DON'T GO SEE MICHAEL MOORE'S NEW MOVIE SICKO IF YOU DON'T LIKE CRYING IN THE MOVIE THEATER

You've probably never dreamed about lining Republican lawmakers and propagandists up against a wall, shoving a last cig into their faces and yelling, "Ready, Aim..." I didn't need to see Sicko for those images to getting buzzin' 'round my brain. They're never far away. And when Moore used the refrain from the Rolling Stone's "Street Fighting Man"... well, there was a visceral reaction. Just after the turn of the century, when I used to have trouble sleeping-- before I switched to a raw food diet; now I fall asleep in less than a minute-- I never counted sheep. I always counted dangerous threats to my country... swinging from lamp posts. Yep, I'm heartless. I had to get up halfway through the movie and go stand in a dark corner so I could cry without embarrassing myself in front of everyone.

The first time I met Howard Dean, then the little known, ex-governor of Vermont and a long-shot presidential candidate who no one was taking seriously, I had already endorsed John Edwards and written his campaign a check. Dr. Dean came over to my house for breakfast and I served him a variation of what my friends-- and their friends-- call a Howie breakfast, in this case, half a papaya with blueberries, pomegranate seeds, strawberries, lemon juice, freshground flax seeds and pecans. Then we talked about health care; well... he talked and I listened. His vision for a not-for-profit health care system-- a system for health instead-- didn't make me think any less of John Edwards. I just never thought about him or any other candidate again-- until after the public media assassination of Dean in Iowa. (And then the dream was over and it was back to politics as usual and I voted for Edwards in the California primary. Hillary can count on me on the first Tuesday of November to vote for her less evil ass than whatever more evil ass the fascists put up.)

Anyway, Moore uses Sicko to get across that same vision. He does it really well, although you can count on every reactionary asshole you ever heard of crawling out of the woodwork to attack him for it. People's true colors will come out, believe me. His film is truly revolutionary and it will be incumbent on all those desperate to maintain the status quo-- regardless of political party-- to attack it, and attack it with a fury. Their hatred and fears will fall on Moore in the next week like a ton of bricks, like a million tons of bricks. Google is even using the fear of it to sell advertising to health care companies! "We can place text ads, video ads, and rich media ads in paid search results or in relevant websites within our ever-expanding content network. Whatever the problem, Google can act as a platform for educating the public and promoting your message."

Take a look at what one of the Republican Party's highest paid whores corporate lobbyists had to say about Sicko. And being a Hollywood actor, he also "reviewed" the movie in a GOP propaganda sheet. And Moore responded, a bit more eloquently than the old geezer could possibly be expected to handle.

The movie is everywhere in L.A. and it was sold out all over town. I had to go to three theaters before I found one that could sell me a ticket-- and that was for a showing 3 hours later. It was worth the wait. I just wish I had brought some kleenex. It'll probably be the biggest grossing opening for a documentary since Fahrenheit 911-- and that'll drive the corporate health care industry and their paid political whores-- of both parties, but especially of the far right party-- into a frenzy of attack and recrimination. I loved the part about how the government in France fears the people-- so they do things the people want-- unlike here where the people fear the government-- so the government serves the interests of insiders and paymasters. Here's the preview:




UPDATE: MOST OF THE REVIEWS COULD HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY P.R. FLACKS FOR THE GOP OR THE "HEALTH" CORPORATIONS, EXCEPT ONE THAT SAYS MOORE DIDN'T PAINT A BLEAK ENOUGH PICTURE

Tomorrow's Washington Post has an article by a Chicago doctor, Thomas Fisher, who points out-- as Moore did early in the film-- that Sicko isn't about the millions of Americans without health insurance; it's mostly about the millions of Americans with health insurance, health insurance designed to screw them over and make them die. Dr. Fisher works with poor people and poor people of color who have no health insurance and grossly inadequate health care. And they're much worse off than the folks in Moore's movie, the ones whose stories made me cry for two hours and then sent me running to the shooting range so I could get my frustrations out and not do something sillier than writing a blog post.

Here's the view from the front lines: Hospital waiting times of 10, 12 hours. Emergency rooms so packed that ambulances must be turned away. People suffering from ailments ranging from organ failure to psychotic breakdowns, all preventable.

These issues affect not only individuals, but whole communities and the health outlets serving them. I sympathize with those who are unhappy about the quality of their insured care, but I'm more worried about those with no insurance at all. The bigger problem is that we all want the finest of health care, and as a result, many of us -- largely black and brown -- are left with nothing.

One scene in Sicko does deal directly with race: A white woman questions whether her husband, who is black and has kidney cancer, would receive better care if he were white. I can't speak to their situation, but my experience is that the influence of race and racism on health care is rarely that obvious. But it is unmistakable, nonetheless.

Although not for the people of color who work for the man in the Big House, like Condi, Clarence Thomas and Ken Blackwell.

AT THE SOUND OF THE BELL: GOP ISN'T EXACTLY DISINTEGRATING... BUT... CLOSE

While the GOP acclimates itself to the electoral devastation headed their way in 2008-- and puts all its hopes on nurturing future shit-eating candidate General BetrayUs-- GOP members of Congress are doing all they can to minimize the damage to their own careers. Voters are so thoroughly disgusted with Bush's Iraq escalation that respectable Republican senators who have abdicated any semblance of oversight for the past 7 years-- like Richard Lugar, Jon Warner and George Voinovich-- are now calling for Bush to forget his grand designs for making Iraq into an American puppet state. The new CBS poll out today shows 77% of Americans think the war is going badly.

And near universal disgust with Bush, Cheney, their disastrous regime and it's catastrophic policies and venal agenda aren't the only things that bode ill for the Republicans at the polls next year. Even Republican voters have had enough! The Republican Party crafted themselves a brain dead, zombie-like base, incapable of independent thought and Pavlovian in it's response to the dog whistles from Hate Talk Radio and Fox-TV-- commercial enterprises catering to the lowest-information groups and most bigoted people in the country. And now Republican politicians, who were all too willing to feed that tiger are realizing that they're the next meal. The work they did on Bush's failed immigration legislation is killing McCain's presidential hopes and wrecking Lindsey Graham's hopes for re-election to the Senate. If not for the fact that the Bush Regime had the FBI arrest the far right Republican who was opposing Graham, South Carolina Treasurer Tom Ravenel, for selling cocaine, Graham would have had virtually no chance of even winning the GOP nomination. Now Republicans in South Carolina are trying to make a deal to support a Blue Dog Democrat just to teach Graham and other Republican hacks a lesson. Only 31% of South Carolina voters approve of Graham's job performance. And fewer Republicans like him than Democrats!

And the harder the "Amnesty Republicans" fight back, the more the base turns against them. Almost all the rubber stamp senators facing re-election, who supported Bush on everything and who have been supportive of the immigration bill-- from Saxby Chamberpot (GA) on the extreme right to the quartet of fake moderates Coleman (MN), Collins (ME), Smith (OR) & Sununu (NH)-- abandoned Bush at the last minute and bowed to the intense, searing pressure from the dominant Know Nothing wing of the party. Yesterday the GOP's hapless chairman, Florida Senator Mel Martinez, was still defending the failed immigration legislation. He's very lucky he isn't up for re-election next year, but his carping on the issue is ruining the chances for other Republicans to recover from the calamity. He's still calling the Republican base "the voices of negativity." They don't like that and Martinez' approval ratings in Florida are even worse than Graham's and almost as bad as Cheney's! Only 23% of Florida voters think Martinez is doing a good job. I've seen indicted Republican congressmen on their way to prison with higher approval ratings.

Today is the last day of the quarter, a time period Inside the Beltway hacks and pundits look at to figure out who is a serious candidate and who isn't. So if you're thinking about helping out some progressive candidates, today would be a good day. All of our candidates are on our Blue America page and I'd like to especially point out a number of incumbents who have been very steady and unflinching in their support for all of our values and ideals, especially Steve Cohen (TN), Carol Shea-Porter (NH), Tom Allen (ME), Jerry Nadler (NY), John Hall (NY), and Hilda Solis (CA). They deserve our appreciation. Also very much deserving our appreciation are real fighters who came close to beating Republican jerks in 2006 and who are going for it again, especially Angie Paccione (CO), Victoria Wulsin (OH), Eric Massa (NY), John Laesch (IL), Charlie Brown (CA), Darcy Burner (WA) and Donna Edwards (MD), whose opponent is a Liebermanlike fake Democrat and, I'm happy to announce, will be our Blue America guest next Saturday at 2pm, EST.

NEW HAMPSHIRE REPUBLICANS: FREDDY AIN'T READY

They were both invented in Hollywood, but have you ever seen them in the same room at the same time?

The public has looked over the 10 old white dwarves who have put themselves forward as successors to George W. Bush. And the publicv has, collectively, puked. Oops... who will stop Hillary? Must... stop... Hillary. Disinterring Ronald Reagan was quickly taken off the table and, one after another there have been moves to prop up one of the dwarves. They've all failed. Rudy McRomney will never be president-- starting with the fact that none of them can win the GOP nomination. But someone has to win... right? The party can't just skip this one and run General BetrayUs in 2012, right? Yes, there has to be a sacrificial pig put up, like that old Dole guy in 1996.

So some wise old heads looked around at the list of reactionaries on the long list of Republicans on the Free Scooter Mandela Committee and they came up with a long-forgotten ex-pol, a contemporaryish actor, Freddy Thompson. A few days ago DWT readers got to watch a video showing how completely unfit Freddy Thompson would be as a candidate-- above and beyond the two decades as a slimy Inside the Beltwat lobbyist part of his resume.

Thompson has been trying to hold his appearances down to backwater gatherings in South Carolina, where all you have to do is scream "build a wall" and "support the troops" a few times and they want to crown you king. But sooner or later he was going to have to leave the Old Confederacy and come up to the U.S. This week ole Freddy popped up inNew Hampshire, a high info state that the rest of the states count on to separate the wheat from the chaff. The Republicans in the Granite State took a look and found... all chaff. They were "decidedly underwhelmed... 'He's got a nice voice. But there was nothing there. He's for apple pie and motherhood. He's going to have to say what he's for.'" That's Freddy!

...He left some Republicans thinking he needs more work before his nascent campaign matches the media hype it's gotten in advance.

The former Tennessee senator with the baritone drawl showed up Thursday in New Hampshire, the site of the first primary voting, and gave a speech that lasted only nine minutes, skipping over hot-button issues such as Iraq and immigration to invoke platitudes about freedom and strength.

He left more than a few Republicans disappointed.

One serious conservative donor took a look and saw another empty suit (like Willard). "He looks good onstage, but I don't know if he has the gravitas, It seems like he's trying to win over conservatives, but I'm still not sure he has the credentials. I'm worried he's trying to get by on his celebrity.''

MEET DANIEL BISS-- A PROGRESSIVE WHO CAN HELP ILLINOIS LIVE UP TO ITS POTENTIAL AS A SOLIDLY BLUE STATE

Remember when we did the vlog session with John Laesch a month or so ago? Christina put together a memorable event built around that and I got to meet some of the best progressive minds in Chicago. One was a 29 year old math professor named Daniel Biss who Christina was especially keen on me meeting. And now I'm keen on you meeting him. Daniel is running for State Representative from a district just north of Chicago, the 17th. It's a Democratic district with an unimpressive squishy Republican rep, just like the congressional district it overlaps (Kirk's). The district includes a bit of Evanston, where Daniel lives, plus  parts of Skokie and Wilmette, as well as Winnetka, Glencoe, Northfield and Glenview. Kerry and Gore each beat Bush handily here. Obama swept the area when he ran for Senate. Beth Coulson, the current Rep., isn't a monstrosity; but she is a Republican and she supports her party's leaders and their venal and destructive agenda. She has enjoyed support from one-issue liberal groups like the Sierra Club and the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, whose heads are too far up their butts to be able to understand why Republicans are their enemies.

Daniel Biss is anything but wishy-washy or squishy. He's a genuine progressive leader with a powerful understanding of what government's role in society should be. "People in this district," he told me, "believe government is capable of benefiting people. The Republican Party functions as if government has to be kept out of the way." This primitive, anti-social Republican outlook helps draw the distinction between Daniel and Coulson. Mathematicians are logical and, above all else, they are problem solvers. Not only is that different from a Republican, that is different from most politicians of any stripe. It goes beyond the intellectual dishonesty that makes the political system a cesspool. Daniel, who graduated from Harvard and MIT, is a guy I found intellectually rigorous.

He finds the notorious shortsightedness engendered by our politics to be unhelpful to people and their problems and issues. "They're incentivized to focus on the 2-year election cycle rather than the 20-year plan. As an academic, I've spent my whole career thinking about long-term projects and goals. I think it's no coincidence that the issues I stress most, education and environmental policy... these are places where common sense dictates that making major changes now is a great long-term investment, and yet our politicians can't seem to bring themselves to make that investment, because they're too caught up in the short term."

He's actually a guy who has spent a lot of time seriously considering what it means to be a progressive. "I keep coming back to etymology: progressives like progress, which means that we're focused on the future. Believing in a better future has to also mean planning for and making a better future. And I find it flabbergasting how little of that goes on in our politics today."

Illinois, one of the richest states in America, is 48th in the country in dollars spent per pupil. "In the last legislative session there was a bill to increase the education funding level per pupil by a few hundred dollars-- rather than the thousand or more that many people feel is absolutely necessary-- and [in a party line vote] Coulson voted against it."

It doesn't look like she's in a position to do anything for her constituents even if she wanted to. She's boxed in between the progressive and moderate voters of the 17th on the one hand and her own crazy, incompetent party leaders-- the ones who imported Alan Keyes to run for Senate-- on the other hand.

Daniel got his political start as a grassroots organizer, after despairing over the river of misdeeds flowing out of the Bush Regime. He organized volunteers for Kerry and three congressional candidates, but with Democrats controlling every facet of Illinois government, he sees dysfunction where there could be a model for good government. He is hoping to help build a new independent power based within the Democratic Party-- a coalition of workers, middle class African-Americans, people in suburbs not enamored of a Chicago machine politics that spits up corrupt reactionaries like Rahm Emanuel and Dan Lipinksi, latinos newly galvanized by the immigration issue, etc. He hopes to open debate in the party, debate that has never been welcome in the old style political machines.

Daniel Biss is the kind of young leader we need to help build a Democratic Party that will be worth something. There are 65,000 registered voters in the 17th and he intends on meeting every last one of them. We can help him. Remember, Illinois practically has no campaign finance laws and the big corporations have a history of buying elections. Campaign mailers and even cable TV spots are not prohibitively expensive... but they cost something. Daniel is one of us, a friend of Rick Perlstein's and Christina Siun's. Let's welcome him to Blue America and help him raise the money he needs to conduct a competitive campaign. Today at 2pm, EST (1 pm in Chicago), Daniel will join us at Firedoglake for a discussion.

ABBA LIKE YOU NEVER SAW THEM BEFORE

Let's start the 4th of July weekend off with a bang!

AWKWARD SITUATION IN MAINE: SNOWE, MICHAUD, ALLEN vs COLLINS

Together, they covered up for Bush and made it worse-- much worse

There are very few senators who glom on to another senator and just copy their every move; most have more self respect. But there are always an exception or two. I've noticed that Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas' pathetic reactionary senator-- well the woman one; the male pathetic, reactionary is Mark Pryor-- always copies the equally pathetic and reactionary Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, the Democrats' most endangered incumbent-- not Republican enough for the Republicans and too Republican for the Democrats. The Senate will be a far better place without her. But what will Blanche do? I guess she'll just have to find someone else to mimic. Susan Collins (R-ME) did. For her entire senatorial career she has basically just done whatever Maine's senior Senator, Olympia Snowe did. Their voting records are very close, although Collins is always a little more likely to hew to the GOP line and it is always a big drama when Snowe takes an independent position and poor Collins gets confused and upset trying to figure out what to do.

But now she doesn't have to worry about that any longer. She's finished copying Olympia Snowe. Bizarrely, she has chosen a new mentor, Joe Lieberman, like herself, a reflexive rubber stamp for Bush and Cheney, each from a progressive state where there is a need to cover that posture up at every opportunity. This week the Lewiston Sun Journal blew the whistle on Collins-- at least in terms of the escalation in and occupation of Iraq. Republican Snowe agrees with Democrats Mike Michaud and Tom Allen that Mainers want the U.S. out of Iraq. Like her new role model, Lieberman, Collins is sticking with Bush and Cheney on that one.

Just as her re-election campaign kicks off-- with a Lieberman-sponsored fundraiser-- Collins finds herself the odd man out. Senator Snowe acknowledges that Iraq is "the paramount issue in Maine, as it is across America." Collins' opponent, Rep. Tom Allen, is happy to reach across the partisan divide on this and welcome Senator Snowe aboard. He's been pointing out the folly of Bush's policies in Iraq from the very beginning. He says it's the top issue in the state. "People are overwhelmingly looking for an exit strategy and support setting a deadline for getting our troops out of harm's way," said U.S. Rep. Tom Allen's spokesman, Mark Sullivan. Michaud agrees with Snowe and Allen, explaining that his constituents "have consistently and overwhelmingly called for an end to American military participation in Iraq."

So while the 2 Democrats who represent between them the whole state, and Senator Snowe, who also represents the whole state, claim their constituents, in Snowe's words, "range from those looking for our present course in Iraq to end or change dramatically, to those who are calling for phasing out or completely withdrawing our troops," Collins seems to think she represents a different place that isn't Maine. Of course, it isn't Connecticut either, but her deceptive rhetoric is very reminiscent of... well, you guessed... Joe Lieberman's.

A spokesman for U.S. Sen. Susan Collins said Iraq is a big concern, but not the top one.

Unlike the other three, Collins' office said the consensus from constituents isn't to get out of Iraq right away, or even soon. Her constituents have many different opinions about the war, said spokesman Kevin Kelley.

However, Collins "agrees with Mainers who believe that the current strategy in Iraq has failed to achieve the goal of a peaceful, stable democracy," Kelley said.

Collins has said that if President George W. Bush's surge strategy does not demonstrate results later this year, "Congress should consider all options including a gradual but significant withdrawal of our troops next year."

Collins is about to find out that most Mainers have already made up their minds about Bush's escalation and they don't agree with her footdragging or her mimicking of Lieberman's reactionary policies. Lieberman has, however, managed to get his K Street buddies to donate huge amounts of lobbyist cash to Collins' campaign. I urge all DWT readers to consider a donation-- even $5 or $10-- to Tom Allen, someone who has consistently opposed Bush's and Cheney's toxic agenda and will be a fantastic replacement for Collins in the Senate. One Joe Lieberman is more than enough. Please donate here.

UPDATE: SCOTUS-- THE DAY AFTER

Today Slate asked liberals and moderates if they're sorry they didn't fight Roberts' nomination when Bush put him forward. And today some of my pals in Montana were berating the execrable Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate from their state, Mike Lange. There aren't enough bad things anyone could ever say about Mike Lange. He's human garbage on two legs and anyone who votes for him should have a thorough psychological examination. But who is he running against? Max Baucus. The only good thing you can say about Baucus is that he's a little better than Lange-- although on Alito and Roberts, and on countless other crucial issues, there is no difference whatsoever.

In this morning's Washington Post E.J. Dionne wrote a "Just say no" column, Not One More Roberts or Alito.

The Senate's Democratic majority-- joined by all Republicans who purport to be moderate-- must tell President Bush that this will be their answer to any controversial nominee to the Supreme Court or the appellate courts.

Yes, they must. But E.J. is no fool. He knows what hacks reside in the Senate Democratic caucus. And what Republican moderates? Did even one Republican "moderate" stand up against Alito or Roberts? The answer is "no." The fake moderates who try to claim they are "independent," rubber stamp trash like Sununu, Coleman, Collins, Smith... they all voted to confirm, happily. And among the Democrats E.J. seeks to rally? It wasn't just former Democrat Joe Lieberman who thought Roberts would be a great Supreme Court Chief Justice. As many Democrats voted for him as opposed him, 22. And although fewer Democrats backed Alito, it was only three fewer.

Who is E.J. going to rally? Max Baucus (MT)? Mary Landrieu (LA)? Mark Pryor (AR)? Blanche Lincoln (AR)? Tom Carper (DE)? One of the reactionary Nelsons (NE & FL)? Good luck! These people are not on our side. They didn't accidentally vote for Roberts and Alito. They may claim they didn't have the right information to vote against Bush's attack on Iraq but they certainly had all the information they needed to know how Roberts and Alito would be voting once they got on the Supreme Court. They got what they wanted, what makes them comfortable.

E.J. says the Senate should refuse to even hold hearings on a future Bush nominee (God forbid) "unless the president reaches agreement with the Senate majority on a mutually acceptable list of nominees." But E.J. isn't the Senate Majority Leader; Harry Reid is. And Reid depends on the Baucuses and the Landrieus and the Nelsons.

We now know that the president's two nominees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, are exactly what many of us thought they were: activist conservatives intent on leading a judicial counterrevolution. Yesterday's 5 to 4 ruling tossing out two school desegregation plans was another milestone on the court's march to the right.

Any senator who claims he didn't know that before the vote is too stupid, incompetent, and dense to hold the job.

If another conservative replaces a member of the court's moderate-to-liberal bloc, the country will be set on a conservative course for the next decade or more, locking in today's politics at the very moment when the electorate is running out of patience with the right.

That's why a majority of senators should warn Bush now that they will not take up his nominee unless he strictly construes the Constitution's provision that he appoint justices with "the Advice and Consent of the Senate." The rule should be: If the advice isn't taken, there will be no consent.

And if conservatives claim to believe the president is owed deference on his court appointees, they will be-- I choose this word deliberately-- lying. In 2005 conservatives had no problem blocking Bush's appointment of Harriet Miers because they could not count on her to be a strong voice for their legal causes. They revealed that their view of judicial battles is not about principle but power. When they went after Miers, conservatives lost the deference argument.

You go, girl! You know Reid's number, right? I can't wait to see how Democrats respond to DSCC pleas about donating money to Baucus, Landrieu, and Pryor this year for their re-election campaigns.

DID YOU KNOW THERE'S SOMEONE NAMED WILLARD RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT? HE FLIPS, HE FLOPS, HE LIES AND HE SMILES... BUT HE NEVER USES HIS REAL NAME

In 1983 Flip Flop Mitt was cruel to Seamus, the family Irish Setter. What can I say? Does it make him unfit to be president? There's so much more to get to before that, although, for some people, it will help them see the kind of person behind the expensive pearly whites and million dollar image consultants. Fine that the Boston Herald dug up the old story about how Romney strapped the poor dog to the roof of the family car before heading up for a vacation in Canada. How about a closer look at the predatory business practices Bain Capital, Romney's investment firm, that specializes in buying out distressed companies and looting them of value, destroying the livelihoods of thousands of employees?

Although Romney always seems to be hovering around fourth place in Republican opinion polls, McCain's campaign is clearing in a death spin, Giuliani's is headed that way and Republicans are starting to get a better look at someone who may be worse than the whole lot of them: "White Knight" Freddy Thompson, who may actually be even worse than his slimy lobbyist career led us to believe. That leaves Flip Flop Mitt-- and the breathless adoration (male) Republican TV propagandists have for his broad shoulders and "presidential look."

Real journalists need to be looking in different directions if they want to figure out why Romney is even less fit to be president that the 3 goofballs who are ahead of him in the polls. And it isn't only because he's a dedicated member of the secretive Mormon cult. Romney is a man with no moral moorings or philosophical convictions on anything beyond grasping, relentlessly, for power. The well-practiced smile hides a lot of ugliness.

Just today, the Salt Lake Tribune gives us a brief glimpse into how the Mormons have been conspiring to sneak one of their own into power in DC. Romney has outraised all the other-- far better known and far more popular-- Republican candidates. Why? The Mormon Mafia. How? Cheating. Today's story, just one small example of what the whole campaign to install a Mormon into the White House, is about how one of his wealthy Mormon supporters chartered a jet to fly 150 Mormons from Utah to a Romney fundraiser in Boston. That was an illegal $150,000 contribution.

Romney's crass opportunism, though, has been the stand out feature of his campaign so far. Today he was viciously kicking Bush and McCain while they were still sprawled on the ground after the beating they took on immigration legislation. Romney's own record doesn't make him the best representative of the Know Nothing, nativist wing of the GOP on immigration. But that didn't stop him; it never does. Someone who doesn't believe in anything, just has to wet a finger, hold it up to the wind and practice sounding sincere in front of the mirror. And with the kinds of radio and TV "journalists" covering Romney's campaign, they wouldn't care even if he lied about his name; as long as he has that heavenly chin Hannity is poppin' a boner over. When Romney was asked to comment on his party's senatorial foreign policy expert, Richard Lugar, it was classic wishy-washy Romney. Lugar castigated the Bush's Regime's failed escalation policies. Romney knows what an easy target Mexican immigrants are with the Republican base, so he can speak out. With Iraq... too complicated. So here's what the fearless would-be leader muttered:

"I think it's a little early to make that call. The Congress and the president have expressed support for Gen. [David] Petraeus to use the troop surge to provide security in Baghdad and Anbar province... Gen. Petraeus is going to be back reporting in September. I'd like to hear what he has to say, unless there is some surprise in the interim.''

I worked at a major corporation for a very long time, as a vice president, a senior vice president, a president and a ceo. I read Romney's statement and I can tell you that I didn't hear a leader; I heard the worst kind of contemptible corporate hack, eager to get out and play golf and leave the tough decisions to someone else so his own fingerprints would never be on them-- although with the wiggle room necessary in there so he can rush in and claim the credit if things go well.

HOMOPHOBIA WILL SAVE BLUE AMERICA DONORS SOME MONEY THIS YEAR: 40 DEMOCRATS REUNITE WITH VIRGIL GOODE TO BURY THE HATCHET-- IN THE BACKS OF GAY PEOPLE

One's a real American and one is a KKK terrorist. Wanna guess?

Yesterday we wondered whether the one-man Executive Department and his mouthy wife would stand by silently while their new grandson, David Samuel Cheney, was legislated into second-class citizenship. Today a super-reactionary, hysterically homophobic, ex-Democrat Virgil Goode introduced a blatantly anti-gay amendment to the DC Appropriations Bill so that Bush could pacify his-- and Goode's-- most extremist, hate-filled base.

I wasn't that worried because the Democrats certainly had the votes to stop it. I mean, sure there are the rabid gay-haters in the Democratic caucus, who always vote to penalize gay men and women-- vicious hate-mongering jerks like Jim Marshall (GA), John Barrow (GA), David Scott (GA), Gene Taylor (MS), Colin Peterson (MN), Dan Boren (OK), Chris Carney (PA), Dan Lipinski (IL), John Salazar (CO)... you know the Democratic Gay Hater Caucus, member's whose existence in Congress endangers gay people's lives and families. But with a dozen Republicans abandoning their bigoted leaders-- though not GOP closet queens like Patrick McHenry, David Dreier and Jim McCrery-- I figured Speaker Pelosi would have this well in hand.

But then something very strange happened. The Democratic leadership either was asleep at the wheel or just didn't give a crap as 40 Democrats showed their true gay-bashing colors. It passed by 6 votes. I hope gays in West Palm Beach, Florida get the message that their new quasi-Democratic congressman, Tim Mahoney (a vile homophobe) just voted to make Washington DC gays second class citizens. And the other reactionary that Rahm Emanuel talked into calling himself a Democrat and then running for Congress-- Heath Shuler (NC)-- also voted with the Republicans. So did Zach Space (OH); we could have kept Bob Ney and had the same result. Other freshmen voting the bigotry line: Boyda (KS), Ellsworth (IN), Donnelly (IN), Lampson (TX), and, of course, Carney (PA).

Let me go back to something I said yesterday about never donating to the DCCC, who will funnel your contributions to gay haters like Chris Carney, John Barrow and Jim Marshall (all of whom are on the skids because progressives are unenthusiastic about their Republican-lite votes, not just on this but on all important issues). Donate to progressives directly and thru trustworthy progressive groups like Blue America. Make sure your money goes to Democrats with Democratic values, not to Democrats with reactionary Republican values.

The whole list of Democratic traitors is up at AMERICAblog.

THE TANGLED WEB

-by Noah

Who needs conspiracy? Here's some interesting facts (for real) that drive JFK/CIA/Cuba conspiracy buffs into a frenzy:
1. Sam "Momo" Giancana was found dead in his kitchen the day before he was due to testify in front of the House Special Committee on Assassinations back around 1978. A circle of bullet holes placed none too discreetly around the corpse's mouth. Giancana and JFK were bangin' the same babe, Judith Exner. I never found her that appealing.
2. The financial interests that the mob wanted back in Cuba were the Havana casinos, the profits of which they enjoyed under Batista. Las Vegas wasn't enough. JFK wouldn't invade Cuba again after his agreement with Nikita over the missile crises. That made the right-wingnut crowd also hopping, foaming-at-the-mouth mad at JFK. Oh, and the mob detested JFK's bro for some reason. Something to do with trucks.
3. After he lost his campaign for the governorship of California in 1962, one of our country's biggest madmen, Richard Nixon, worked for Robert Maheu. He was essentially his bagman. Maheu worked for Howard Hughes in Las Vegas most of his adult life. Nixon got his reward 6 years later.
4. Nixon was meeting with Texas oilman Jim Brannen, on behalf of Maheu, in the DalTex building (on Dealey Plaza) in Dallas on 11/22/63. He left later that morning. Nixon carried a briefcase into and out of the DalTex building. It wasn’t weighed either time.
5. E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis (plumbers, later arrested in the Watergate break-in) have also been reported multiple times as having been in Dallas that day. Hunt’s alibis were blown to smithereens decades ago and Hunt's own kids once confronted him about their suspicions. What does your daddy do?                                   
6. Hunt was CIA. So was Sturgis; both had connections to the mob, the CIA, and Cuban exile groups. Oswald traveled in some of the same circles. You ever hear of six degrees of separation? Try two. Some say Sturgis was one of the shooters but there is little evidence and it is more likely that the actual shooters were brought in from out of the country by the mob, if the mob was involved, of course. That's just how they operate. "Sure, Lee, you can fire off a few rounds, too".
7. When arrested at The Watergate in June of 1972, Hunt and Sturgis were working for CREEP. It really was called that. Committee to Re-Elect the President. You can’t say these guys didn’t have a sense of humor. And, of course, it’s gotta just be a big fat coincidence that several lawyers defending players in the Watergate cover up also worked for the suspect Warren Commission ten years earlier.
8. CIA Caribbean station chief at the time of the JFK murder was George H. W. Bush, although the CIA has always claimed that it was "another George Bush". You can’t make this stuff up. Reality is what they say it is, or so they think. Kinda like Daddy Bush’s son Dubya saying amnesty means paying a price for your transgressions. They don’t lie. They just re-define.
9. The "troop" ships for the Cuban exiles in the original Bay of Pigs operation were supplied by a dummy oil company in Houston, set up for the CIA by George H. W. Bush.
10. Nixon's Watergate tapes reveal him to be very concerned about anyone talking about "the Bay of Pigs", saying that "It would be very bad to have this fellow Hunt… he knows too much". Nixon’s aide H. R. Haldeman, in his memoirs backs this up. Nixon had once told his other chief aide, John Ehrlichman, "this fellow Hunt… will uncover a lot of things… you open that scab… this involves the Cubans, Hunt and a lot of hanky panky", saying in effect that the Bay Of Pigs" and Dallas were one in the same, intertwined. THAT just may have been his biggest concern about the Watergate investigations.
11. John Ehrlichman once wrote a novel called "The Company". It’s about a President and a CIA head who are blackmailing each other over a past assassination plot that had CIA involvement. Hey, write what ya know!
12. OJ did it. Warning: This post will self-destruct in 30 seconds.

THIS IS WHAT CONSERVATIVES WANT TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT? OF THE UNITED STATES? GET A GOOD LOOK

Apparently Fred Thompson is more than just a corrupt, Inside the Beltway lobbyist and TV actor. He's also a totally mixed up, shook up girl. What a mess! Pretty soon people are going to start wishing McCain hadn't self-destructed so fast-- or asking what exactly is so crazy about a flip-floppin', varmint huntin' Mormon.



And women's right to choice isn't the only thing Freddy is confused about. He's running hither and thither all over America trying to convince Republicans he's the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan. They were both actors. And like Reagan, as Thompson started losing his mind he started mixing up plots in movies to plots presidents could play at. He was frightening easily frightened South Carolina Republicans yesterday with tales of Cuban illegal immigrants-- oh, that's going to go over well in Florida-- sneaking suitcase atomic weapons into Charleston. "We're living in the era of the suitcase bomb," he warned the autograph seekers and imbeciles who ate up every word. But, as the Center For American Progress showed today, it's not the era of suitcase bombs-- unless you mean the TV era. These things only exist in Hollywood studios and in the small minds of people like Freddy Dalton Thompson.

GUEST POST FROM JOHNNY WENDELL, WHO MAKES THINGS SOUND SO EASY TO UNDERSTAND

I find Mr Bush's and Mr Cheney's evasions amusing if disgusting. But they do pale compared to the defenses offered by their admirers like Sen. Pat Roberts for example, who tell us that our rights are useless if we're dead (disregarding original patriot Patrick Henry among others).
 
They get away with this because we're at war with a shadowy "enemy", one that isn't generally regarded as white and Christian for the most part. Because they'd like us to tribalize ourselves and see "terrorists" as non-white "others", I'd like to propose a paradigm that just might enlighten them a little and shatter this illusion.
 
To wit:
 
Many Irish and Italian Catholic priests have been charged with child sexual abuse, yes? In Massachusetts and Los Angeles and Philadelphia and Newport KY, as examples. So, if you know any Irish/Italian Catholics, they probably know a little about this, being of the same ethnic, geographicaland religious background. Why risk that they don't?
 
Therefore, according to the same logic that the Right applies to Cheney and to the administration's policies on torture, rendition and suspension of Habeas, they should be rounded up, wiretapped without warrants and imprisoned indefinately without facing their accusers, because child predation is a serious crime-- much as "terrorism" is--- you're talking about the life of a defenseless child here.
 
We have to use every resource here. Never mind that if these people had any actual contact with a priest that might yield information, it could be obtained by warrant and that in America, one is presumed innocent. All irrelevant-- because pedophilia is a horrible, brutal crime and must be wiped out. Ergo, the POSSIBLE association of any Catholic to a pedo-priest means said Catholic's rights are superceded by the need to end pedophilia.
 
Wonder how Sean Hannity's fan "Trish in Mineola" would think of an indefinate stay in Gitmo?
 
When the proverbial shoe is on the other foot, they can't walk in them.
 
Have a nice day.


Johnny Wendell, KTLK talk host, aka Johnny Angel, writer, musician, actor, loving father.

CHRIS VAN HOLLEN HAS SOME FIREWORKS PLANNED FOR A GAGGLE OF ESPECIALLY BAD REPUBLICANS

Today the DCCC announced they will be targeting 14 Republican districts with radio ads, viral Internet videos and informational phone banking in a 5 day period centered on the 4th of July holiday. "Next week, Republicans are going home to talk up their support for our nation’s troops and veterans. But, their constituents deserve to know that the Republican record on veterans is all talk and no action," said Chairman Chris Van Hollen. "America’s troops and veterans deserve more than patriotic speeches this Independence Day."

The congressmen targeted are all looking vulnerable and shaky in their re-election hopes. In other words, the DCCC isn't going after congressmen with horrible records in deeply red low-information districts where it isn't likely to do any good. They're targeting Republican incumbents with bad records in toss-up and blue-leaning districts. Radio spots will run in districts misrepresented by:
Sam Graves (MO)
Shelley Moore Capito (WV)
Robin Hayes (NC)
Joe Knollenberg (MI)
Jon Porter (NV)
Jim Walsh (NY)
Don Young (AK)

And web videos, e-mail campaigns and phone banking will be deployed targeting:
Thelma Drake (VA)
Mark Kirk (IL)
Randy Kuhl (NY)
Heather Wilson (NM)
Marilyn Musgrave (CO)
Phil English (PA)
Mike Ferguson (NJ)

The DCCC is as likely to help a war-supporting, reactionary, corrupt hack-- like John Barrow, Gene Taylor, Jim Marshall, etc-- as they are to support a fighting progressive. So, if you want to make sure your donations go to Democrats who embody progressive values and ideals never donate to the DCCC or DSCC. Always donate directly to candidates of your choice or through organizations you trust to do the research. I hope Blue America, the Act Blue pages operated by this blog, is one of those organizations. We very much agree with the DCCC's choice of CO-04 and NY-29, districts where Angie Paccione and Eric Massa will make excellent representatives.

Right now, our #1 priority is making sure true progressives like Donna Edwards (MD-04), Jamie Eldridge (MA-05), John Laesch (IL-14) and Victoria Wulsin (OH-02) are the Democratic candidates in their respective districts instead of corporate insider politicians who will represent interests at odds with those of workers and consumers.

There are two birthdays we're celebrating at DWT today. One is for a candidate we admire and respect: Donna Edwards and one is for ActBlue, the wonderful organization that has helped Democrats collect over $24,000,000 in three years. You can wish them a collective Happy Birthday with us by donating to Donna's campaign.

CRAZY WILD DAY-- FROM BUSH TO COULTER TO HILLARY

What a day! