sharpton the way I do Ralph Nader. But the fact that this dishonest carnival barker been allowed to become the most politically prominent leader of disenfranchised Blacks in this country is both tragic and pathetic, as black people have never needed tough-minded and independent-thinking leadership than they do at this moment. It's obviously bad news for the Democrats, as well, but not as bad if Sharpton tried to take Blacks out of the party, as I gather, the anti-Semitic Cynthia McKinney might attempt to do for the Greens.
Some of you will disagree with that statement, but I agree that it's 'tragic and pathetic' that Sharpton has become a prominent Black leader. I saw him on "Meet the Press" Sunday and it's a reprehensible he still hasn't apologized for the Tawana Brawley scandal.
Nathan Newman plays optimist in evaluating Joe Millionaire:
Okay, okay-- yes deliberately deceiving twenty women in order to induce the worst gold-digging stereotypes, then yanking out the truth to humiliate them when forced to "choose between love and money" (when the whole setup was about love OF money) is a sign of the apocalyse, of cultural decline and depravity.
So what's to praise? Well, one notable thing from watching the first episode last week was the easy interracial dating involved. I haven't followed the "group dating shows" (The Bachelor etc.) closely, but many of the traditional TV dating shows like Blind Date have been almost scrupulously Jim Crow in their dating matchups. I remember a few years ago when MTV introduced its dating show, Singled Out, how radical it was on television to have couples paired so easily and obliviously to race, while the regular television dating shows did and usually continued to be so racially segregated in their matchups.
Good observation. As I wrote before, I think Joe Millionaire is one of the most hilarious concepts to hit network television in years. I hate certain aspects of network television, such as reality shows, but Joe Millionaire seems twisted in a good way.
On a different matter, do reality shows like Joe Millionaire represent a cultural decline? It may, but I don't think it matters. Culture is in the eye of the beholder and we can't hold everyone in society to the same standard or definition. If people watch a reality show and like it, who are we to judge and play moral critic? Doing so makes us no better than Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson. As a result, I bristle at any suggestion that government should regulate what's on television or in music (and a reason why I would never support Joe Lieberman for president or didn't care much for Tipper Gore, despite their Democratic-leanings ... though calling Joe Lieberman a 'Democrat' is arguable). Hence, I take a libertarian approach to anything entertainment-related. If people want to watch pro-wrestling or police car chases instead of PBS or international news, more power to them.
Downward Bush? So writes D. Meredith:
After the mid-term elections, it was widely reported that President Bush was a political colossus. He appeared to be politically unassailable. Mr. Bush had high approval ratings. He had gotten both his massive tax cut and a use of force resolution through Congress in his first two years. Mr. Bush took substantial political risk in 2002 and reaped the reward of Republican control of both houses of Congress. During the 2000 campaign as well as in his first two years, Mr. Bush had gotten a virtual free ride from the media. Mr. Bush has been described as the most powerful President since Lyndon Johnson.
We detect, however, a change in the zeitgeist. We believe that Mr. Bush's popularity and political power have peaked and that his next two years will be much tougher than the last two years. There are a number of signs that point to erosion of Mr. Bush's popularity and political power.
The first sign of slippage came in the two run-off elections in Louisiana after the midterm elections. Mary Landrieu won reelection to the Senate despite massive Republican resources poured into the state, a large White House effort including the personal attention to the race by Karl Rove, and the active support for the Republican candidate by President Bush ...
more at PLA
Tom Tomorrow has his weekly comic up.
And here's something from Boondocks:
-Eric. Link.
 Monday, January 13

Should Clinton Be More Active? Soto at Daily Kos writes:
There is a supposed tradition that ex-presidents refrain from attacking the actions and policies of their successors, even though I do remember Bush I taking shots at Clinton. On the few occasions that Clinton has spoken out (almost always after taking shots from the Bush White House), he has been accused by the right wing media Wurlitzer of violating the "tradition" of silence. Now, with this most recent and grotesque attempt by the Bushies to deflect blame to Clinton for their own botched foreign policy, it begs the question: is it time for Clinton take the gloves off and spend some time responding in kind to set the record straight?
Yes, there will be those who say that Clinton grabbing some of the spotlight right now can only hurt the candidacies of the 2004 Democratic candidates, and give Ari and Karl a chance to hurt the party by bringing up Clinton's drawbacks. However, others will say that on this issue, Clinton has the high ground to pound away at Bush's failings, which are all too apparent. In fact, as time goes on, it appears that one issue where Clinton can pound these guys successfully is on foreign policy, an area where despite the media whoring to the Bushies, there is very little actual achievement for this Administration to tout. Come to think of it, that applies to all issues as time goes on.
I personally would like to see Clinton go on the offensive for 30-60 days and make the Fleischer Ministry of Propaganda go on overdrive. Yes, Rush and Fox News would love it, but seeing Clinton effectively show how bad these guys really are would be fun too. And having six Democratic hopefuls for 2004 plus Clinton hammer at these guys at the same time would make the media cover it, something they will not do unless it involves sex, a war, or a fight. And Clinton would certainly give them something to cover.
MWO on media and Pickering:
Once again, the Post has been caught red-handed spreading Republican National Committee propaganda as if it contained a shred of truth. And this time it concerns a matter that ought to have been a no-brainer for a newspaper in heavily-black D.C.: the record of Judge Charles Pickering.
Ever since the White House nominated Pickering for the Federal Court of Appeals, the RNC and its media satellites have tried mightily to transform the old segregationist into some sort of heroic fighter for racial justice ... (MORE AVAIL)
Sad.
Two red pandas were found dead yesterday morning inside their exhibit at the National Zoo and three employees who went inside the animals' enclosure fell ill, according to zoo officials who said they are investigating whether rat poison used at the zoological park may have played a role.
