The Boom's a Bust

Former Philly reporter Steve Lopez has a great column in the LATimes, Income Gap More Like a Chasm, discussing the growing class/income disparity, which applies well beyond the city limits of LA. As he observes:

In the last week I've written about the quick recovery of an illegal immigrant who was shot in the chest while landscaping a yard in Inglewood, and a U.S.-born high-rise security guard who makes so little money she can only afford a phone booth-size room in downtown Los Angeles.

Some readers saw an obvious connection:

The illegal immigrant and thousands like him have depressed wages for legal blue-collar residents like her.

There's certainly some truth in that. If you've got an illegal workforce willing to work for peanuts, and employers happy to exploit their desperation, wages at the bottom end are likely to stay low.

But let's forget illegal immigration for a moment, because if you ask me, we've got other economic problems in Southern California, and here's a thumbnail sketch:

Despite a relatively healthy economy on paper, middle-income jobs are as scarce as intelligent screenplays, and that has more to do with the death of manufacturing than the influx of illegal immigrants.

* * * *

What this means is that we've got $20-million houses offering spectacular views down the hill and into the Third World. If not for the fact that it takes forever to get anywhere on the bus, we'd have a revolution on our hands.

So the question I've been asking public officials and civic leaders is what we can do about the income gap that runs like a fault line through the land, dividing the haves from the help.

I want to stand up and clap when Jack Kyser of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. lays some of the blame on the big-box planning model. He says we do not need — repeat, IX-NAY— any more Targets and Kmarts, or any other Coliseum-size discount joints.

Not only do those places devour what little land is still available, but the jobs they provide are lousy, and it's not as if consumers have nowhere else to turn for tube socks and toilet paper.

* * * *

Kent Wong of UCLA's Center for Labor Research agrees that we need to keep trying to replace the kinds of jobs that were lost in Southern California when aerospace and manufacturing went belly up. But he also knows that the service economy is here to stay, and that means we have to find ways to elevate the standard of living for bellhops, janitors, security guards, nannies, maids, construction workers and waiters.

"We have a situation like we did in the 1930s, when auto manufacturing, mining and steel work were poverty jobs," Wong said. Unionization moved those workers into the middle class, he says, and it can push service employees in the same direction.

Los Angeles County has 55,000 security guards, said Bruce Stenslie of the Los Angeles Workforce Investment Board.

"If you could move them from $8.50 an hour to $10.50, $11, $12, with health benefits," as Local 1877 of the Service Employees International Union is trying to do with security guards, "you'd have an enormous impact on the economy," he said.

If you hear a sucking sound, it's mass hyperventilating by the fat and happy building and business owners who employ the security guards. But before you shed too many tears for the captains of industry, consider the billions of dollars in corporate welfare shelled out each year across the land, not to mention congressional largesse on offshore flimflam and other tax shelters and loopholes.

Beyond that, a living wage translates into more people contributing and fewer people on the dole.

This may explain why the supposed economic goodtimes aren't being celebrated, despite the fact that we keep being told that they are here. Where? Over here? No, over there. Somewhere.

He Ain't Tired

Once again, Deborah Leavy has published an op-ed that does an excellent job expressing my own sentiments on the subject she's writing about. In her latest Philly Daily News column, It's the Arguments That Are 'Tired' & 'Poor', she notes:

IN THE CURRENT discussions about immigration, the Emma Lazarus poem on the Statue of Liberty ("Give me your tired, your poor...") is often cited, usually with considerable eye-rolling, by those who use it to argue that pro-immigration people are hopelessly outdated, impractical romantics. Perhaps some are. But I think there are much more contemporary and compelling reasons to continue to welcome immigrants to our shores.

* * * *

To put it bluntly, those who want to come here to share in our way of life aren't the ones who want to kill us. You don't bomb the place you want to move to. The more who think America is the place to be, the better.

* * * *

We get the best of the gene pool. Once here, they are ready to work hard to realize their goals - the Pakistani taxi drivers taking double shifts, the Chinese restaurant owners who put their extended families to work, the Latino day workers who crowd into rooms at night so they can send money back to their families. Their energy is new blood pumping into the American economy.

Are they taking jobs from Americans? Only when they are exploited because of their immigrant status. Stop employers from taking unfair (and often illegal) advantage of immigrants and they will be competing with Americans on a level playing field.

* * * *

No doubt much of the anti-immigrant feeling is coming from the same place it always has - prejudice. We also didn't want the Chinese, the Irish, the Italians or the Jews. Now there are people in a panic because salsa outsells ketchup, ballots must be multilingual, customer service offers an option in Spanish.

They worry that Hispanic immigrants, legal and otherwise, aren't just in big cities like Los Angeles, New York and Philadelphia, but in whitebread towns everywhere across the country.

And if that isn't enough, there are Korean-language signs on shops and churches and taxi drivers wearing turbans. It's enough to scare the living daylights out of Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, whose grandparents didn't exactly come over on the Mayflower (and would have been immigrants if they had).

Throughout our history, immigrants have invigorated our nation. Our ability to absorb other cultures is our strength - it makes us who we are. We have to start with that premise in determining immigration policy.

As I watch the Immigration Rallies across the country, with the passion this issue has raised within the immigrant population, there has been a tinge of sadness as well. With all of the serious assaults and threats to our liberties and by the government in power, we too should be taking to the streets in revolt. But alas, we do nothing. We do need that infusion of spirit in our country that our newest members may inspire.

Immigration is certainly a complex issue, but I think that it is fairly clear that the policies that we currently have in place to deal with the issue are inappropriate and inadequate. However, any solution needs to take into account these long held views and principles as we try to fashion a reasonable way to include new people in our midst.

Luckily, the Republicans can't get their act together on this issue either, so they won't be able to make it worse.

Tags: Immigration, Commentary

Cartoon of the Day

* Pat Oliphant 

Gotta Go

In honor of Passover, which begins at sundown, Jib Jab (makers of the classic "This Land" video) presents Matzah for your viewing pleasure.

This one is for my cohorts of the Jewish persuasion. Enjoy!

Cartoon of the Day

"A Leak"

*D. Honig, Hypnocrites

A Day to Remember

-- President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act on April 11, 1968, a week after Martin Luther King was assassinated.

“Until justice is blind to color, until education is unaware of race,
until opportunity is unconcerned with the color of men's skins,
emancipation will be a proclamation but not a fact.”

~~~~
(Photo & Quote via My Left Wing)

Confidential Disinformation

The other day, I included a reference to an '80s TV show, "Yes, Prime Minister," A Sacred Homage, which has a eerie resemblance to the situation with George Bush, as Leaker-in-Chief.

You can watch a clip of the episode in which the Prime Minister is exposed as the leaker, at OneGoodMove, Good Leak, Bad Leak. As OGM says, "the application of the Secrets Act is reminiscent of recent Bush Administration leakgate shenanigans and the dialogue about when its okay to release and when it is not is classic."

One of the OGM Commenters included the following quotes from the Show that are very apt:

Sir Arnold: "Are you suggesting that I give confidential information to the press?"
Sir Humphrey: "Certainly not, Arnold. This is confidential disinformation."
Sir Arnold: "Ah, that is different."

Sir Humphrey: "So I gather, you denied that Mr. Halifax's phone had been bugged?"
Jim Hacker: "Well obviously, it was the one question today to which I could give a clear, simple, straightforward, honest answer."
Sir Humphrey: "Yes, unfortunately although the answer was indeed clear, simple and straightforward, there is some difficulty in justifiably assigning to it the fourth of the epithets you applied to the statement, inasmuch as the precise correlation between the information you communicated and the facts insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated is such as to cause epistemological problems of sufficient magnitude to lay upon the logical and semantic resources of the English language a heavier burden than they can reasonably be expected to bear."
Jim Hacker: "Epistemological? What are you talking about?"
Sir Humphrey: "You told a lie."
Jim Hacker: "A lie??"
Sir Humphrey: "A lie."
Jim Hacker: "What do you mean a lie?"
Sir Humphrey: "I mean you ... lied. Yes I know, this is a difficult concept to get across to a politician. You ..... ah yes, you did not tell the truth."

After watching this clip, you almost feel like you are watching what's happening in the White House as we speak. Life follows Art for sure with this one. You should definitely check it out!

Cartoon of the Day - Bonus Extra

*Pat Bagley, Salt Lake Tribune
~~~~~~~
For those who are of a certain age, you will understand this Cartoon & the saying it brings to mind:

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Those same people will remember these lyrics:

And it's one, two, three,
What are we fighting for ?
Don't ask me, I don't give a damn,
Next stop is Vietnam;
And it's five, six, seven,
Open up the pearly gates,
Well there ain't no time to wonder why,
Whoopee! we're all gonna die.

For a real memory jolt, you can listen to Country Joe McDonald singing "I Feel Like I'm Fixing to Die" at Onegoodmove.

Love Park Rally

Today was the Day Without an Immigrant Rally at Love Park in Center City.

My daughter, who attends a Quaker School in Center City attended the rally. The Independent Media Center of Philadelphia has articles, pictures and video here: Thousands Rally at LOVE Park and here: Civil disobedience of the event.

They've been studying the issue at school, see Ever Onward, so I'm glad she was able to participate.

(Photo courtesy of PhillyIMC)

Tags: Civil Liberties, Immigration

Cartoon of the Day

*Steve Greenberg, Venture County Star 

I'm Misunderstood

A NYT article by Adam Nagourney, McCain Emphasizing His Conservative Bona Fides, is the unveiling of the new & improved version of John McCain (or, some might say - me, for example - that the real McCain is finally standing up). As Nagourney observes: "Mr. McCain has long sought to present himself as a singular sort of American politician - straight-talking, iconoclastic and hard to quantify."

No more. McCain explains:

"I've always been a conservative," he said. "I think my voting record clearly indicates that on economic issues, national security issues, social issues - I'm pro-life - so I think I could make an argument I've had a pretty clear 20-some-year record basically being conservative."

The concluding quote of the article laments:

"I think a lot of people don't exactly get where I'm at," he said.

Trust me. Some of us already do, see, e.g. Sitting in a Tree. I'm just glad that it's becoming clearer just who you are, especially the folks on the left.

Tags: Politics, McCain

Cartoon of the Day

*Tom Toles, The Washington Post 

A Messy World

Today may be his birthday, but after reading this terrifying New Yorker article, The Iran Plans, I'm not sure I want to wish Seymour Hersh a Happy Day. He certainly did a good job of ruining my day.

I'm not even going to quote selections from the article. It is a must read. After reading this, I'm beginning to believe that Bush truly is part of the "rapture" movement and is trying to push it along. As Hersh noted in his piece:

Speaking of President Bush, [an unnamed] House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

Be afraid. Be. Very. Afraid.

~~~~
Gee, it's also Tom DeLay's birthday. My guess is his celebration may be a little low key this year.

UPDATE: Seymour Hersh was on the Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer today, discussing his New Yorker article. A video clip is worth seeing & is available at: Crooks and Liars.

Tags: Bush, Iran, Politics

Saturday Silliness

Double-icious. This week's New Rules are all funny, of course, but there are 2 Rules that merit a special note.

One goes out to the Ladies Who Lunch. It's Rule # 4 -- "Failure to Lunch. " The Rule says that you have to take a turn cleaning the office microwave. His office is like ours, where the 3 settings are "cook, defrost, and hepatitis." Listen up, Ladies. We all need to learn this lesson!

The other is the last Rule, "No Pay, Jose," in which Bill Maher riffs on the fact that we should stop blaming illegal immigrants for driving down wages. News Flash -- the blame falls squarely on Congress (which is controlled by the Republicans), and which hasn't raised the minimum wage since 1997. As he says, no one could live on minimum wage; indeed, "5 bucks an hour, in an America where the luckier ones spend that on a coffee -- is a cruel joke."

It's excellent -- don't miss it: New Rules (Via One Good Move).

Tags: Bill Maher, New Rules, Video

Cartoon of the Day

* Dan Wasserman, The Boston Globe 

A Leak is a Leak

Knight Ridder's Warren Strobel & Ron Hutcheson, in Libby testimony shows a White House pattern of intelligence leaks, provide some perspective on the "leakiness" standard (which is a first cousin to truthiness) that the Bush Administration is attempting to fashion in light of the recent revelation that Bush is a leaker:

The revelation that President Bush authorized former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby to divulge classified information about Iraq fits a pattern of selective leaks of secret intelligence to further the administration's political agenda.

Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other top officials have reacted angrily at unauthorized leaks, such as the exposure of a domestic wiretapping program and a network of secret CIA prisons, both of which are now the subject of far-reaching investigations.

But secret information that supports their policies, particularly about the Iraq war, has surfaced everywhere from the U.N. Security Council to major newspapers and magazines. Much of the information that the administration leaked or declassified, however, has proved to be incomplete, exaggerated, incorrect or fabricated.

* * * *

On Friday, White House officials said that the administration declassified information to rebut charges that Bush was manipulating intelligence.

Without specifically acknowledging Bush's actions in the Libby case, White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters: "There were irresponsible and unfounded accusations being made against the administration suggesting that we had manipulated or misused that intelligence. We felt it was very much in the public interest that what information could be declassified be declassified."

McClellan didn't address why administration officials often declassified information that supported their allegations about Iraq but not intelligence that undercut their claims.

Robert Hutchings, the chairman of the National Intelligence Council from January 2003 to February 2005, said there was nothing improper about Bush's reported actions.

However, Hutchings said, "The decision to put in the public domain classified information, whether through a leak or through the formal authorization" shouldn't be done for "political convenience."

* * * *

The White House's McClellan took issue with suggestions that the leak to Miller called into question the sincerity of Bush's frequent complaints about government leaks.

"There is a difference between providing declassified information to the public when it's in the public interest and leaking classified information that involved sensitive national intelligence regarding our security," he said.

Still, when leaks of classified information help make the White House's case, officials haven't always complained.

In November 2003, the conservative magazine The Weekly Standard published highly classified raw intelligence purporting to a show a link between Saddam and al-Qaida.

The Pentagon disavowed the report. But in early January 2004, Cheney told the Rocky Mountain News newspaper that the magazine report was the "best source of information" about the Saddam/al-Qaida connection. That connection has never been proved.

(Via Eschaton)

Not so many years ago, this revelation would have been explosive. Today, not so much. Things have gotten so out of kilter in this country that even serious events seem farcical. The constant spin/propaganda machine of the Bush Administration in rewriting every negative fact or event certainly helps promote this dichotomy.

In part, I think that's why my reaction to recent events has been a combination of "OMG" and "you've got to be kidding!" Grave concern and merriment all wrapped up together. Just like the Abramoff/Ralph Reed situation reminded me of the Jack And Jill nursery rhyme, this brings to mind another old time tune:

A leak is a leak, of course, of course,
And no one can talk to a leaker of course
That is, of course, unless the leaker is the famous Mr. Chief.

Go right to the source and ask the Leak-in-Chief
He'll give you the answer that you'll endorse.
He's always on a steady course.
Talk to Mr. Chief.

(Apologies to Mr. Ed and his theme song)

A Sacred Homage

From the Forums at Poynter Online:

Is nothing sacred? George W. Bush plagiarized an episode of the 1980s BBC comedy "Yes, Minister." As fans of that Brit-com will recall, Prime Minister Jim Hacker ordered an investigation of a government leak, demanding that if found the leaker be tossed in jail. After the usual expensive, lengthy inquiry, his staff reported back -- we've found him. Well who is he, the PM asked? It's you, Prime Minister. (Dialogue from memory.)

P.S. OK, maybe it wasn't plagiarism, it was an homage.

(Via Eschaton)

Cartoon of the Day

*David Fitzsimmons - Arizona Daily Star 

Exit This Way

When I heard that Bush was the "Leaker in Chief" yesterday, Cheney's Aide Says President Approved Leak, one of my first thoughts was, that I bet he really wants to be done with this job. Cenk Uygur has written a piece for The Huffington Post, The President is Trying to Get Impeached, that expresses those same thoughts:

My theory is that President Bush is trying to get impeached. He's tired and he just wants to go home. His bed in Crawford seems so enticing now. All this presidenting has worn him out. . . . Why else would you break so many laws?

* * * *

He let a whole American city go. This isn't Travel Gate. He lost New Orleans. And he still didn't want to show up to work. He was told ahead of time what dangers lay ahead and he stayed on vacation.

He was told that Osama bin Laden was determined to strike inside the United States a month before September 11th. What was his reaction? He stayed on vacation.

And we lost the World Trade Center.

How many more American landmarks are we going to lose with this guy asleep at the wheel? Let alone the treasure in American lives we lost starting a civil war in Iraq.

Now we find out that he authorized leaking classified information to protect his butt politically. This after he had already ordered the NSA to break the FISA law because he was too lazy to get warrants like any other president. This guy just doesn't want to do the heavy lifting of the presidency. He is tired of all the homework and just wants to go home.

* * * *

Georgy needs a nap. He's dying to get fired. Will someone put this guy out of his misery and impeach him already? Believe me, you'd be doing him a favor.

Bill Maher said the same thing several months ago, George of the Bungle, after the Katrina debacle:

"I kid, but seriously Mr. President, this job cant' be fun for you anymore. There's no more money to spend. You used up all of that. You can't start another war because you also used up the army, and now darn the luck the rest of your term has become the Bush family nightmare, helping poor people."

Tags: Politics, Bush, Leaks

Cartoon of the Day

*Don Wright 

And Jill Came Tumbling After

Jack & Jill went up the hill,
To fetch a pail of water;
Jack fell down,
and broke his Crown,
and Jill came tumbling after.

As I read about the various Abramoff-related scandals, that Mother Goose nursery rhyme keeps running through my head. It certainly applies to Jack Abramoff and his bevy of Jills.

Bob Moser has written a devastating portrayal of one of those "Jills" -- Ralph Reed, the founder of the Christian Coalition (a/k/a, the ABCC, the Anything But Christian Coalition), for The Nation.

Reed is the epitome of what I call the "Ted Bundy" phenomenon. There is a tendency to "trust" someone with an attractive appearance, no matter how wicked the inner personality may be. So long as the person is personable and presentable, we are reluctant to accept the evil within. Moser alludes to this, noting a recent appearance as "vintage Reed, the incorrigibly boastful, smooth-talking operator who long dazzled--and blinded--evangelical Christians, big-money Republicans and mainstream journalists. Now 44, he still looks like a million bucks, his elfin face perma-tanned to a brick red, his pencil-thin body subtly bulked out by a well-tailored suit."

However, in The Devil Inside, Moser explores the depth of Reed's true faith and beliefs. His worship of money and power. God is a logo, a brand, that he uses to sell his "evangelical politics." Reed has finally been exposed, for all the world to see. Like many others, has been tainted by Abramoff and is now feeling the effects.

He amassed a fortune selling himself as "the Right Hand of God." But "Divine intervention" has now interfered: his "first campaign for public office--lieutenant governor of Georgia, a position Reed and his fans envision as a stepping stone to bigger things--has turned into a waking nightmare."

In fact, if you were a true believer, you would believe that God has tweaked Reed. He let Ralph follow Jack up that hill. And now, this "Jill" is tumbling down, down, down.

Sitting in a Tree

John and Jerry, that is. You can fill in the blank as to what they are up to. As Paul Krugman puts it:

Senator John McCain obviously believes that he can't get the Republican presidential nomination without Mr. Falwell's approval. During the 2000 campaign, Mr. McCain denounced Mr. Falwell and the Rev. Pat Robertson as "agents of intolerance." But next month Mr. McCain will be a commencement speaker at Liberty University, which Mr. Falwell founded.

* * * *

So what has happened since the 2000 campaign to convince Mr. McCain that Mr. Falwell is not, in fact, an agent of intolerance?

Maybe it was Mr. Falwell's TV appearance with Mr. Robertson on Sept. 13, 2001, during which the two religious leaders agreed that the terrorist attack two days earlier was divine punishment for American immorality. "God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve," said Mr. Falwell, who also declared, "I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the A.C.L.U., People for the American Way — all of them who have tried to secularize America — I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen.' "

Or maybe it was Mr. Falwell's appearance on "60 Minutes" in October 2002, when he declared, "I think Muhammad was a terrorist." Muhammad, he said, was "a violent man" — unlike Mr. Falwell, I guess, who said of terrorists that we should "blow them all away in the name of the Lord."

* * * *

As for Mr. McCain: his denunciation of Mr. Falwell and Mr. Robertson six years ago helped give him a reputation as a moderate on social issues. Now that he has made up with Mr. Falwell and endorsed South Dakota's ban on abortion even in the case of rape or incest, only two conclusions are possible: either he isn't a social moderate after all, or he's a cynical political opportunist.

My opinion of McCain, as I've expressed many times, see, e.g. He's Not the Right Man, is that he's both -- a cynical opportunist who's merely pretended to be a moderate.

I knew that Jon Stewart would have to something to say on the subject. He, however, sees a better side of McCain than I think is there. Maybe not so much any more. Now that McCain's admitted that he's gone into the "crazy base world." See: Citizen McCain (via OneGoodMove).

(Krugman article available here, Feministe, if you don't have access to NYT)

Tags: McCain, Krugman

Cartoon of the Day

*Signe Wilkinson, Philadelphia Daily News 

The Closer I Get to Thee

Other people use the excuse that they want to spend more time with their family. Not Tom DeLay. He's leaving Congress to spend more time getting closer to God.

Based upon his accomplishments so far, he could use all the time he has left repenting for the life he's led.

Sidney Blumenthal provides a short, but precise description that capsulizes the career of Tom DeLay, in a Guardian comment, I, DeLay, the "former majority leader of the House of Representatives [who] has been the Republican strongman in the Congress, known as "The Hammer." As the party whip, he hung a bullwhip on his wall as a symbol of intimidation. The style of the former exterminator from Sugar Land, Texas was bullying and crude."

Dick Polman utilizes the Lord Action quotation, "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely," to epitomize DeLay, in The Hammer whacks himself. As he explains it:

He says today that he'll quit Congress this spring, in order to focus on an issues agenda that will include nurturing a closer relationship between religion and politics. He neglected to mention that, as an indicted criminal defendant, he will also be compelled to focus on the issue of staying out of jail.

* * * *

DeLay tells Time magazine that he's quitting because "I can evaluate political situations," meaning that he's not sure he has enough votes to win re-election as a backbench congressman. But this argument is a tad incomplete; it's akin to what Richard Nixon said in 1974 when he resigned the presidency.
Nixon said he was quitting because "I no longer have a strong enough political base in the Congress," when, in reality, it was because he faced impeachment and conviction for high crimes and misdemeanors. DeLay's statement about "political situations" omits the most important fact of all: A legal noose might be tightening around his neck.

* * * *

The best way to assess DeLay's rise and fall is to focus on the big picture. His ties to his former good friend Abramoff are merely symptomatic of DeLay's longstanding efforts to fuse the '94 conservative revolution to the K Street lobby-finance machine; he married conservative ideology to big money; power became not merely the means, but the end in itself. And then Lord Acton's observation kicked in.

And, of course, Wonkette provides a whole different spin on the matter:

Yeah, we’ll miss the old bastard — he knew how to be a majority leader, dammit. It’s about taking the R.J. Reynolds corporate jet to your arraignment and not giving a shit, not being famous for your goddamn tan like some dimestore George Hamilton. It’s about multiple admonishments from the House ethics committee, comparing yourself to Jesus, flashing a shit-eating grin in your mugshot, money-laundering, calling for violent retribution against activist judges, and contacting six federal agencies to trail Texas Democrats!

Sounds like DeLay has confused things a bit. Perhaps he's planning to spend more time with his lawyers, not God. The only man in robes he's likely to be spending time with in the near future is the Judge in a courthouse, which is certainly a different kind of religious experience.

Tags: Politics, DeLay

It's 1,2,3,4,5,6

According to Wired News:

Where New York Times columnist David Pogue latched onto this fascinating factoid, there's no telling. But as randomly useless bits of trivia go, this is definitely worth noting.

Pogue writes: Late tonight -- specifically, 123 seconds after 1:00 a.m. -- the time and date, for the first time in all of humanity, will be 01:02:03 04/05/06.

And, Pogue points out, this moment will never come again.

Well, at least not exactly. In Europe, which renders the date before the month, this singular moment will occur next month, at 123 seconds past 1 a.m. on 4 May. And after that, it most definitely will never occur again.

Hope you weren't sleeping and missed it!

Quote of the Day

I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass.

--Maya Angelou
Born April 4, 1928

~~~~~

A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.

--Martin Luther King, Jr.
Assassinated April 4, 1968

Cartoon of the Day

*Dana Summers 

God Loves Republicans

Kevin Phillips penned a compelling essay for the Washington Post, How the GOP Became God's Own Party, about the rise and ascendancy of the Religious fundamentalist movement into the Republican Party. Phillips asserts that the trilogy of God, oil and debt portend a treat to democracy.

Now that the GOP has been transformed by the rise of the South, the trauma of terrorism and George W. Bush's conviction that God wanted him to be president, a deeper conclusion can be drawn: The Republican Party has become the first religious party in U.S. history.

We have had small-scale theocracies in North America before -- in Puritan New England and later in Mormon Utah. Today, a leading power such as the United States approaches theocracy when it meets the conditions currently on display: an elected leader who believes himself to speak for the Almighty, a ruling political party that represents religious true believers, the certainty of many Republican voters that government should be guided by religion and, on top of it all, a White House that adopts agendas seemingly animated by biblical worldviews.

* * * *

Over a quarter-century of Bush presidencies and vice presidencies, the Republican Party has slowly become the vehicle of all three interests -- a fusion of petroleum-defined national security; a crusading, simplistic Christianity; and a reckless credit-feeding financial complex. The three are increasingly allied in commitment to Republican politics. On the most important front, I am beginning to think that the Southern-dominated, biblically driven Washington GOP represents a rogue coalition, like the Southern, proslavery politics that controlled Washington until Abraham Lincoln's election in 1860.

* * * *

Besides providing critical support for invading Iraq -- widely anathematized by preachers as a second Babylon -- the Republican coalition has also seeded half a dozen controversies in the realm of science. These include Bible-based disbelief in Darwinian theories of evolution, dismissal of global warming, disagreement with geological explanations of fossil-fuel depletion, religious rejection of global population planning, derogation of women's rights and opposition to stem cell research. This suggests that U.S. society and politics may again be heading for a defining controversy such as the Scopes trial of 1925. That embarrassment chastened fundamentalism for a generation, but the outcome of the eventual 21st century test is hardly assured.

These developments have warped the Republican Party and its electoral coalition, muted Democratic voices and become a gathering threat to America's future. No leading world power in modern memory has become a captive of the sort of biblical inerrancy that dismisses modern knowledge and science. The last parallel was in the early 17th century, when the papacy, with the agreement of inquisitional Spain, disciplined the astronomer Galileo for saying that the sun, not the Earth, was the center of our solar system.

Conservative true believers will scoff at such concerns. The United States is a unique and chosen nation, they say; what did or did not happen to Rome, imperial Spain, the Dutch Republic and Britain is irrelevant. The catch here, alas, is that these nations also thought they were unique and that God was on their side. The revelation that He apparently was not added a further debilitating note to the late stages of each national decline.

Phillips, the author of "American Theocracy: The Perils and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century," is a former Republican strategist who was a pioneer of the modern Republican coalition, in particular its "Southern strategy." He wrote "The Emerging Republican Majority" in 1969, which was the bible for the Nixon Administration and the Party. He has gone from a creator of the problem to an apostate in speaking out against it.

More on Phillips can be read at Shakespeare's Sister and Crooks and Liars has a video of his interview on Lou Dobbs.

Tags: Politics

Cartoon of the Day

*Stewart Carlson 

Show Me the Way to Go Home

Back from our vacation in Florida, our return has been eventful.

While we were away, our daughter had been complaining of back pain, which worsened by the end of the week. She also developed a cough and fever, which also got worse over the week-end. Last night her fever was close to 104 degrees. This morning, she could barely move because of the back pain. She also wasn't able to walk because she lost feeling in her legs.

Not a good sign at all. So, off to the Emergency Room we went, and spent the day there. Turns out she has a bad case of pneumonia. In the scheme of things, that's not so bad.

Welcome home.

Scorched Earth

Two different articles I read today discuss two very different subjects, one providing a view of Abramoff scandal and the other of Grover Norquist. Both pieces were interesting on their own, but I also was struck by a theme that was contained in both. It was what trial lawyers used to refer to as the "scorched earth" policy; that is, winning isn't enough, you must totally and completely destroy the other side.

The first article is the tale of the "Jilted Lover" who ended up being the cause of the downfall of Abramoff and his cronies. The Wall Street Journal story, Behind Unraveling Of DeLay's Team, A Jilted Fiancée, describes the escapades of the greedy gang that worked for Abramoff and Tom DeLay. It's almost amusing to read about these characters, each is worse than the other. They all so deserve each other and their fate. And best of all, it's all due to the wrath of a woman scorned. A beautiful sight to behold in this case.

The other article is by Dick Polman from his blog, American Debate. In Is it over, Grover?, Polman describes a recent Grover Norquist talk in Philly, in which Norquist opined on his predictions on the fate of the Republicans in the upcoming elections.

The eerie similarity came from these pair of quotes from various Republican operatives. It is the deeply warped mentality that pervades the party, from Karl Rove on down.

Describing two then-press aides for DeLay, Mike Scanlon and Tony Rudy, the Journal notes:

The two shared a pit-bull political style and pushed Mr. DeLay to lead the charge in 1998 for the impeachment of President Clinton. "This whole thing about not kicking someone when they are down is B.S.," Mr. Scanlon once wrote to Mr. Rudy in an email published in "The Breach," a book by Peter Baker about the impeachment. "Not only do you kick him -- you kick him until he passes out -- then beat him over the head with a baseball bat -- then roll him up in an old rug -- and throw him off a cliff into the pound surf below!!!!!"

Dick Polman explains Norquist as follows:

This is a guy, after all, who once said that "bipartisanship is another name for date rape," and said, at another point, "It is not good enough to win; it has to be a painful and devastating defeat....It is like when the king would take his opponent’s head and stick it on a pike for everyone to see.”

This is the real face of the Republican Party. The party of Christians, of family values and of compassionate conservatism.

Google This

Google has it's latest Beta program, Google Romance, available to try out.

Very interesting. Try: Take The Tour.

I just love Google -- they think of everything!!


~~~
Oh, and what's today?

Oppressed by Christians

One of Bill Maher's latest New Rules, a rant on Oppressed Christians, is sooo on target. Maher's discourse on War on Christians (via Onegoodmove) segues from hysterical to homily. The video is a must see.

My favorite quote:

And the worst part is, the people bitching loudest about being persecuted for their Christianity -- aren't Christians at all. They're demagogues, and con men and scolds, and the only thing they worship is power. . . .

Thomas Jefferson called the type of Christian who trumpets his own belief in the divinity of Jesus, rather than the morality of Jesus, pseudo-Christians, and that's who's running our country today.

Tags: Bill Maher, New Rules, Video

Quote of the Day

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. - Ralph Waldo Emerson

And yes, it does remind me of a particular "statesman" with a "little mind."


Happy April Fool's Day!

Church Gives Chin Flick

I sorta feel like I did with the Cheney shooting, see It Ain't Over Till the Quail Speaks. That is, it's hard to let go of the Scalia "kiss off."

Scalia's "Chin Flick" has been the subject of much media attention, see my posts at Because It Won't and Res Ipsa Loquitur. This incident is the gift that keeps on giving. And the episode hasn't even made the rounds with the late night comedians yet.

The latest installment involves the Archdiocese of Boston.

The Church of Boston is at it again. This is the same Church that has been dealing with the clergy sexual abuse scandal (see, e.g. Boston Globe - Abuse in the Catholic Church). This is the same Church that recently opted to stop it's adoption program though Catholic Charities, Jesus Weeps, rather than permit gays to be included in the adoption pool.

Now, as reported in the Boston Herald, in Church fires photog over Scalia picture: Freelancer pays for 'right thing', the photographer who captured Scalia's infamous gesture "has been fired by the Archdiocese of Boston's newspaper for releasing a picture of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia making a controversial gesture in the Cathedral of the Holy Cross on Sunday."

Technically, he wasn't "fired" because he was a freelancer, but you get the idea. The photographer had been engaged by a Church paper, The Pilot, who would not run the photo. As the Herald notes:

Smith wouldn't give up the photo earlier this week but chose to release it when he learned Scalia said his gesture had been incorrectly characterized by the Herald. Smith, who was standing in front of the judge, said the Herald "got the story right."

Smith said the Pilot had an obligation at that point "to bring some clarity to it."

"I felt that same obligation," Smith said. "I had to say what I knew and come forward with it.."

Responding to the decision to "terminate" the services of the long time photographer, the Church responded with:

"It's nothing personal," added Pilot editor Antonio Enrique. "I need to try and find people I can trust."

Trust to obfuscate. Trust to ignore, then cover up the child abuse scandal. Trust to be anything but ethical and truthful. The teachings of the new Catholic Church.

~~~~
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty. -- 1 Cor 1:27 (In honor of April Fool's Day)

Tags: Scalia

South Beach

Another day at the beach. Spent the day in South Beach yesterday. Great Beach. Didn't know it was topless. Of course, my brother (who lives down here) & husband enjoyed the scenery. Last day of our vacation in Florida. We'll be heading home today. 

Cartoon of the Day

*Bruce Beattie 

Res Ipsa Loquitur

CNN reports that Supreme Court Justice Scalia has castigated the Boston Herald reporter regarding "The Gesture," in Reporter misread hand gesture. As the comical controversy has grown, (see my post Because It Won't), Scalia decided to try to get the last word by writing a letter To the Editor of the Boston Herald.

There is no dispute that Scalia used "a" gesture upon leaving a Catholic Church in Boston after a Red Mass (a mass where lawyers pray for themselves). Only dispute is whether it was "The Gesture" or "The Finger." Scalia says all he did was give the "chin flick," a mild Italian gesture, explaining "that's Sicilian." So he says, what's all the fuss about? Even worse, despite the fact that he's the one using the Italian gestures and phrases, now he's annoyed that the Herald referred to him as an "Italian American Jurist." No More Mr Nice Blog has a similar take here and here.

In it's latest article on the issue, Scalia seeks Justice over gesture, the Boston Herald describes it best:

Famously feisty Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia yesterday denied that he made an obscene gesture Sunday inside the Cathedral of the Holy Cross, accusing the Herald staff of 'watching too many Sopranos episodes.'

But that's not the end of the story. Although I noted yesterday that the Catholic paper, the Pilot, refused to publish the picture that was taken of Scalia making "The Gesture," the photographer must have missed that word. Apparently, the Photographer has spoken.

The Herald has reported, in Photographer: Herald got it right, that "the freelance photographer who captured the moment has come forward with the picture." It notes:

"It's inaccurate and deceptive of him to say there was no vulgarity in the moment," said Peter Smith, the Boston University assistant photojournalism professor who made the shot.

Despite Scalia's insistence that the Sicilian gesture was not offensive and had been incorrectly characterized by the Herald as obscene, the photographer said the newspaper "got the story right."

* * * *

Smith was working as a freelance photographer for the Boston archdiocese's weekly newspaper at a special Mass for lawyers Sunday when a Herald reporter asked the justice how he responds to critics who might question his impartiality as a judge given his public worship.

"The judge paused for a second, then looked directly into my lens and said, 'To my critics, I say, 'Vaffanculo,' punctuating the comment by flicking his right hand out from under his chin, Smith said.

The Italian phrase means "(expletive) you."

You think maybe this guy didn't like the fact that Scalia lied about what happened? Gee, I bet he went to Catholic school and was taught that lying was a sin.

When contacted, Scalia's PR person said that the Letter to the Editor "defending his gesture at the cathedral ' speaks for itself.'" (Legal translation = Res Ipsa Loquitur). It sure does. I also wonder what gesture Scalia's going to make when he reads this latest entry into the frey.

~~~~
For the non-Italians of the world, the meaning of the Italian expression 'Vaffanculo,' quoted above, can be found at Urban Dictionary.

Tags: Scalia

All the Rage

A recent Trendspotting segment on The Daily Show, Start This Sentence, features Life Coaching.

It answers the question what is a Life Coach? It's like having a really good friend. Who charges.

You also know that you've really made it if you're being satirized.

This is dedicated to Bucky, one of the Ladies Who Lunch.

Cartoon of the Day

* Eric Devericks, Seattle Times 

Spring Break

~~~~~~~~~~

We're spending a few days in Deerfield Beach, Florida, for Spring Break.

My just turned 16 year old daughter is on Spring Break, we're just along for the ride. Of course, she's too young & we're too old for Spring Break in Fort Lauderdale.

My parents winter here & we thought we'd come and visit. Timing was off & they're on a cruise this week, so we have their place to ourselves. Oh, shucks!

Because It Won't

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Did he or didn't he?

The flipping question of the day is: Did Scalia Flip?, as asked by Free Market News:

Did a Supreme Court Justice "flip the bird" at journalists in Boston on Sunday? It depends on who you ask: Antonin Scalia says he did not, but the Boston Herald claims he did, while exiting from a mass at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross.

Original reports said that Scalia gave the press the finger after Mass, but based upon a release from Scalia's PR person, later reports were downgraded to a merely obscene Sicilian chin flick gesture. The issue is a deserving one.

In fact, Wonkette has 2 posts on the controversy, Guess Nino Didn't Give Up Cursing for Lent and Justice Scalia Is Less Cool Than We Thought. Another Blogger, David Giacalone of f/k/a, notes that:

Across the nation, news outlets have been publishing a silly Associated Press report tonight, asking "Scalia's Gesture: Obscene or Sicilian?" -- as if the two concepts are inconsistent. That's based on a statement from Scalia's spokeswoman, who said Nino used a "hand off the chin gesture," which Italians commonly use to show displeasure.

Hmmm. She's got a point: No one ever uses the middle finger to show displeasure.

Scalia might want you to believe that his little Sicilian chin action was harmless, but a lot depends on the attitude displayed along with the gesture. [Both of my sainted grandmothers could definitely make it look obscene.] It's too bad the Justice apparently bullied the photographer who captured the moment into keeping it unpublished. No, it wasn't someone from the Herald -- it was a photographer for the Archdiocese of Boston newspaper, The Pilot.

Ah yes, I too had a sainted grandmother, Noni, who didn't speak English very well, but always managed to get her point across very well.

A Boston Herald side article, Fans and foes weigh in on justice gesture, tantalizes with the knowledge that the answer is so near, but so far away:

While legal watchdogs wagged a disapproving finger at U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia for his off-color "Sicilian" salute in Boston's cathedral, the Archdiocese of Boston said yesterday it won't publish a photo of the gesture in its newspaper The Pilot.

"Because it won't," archdiocese spokesman Terrence Donilon responded when asked why. (Emphasis added)

(Photo via About.com -- Italian Hand Gestures)

Tags: Scalia

Cartoon of the Day

*Clay Bennett, Christian Science Monitor

Cartoon of the Day

* David Fitzsimmons

Ever Onward

The Blogging Curmudgeon has an excellent post about yesterday's march in LA and elsewhere over U.S. Immigration policy. In Political Earthquake Hits Los Angeles: 500,000 March to Protest Immigration "Reform", he noted:

The truest Americans . . . appear to be Latino immigrants. Half a million of them marched in Los Angeles on March 26, 2006 in a "demonstration that may have contained Spanish chants "Si, se puede!", which means, "Yes, we can!" but was American in its heart. The march, which was larger than demonstrations against the Vietnam War and Gulf War II, was quintessentially American: people taking to the streets to petition their government for a redress of grievances. As I watched the sea of people move through the streets of downtown Los Angeles, I thought, These people deserve to be Americans--they have the courage that made the country great.

Explaining his change of heart on the immigration issue, the Curmudgeon (love that name) recalled that we are a nation of immigrants. Also, like those who came before us, these immigrants have the incentive and courage to make this country a better place. We should welcome, not ban, those who come to find a better life. Isn't that what brought our own ancestors here? How can we close our borders when our country was founded on the concept of being open to all?

Perhaps those who aren't happy with the concept can go back to their country of origin, free up space for others and infuse some new blood and ideas into the country. For example, the congressman from Colorado, Tom Tamcredo, is one of those leading the xenophobic charge in Congress, having said that illegal aliens "are 'a scourge that threatens the very future of our nation,' he says. He laments 'the cult of multiculturalism,' and worries about America's becoming a 'Tower of Babel.'" This from a man whose grandparents, like mine, immigrated from Italy at a time when citizenship was more easily had. However, unlike me, he seems to have forgotten his more humble beginnings in his zealous campaign to close the door to America for those who were not as fortunate as he to come here sooner.

Paul Krugman of the NYT, has a thoughtful column, North of the Border, that addresses the problems of illegal immigration. As he said:

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free," wrote Emma Lazarus, in a poem that still puts a lump in my throat. I'm proud of America's immigrant history, and grateful that the door was open when my grandparents fled Russia.

In other words, I'm instinctively, emotionally pro-immigration. But a review of serious, nonpartisan research reveals some uncomfortable facts about the economics of modern immigration, and immigration from Mexico in particular. If people like me are going to respond effectively to anti-immigrant demagogues, we have to acknowledge those facts.

Krugman describes the issues that make illegal immigration a problem for this country, and then opines:

Realistically, we'll need to reduce the inflow of low-skill immigrants. Mainly that means better controls on illegal immigration. But the harsh anti-immigration legislation passed by the House, which has led to huge protests — legislation that would, among other things, make it a criminal act to provide an illegal immigrant with medical care — is simply immoral.

Meanwhile, Mr. Bush's plan for a "guest worker" program is clearly designed by and for corporate interests, who'd love to have a low-wage work force that couldn't vote. Not only is it deeply un-American; it does nothing to reduce the adverse effect of immigration on wages. And because guest workers would face the prospect of deportation after a few years, they would have no incentive to become integrated into our society.

What about a guest-worker program that includes a clearer route to citizenship? I'd still be careful. Whatever the bill's intentions, it could all too easily end up having the same effect as the Bush plan in practice — that is, it could create a permanent underclass of disenfranchised workers.

We need to do something about immigration, and soon. But I'd rather see Congress fail to agree on anything this year than have it rush into ill-considered legislation that betrays our moral and democratic principles.

My daughter attends a Friends (Quaker) School and her 10th grade class has been studying immigration issues. They recently researched various aspects of the issue, including conducting interviews of various people, such as recent immigrants and immigration attorneys. The project concluded with a debate on the issue. So this has been a topic of discussion in our house of late.

~~~
Hasta La Victoria Siempre (Ever Onward to Victory). Note: Poster used for quote, not political statement.

Tags: Politics, Immigration

Do Unto Others

It's Sunday morning, so it's time for some religious studies. And this is some study!

Citing this Pew Survey, Bill Maher discusses the hypocrisy of those religions (and their followers) who condone torture despite religious teachings to the contrary, with Reza Aslan, author of "No god but God," on Real Time: Do Unto Others.

In the Nation article accompanying the Pew survey, entitled "Americans, especially Catholics, approve of torture," it was observed that the public is not just apathetic about the use of torture, but that "a majority of Americans actually approve of the use of torture under some circumstances." Among the findings:

A survey by the Pew Research Center in October showed that 15 percent of Americans believe torture is “often” justified, and another 31 percent believe it is “sometimes” justified. Add to that another 17 percent who said it is “rarely” justified, and you have two out of three Americans justifying torture under certain circumstances. Only 32 percent said it is “never” justified, while another 5 percent didn’t know or refused to answer.

But the portion of Catholics who justify torture is even higher, according to the survey. Twenty-one percent of Catholics surveyed said it is “often” justified and 35 percent said it is “sometimes” justified. Another 16 percent said it is “rarely” justified, meaning that nearly three of four Catholics justify it under some circumstances. Four percent of Catholics “didn’t know” or refused to answer and only 26 percent said it is “never” justified, which is the official teaching of the church.

In contrast to these statistics, 31 percent of Protestants believe torture is never justified, while 41 percent of people identifying themselves as secular oppose torture under any circumstances. So those godless athetists don't believe in torture. No wonder they are so reviled.

The article also interviewed Catholic theologians who affirm that "the church is unequivocal in its denunciation of all torture." It would have been interesting to compare whether those same people are in the pro-life and in the homophobic camps of the Church. I wouldn't be surprised to find a corollary in these views. The irony, of course, is that the justification for the anti-gay and pro-life views are Church teachings -- the same source that is disregarded when the subject is torture.

Of course, if you're Catholic, you can understand why torture is viewed differently. Especially if you went to Catholic school. It was something the nuns excelled at.

~~~~
If Jesus had been killed twenty years ago, Catholic school children would be wearing little electric chairs around their necks instead of crosses. -- Lenny Bruce

Tags: Bill Maher, Video, Quote of the Day

Cartoon of the Day

*Signe Wilkinson, Phila Daily News 

Gotta Have It

A la the lifestyles of the rich & famous, the Smoking Gun has posted Dick Cheney's Suite Demands. Jon Stewart offered his own take on Cheney's Downtime Requirements (via onegoodmove).

The Satirical Political Report uncovered another "top secret memo" outlining the Top Ten demands that President Bush has during his hotel stays:

10. All lights turned off — Bush prefers to stay in the dark.

9. Four cartons of chocolate milk, and a package of Oreos, in honor of such Bush aides as Claude “The Fraud” Allen.

8. Temperature set to 31 degrees — helps maintain Bush’s “brain freeze.”

7. Two televisions, one equipped with an X-Box, one tuned to The Cartoon Channel.

6. Wireless internet capacity, so he can track NSA surveillance of Helen Thomas.

5. A swivel chair, so the President can do “whirlybirds.”

4. For reading material, a comic book version of The King James Bible.

3. For when he travels with Laura, a banner over the bed, reading: “MISSIONARY POSITION ACCOMPLISHED.”

2. A “double-commode” in the bathroom, so that Bush can share intimate moments with Karl “Turd Blossom” Rove.

1. A sign on the back of the hotel room door, providing a map for an “exit strategy.”

(Also via Onegoodmove)

When the Moon is in the 7th House

The Boston Globe reports on the latest "signing statement" by Bush as he attempts to rewrite laws (and history), in Bush shuns Patriot Act requirement:

When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.

* * * *

Bush signed the bill with fanfare at a White House ceremony March 9, calling it ''a piece of legislation that's vital to win the war on terror and to protect the American people." But after the reporters and guests had left, the White House quietly issued a ''signing statement," an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law.

In the statement, Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would ''impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties."

* * * *

David Golove, a New York University law professor who specializes in executive power issues, said the statement may simply be ''bluster" and does not necessarily mean that the administration will conceal information about its use of the Patriot Act.

But, he said, the statement illustrates the administration's ''mind-bogglingly expansive conception" of executive power, and its low regard for legislative power.

''On the one hand, they deny that Congress even has the authority to pass laws on these subjects like torture and eavesdropping, and in addition to that, they say that Congress is not even entitled to get information about anything to do with the war on terrorism," Golove said.

(via Firedoglake)

Gee, I think the Signing Statement's list of exceptions to the requirement that Bush follow the law might have missed the "Moon in the 7th House, Jupiter aligned with Mars" exemption. Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo calls it our permanent constitutional crisis.

Seriously, the litany of exceptions to the requirement that Bush follow the reporting requirement imposed by the reauthorization of the Patriot Act is an example of the legal concept of "exception that swallows the rule." That is, when the scope of an exception to the general rule is so broad, the rule itself no longer has any meaning, it is in effect nullified.

The Patriot Act itself is a dangerous step that could eviscerate our civil liberties. Blogger Seeking a Little Truth cites a recent article that considers the continuum of the erosion of our constitutional protections. For anther view, blogger Concealed Position, provides commentary on "The 14 Characteristics of Fascism," an essay by Lawrence Britt.

Another legal maxim, the "slippery slope" argument, is appropos of the direction the country is headed. Our civil rights may just be slip, sliding away.

~~~
The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. -- Thomas Jefferson

Tags: Patriot Act, Politics

Cartoon of the Day

*Mike Thompson, Atlanta Journal Constitution

She's 16!!

Happy Birthday to you

 

Make a Wish

Make a wish and give it wings
Dreams of bright and beautiful things
Dance through all the fun filled hours
Don't forget to smell the flowers
Share some love and birthday cake
All life joys are yours to take
And when evening comes to view
Thanks your lucky stars you're you

Happy Birthday
Miss Sweet 16

(make a wish photo amber_b)

Cartoon of the Day

*Ann Telnaes, CBS News

Life is Beautiful

As Bush is wont to do, he has been engaging in the "Blame Game" of late, attacking the medias coverage of the war in Iraq as a way to deflect the reality of the situation and his own role in the disaster that exists there.

The Countdown (the one with Keith Olbermann, not the Birthday one) did a segment on the latest "attack the messenger strategy" adopted by Bush and his cronies. As part of the story line, Olbermann shows a few recent Bush speeches, (see Crooks and Liars), where he blames the media for the situation in Iraq. He also addresses Laura Ingraham on the topic.

David Gregory started the dust-up during a recent interview, (Crooks and Liars), on the Today Show with conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham, about the medias coverage of the War. According to Ingraham, who had recently been to Iraq, life is beautiful there. She went on to say that reporters would see that if only they would leave their hotels and go out and about in the various parts of Iraq.

Gregory did a follow up interview on the Today Show with reporter Richard Engel, (Crooks and Liars), in which Engel said that the actual on the ground situation in Iraq is even worse than is being portrayed in the press.

If Ingraham truly believes the stuff she spouts, then I wonder if she's planned her family's Spring Break trip yet? If not, then maybe she could take the whole family to Iraq for their family vacation. Sounds ideal -- lot's of fun and sun.

Cartoon of the Day

*Pat Olphant

Don't Say Goodbye

Both Blinq and Attytood have just reported the sad news that Dick Polman, political writer for the Inquirer, is planning to leave to take a full-time teaching position at Penn.

What bad news for the Inquirer. He and Steve Lopez were the best writers at the Inky, hands down. In fact, I sometimes go to the LA Times, just to read Lopez' columns, even though his column there is LA focused, not national in scope. I still like his style. Likewise Polman. He has an excellent perspective on the political scene.

Bling does say that Polman is in negotiations to continue writing for the newspaper, where his most recent title has been national political correspondent. I hope that he stays in some capacity (and that, either way, he continues his new blog, American Debate).

Damn, I thought it was odd that he used Blogger to host his blog, not the Inquirer. I was hoping it didn't mean he was leaving.

~~~~

All successful newspapers are ceaselessly querulous and bellicose. They never defend anyone or anything if they can help it; if the job is forced on them, they tackle it by denouncing someone or something else. - H.L. Mencken

The Countdown Continues

The Quilt Goddess

The Goddesses Quilt
for
the Quilt Goddess

Happy Birthday, Sarah

Just Say No

Maybe there was a good reason that George Bush has long avoided press conferences and public addresses (with other than hand picked audiences) after all. Now that he's venturing outside that bubble in which he resides, it's been nothing but trouble. If not for him, then for us. We have to watch the spectacle and it's painful.

He's defintitely the Stepford President, he rarely veers from script. Inquirer political reporter, Dick Polman, who is a favorite, has recently started a blog, American Debate. He has an entry, Groundhog Day in America, that echoes that sentiment. Describing Bush's recent PR efforts, Polman says:

But the problem is, he keeps saying the same things over and over; worse yet, he keeps repeating things that are contradicted by factual reality. As a result, the average skeptical American is starting to feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day, who awoke over and over to the same morning and the same radio rendition of "I Got You, Babe."

Consider, for instance, the lyrics in today's press conference: Troop levels will be determined by the commanders in the field...He wants to "spread liberty around the world"...Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will not be fired, because "he's done a fine job"..."This is a global war, and Iraq is part of that..."

A visual, and extremely humorous take on this, is also provided by Jon Stewart, on the Daily Show. He weaves together a montage of Bush speeches, which masterfully combine to tell the same speech, in Stumped Speech (via Onegoodmove).

My Caption, and a portion of the Daily Show skit, refers to Bush's answer to this Q&A from an Ohio speech:

My question is that author and former Nixon administration official Kevin Phillips in his latest book, "American Theocracy," discusses what has been called radical Christianity and its growing involvement into government and politics. He makes the point that members of your administration have reached out to prophetic Christians who see the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism as signs of the Apocalypse. Do you believe this, that the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism are signs of the Apocalypse?

Out of the Closet

For those interested in the South Park Saga, here are a few tidbits and sites. An AP article summarizes the controversial episode:

Last November, "South Park" targeted the Church of Scientology and its celebrity followers, including actors Tom Cruise and John Travolta, in a top-rated episode called "Trapped in the Closet." In the episode, Stan, one of the show's four mischievous fourth graders, is hailed as a reluctant savior by Scientology leaders, while a cartoon Cruise locks himself in a closet and won't come out.

Recently, Isaac Hayes, a practicing Scientologist who is voice of one of the character's, Chef, quit over the episode, claiming it disrespected his religion. Andrew Sullivan's blog, The Daily Dish, also discusses The South Park War.

However, the Guardian Unlimited put it best:

Criticising the hit US television series South Park for being offensive is a bit like criticising Antiques Roadshow for focusing too much on old things. But this has not prevented the soul singer Isaac Hayes from quitting the show in outrage at its treatment of Scientology - ending a nine-year association with a cartoon that has left few other religious or political groups unmocked.

The banned espisode, Trapped in the Closet is available via YouTube. And, if that's not enough,
TayTV Media Blog includes a video of the Letterman interview with Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of South Park, on the subject.

Patriot Act: The Home Version

Philly's Daily News reports on the newest version of Monopoly, entitled "Patriot Act: The Home Version." As the article explains, in Patriot Act game pokes fun at law:

In this send-up of "Monopoly," players don't pass "Go" and they don't go directly to jail - they go to Guantanamo Bay.

Instead of losing cash for landing on certain squares, they lose civil liberties. And the "Mr. Monopoly" character at the center of the board is replaced by a scowling former Attorney General John Ashcroft.

"Patriot Act: The Home Version" pokes fun at "the historic abuse of governmental powers" by the recently renewed anti-terrorism law, according to its creator's Web site.

* * * *

In a nod to President Bush's prewar comments, the "Go" space in is renamed "Bring It On!" Players roll the dice to determine how many civil liberties they start out with, accumulating them from a variety of categories: U.S. citizens get 5; non-citizens 1. Whites and Asians get 5; Arabs 1. Ultra right-wingers get 6; Democrats 3 or 4.

What's even better is that you don't need to run out to buy the game. The game is available as a free download from the creator's website, graphix4change.com.

Best of all, the website promises a "board game that brings the thrill of trampling the Constitution right into your home. . . newly updated for 2006 to include NSA wiretaps and renewal of provisions!"

(Thanks to Loree)

Casey Strikes Out

Attytood from the Philadelphia Daily News announces that NOW has decided to endorse Alan Sandals for the upcoming U.S. Senate seat held by some guy named Santorum. See: NOW deals blow to Casey and endorses Sandals.

It's certainly no surprise that Casey is not the choice of the pro-Choicers. I'm a little surprised that they endorsed Sandals over Chuck Pennacchio, who is also pro-Choice.

I also don't have a problem with a contested primary for the Democratic ticket. After all, that's what the process is all about -- allowing the electorate to pick the candidate of their choice. Funny concept that, but it seems to work when we let it.

~~~~

I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat! -- Will Rogers

Cartoon of the Day

*Jeff Stahler, Columbus Dispatch