The adult male pandas were found on the ground in their outdoor exhibit at 8:50 a.m. by a zookeeper conducting routine morning checks, officials said. The National Zoo's red pandas -- about the size of large house cats -- are unrelated to the better-known and much larger giant pandas. They were 7 1/2 and 5 1/2 years old and had no record of medical problems. Red pandas often live into their early teens while in the care of zoos.
Fox News. Yeah... Rita Cosby's Fox Wire:
COSBY: Some of your supporters say Congresswoman Harris, Senator Harris, maybe President Harris. What do you think about that?
HARRIS: Never mind that. Not my supporters. People who really care about me couldn't possibly wish that on me.
COSBY: There are some people who say you have the potential.
HARRIS: Oh, you know.
Who is saying that besides Fox News reporters?
Skippy links us to this from FAIR:
Police in Genoa, Italy have admitted to fabricating evidence against globalization activists in an attempt to justify police brutality during protests at the July 2001 G8 Summit. In searches of the Nexis database, FAIR has been unable to find a single mention of this development in any major U.S. newspapers or magazines, national television news shows or wire service stories.
According to reports from the BBC and the German wire service Deutsche Presse-Agentur (1/7/03, 1/8/03), a senior Genoa police officer, Pietro Troiani, has admitted that police planted two Molotov cocktails in a school that was serving as a dormitory for activists from the Genoa Social Forum. The bombs were apparently planted in order to justify the police force's brutal July 22 raid on the school. According to the BBC, the bombs had in fact been found elsewhere in the city, and Troijani now says planting them at the school was a "silly" thing to do.
The BBC and DPA also report that another senior officer has admitted to faking the stabbing of a police officer in order to frame protesters. These revelations have emerged over the course of a parliamentary inquiry into police conduct that was initiated by the Italian government under pressure from "domestic and international outrage over the blood-soaked G8 summit in Genoa" (London Guardian, 7/31/01). Three police chiefs have been transferred and at least 77 officers have been investigated on brutality charges.
You know what Ice Cube would say? ...
Monday Quotes.
"The Justice Department announced plans this week for a new color-coded terrorism alert system, with green for the most relaxed, and red as the most serious warning. However, if the scale goes above orange, I will make brown.
Strom Thurmond was visibly enthusiastic about the plan, saying, " A color alert system? Why, I've been waiting for one of them for years!" "
--Tina Fey
"UN inspectors still have not found proof of illegal weapons in Iraq and some say President Bush is having trouble justifying an attack. I think they're right because earlier today Bush accused Saddam of stealing cable." -Conan O'Brien
"It's been reported that the leaders of several Arab countries are thinking of asking Saddam Hussein to step down as president of Iraq. Apparently, they're upset with Saddam about some things he said at Strom Thurmond's birthday party." -Conan O'Brien
Fun with Ari.
by Russell Mokhiber
Mokhiber: Ari, other than Elliot Abrams, how many convicted criminals are on the White House staff?
Ari Fleischer: You tell me, Russell.
Mokhiber: Could you give a list of convicted criminals on the White House staff, other than Elliot Abrams?
Ari Fleischer: I'll go right to the convicted criminals division and ask them.
Mokhiber: Seriously, why isn't being convicted of a crime a disqualifier for being on the White House staff?
Ari Fleischer: Russell, this is an issue that you like to repeat every briefing --
Mokhiber: But you don't answer it Ari.
Ari Fleischer: -- I refer you to the repeat that I gave you the third time that you asked, which masked the second, which corresponded to the first.
Mokhiber: Why isn't it a disqualifier?
(Ari moves on)
Visit the-hamster.com, get free money. Saw this on CNN ... 41 states filed suit against music retailers, claiming price fixing ... this is the settlement site where you can claim money from the suit ... average claim settlement you can get is $5-$20, depending on how many people sign up. Fill out 3 questions, get money ... will you actually end up getting money? I report, you decide.
Pat Buchanan said on the McLaughlin Group that Bush Jr. will contribute billions more to the federal deficit. Well, of course ... with Bush's tax-cut, who's going to pay down the deficit? All the new jobs created by tax-free dividends? (Insert laughter here). Of course, we all love the federal deficit, especially banks. Just makes you want to have more children, don't it?
-Eric. Link.
 Friday, January 10

Daily Kos runs this analysis on Dem contenders:
________________Average______Median
Edwards____________1.3_________1
Kerry______________2.4_________2
Graham____________3.5_________3
Gephardt___________3.5_________4
Dean_______________3.8________3.5
Lieberman___________4.3________ 4
Sharpton____________6.5________6.5
Dodd (1 rating)_______ 7__________7
Sorry about the lines and the cruddy spacing, but I ain't got no stinkin' HTML skills, and it's the best I could do. As you can see, the average/median thing doesn't matter much; the median slightly favors Graham and Dean over Gephardt, big whoop-di-do.
Now that's 15 out of, what, 15 or 20 million Democratic primary voters? Most pollsters probably wouldn't consider that a statistically valid sample, unless of course they're Frank Lutz (badaBOOM).
But I think it's reasonable to conclude that John Edwards had a very strong week, and that John Kerry, who was practically invisible, still has momentum, at least among the cognisceti (I'm going to Rome later in the month, and I gotta work on my Italian).
.... Edwards Great press week; ABC interview; not too much hostile counterfire from the Reptiles. A smooth rollout. Didn't get too chopped up about being a trial attorney (editor's note: But just wait 'til the Reptiles start morphing him into Johnnie Cochrane.) Good showing in new Zogby poll. As the tall moderate from the upper South, benefits from Gore's disappearing act.
K |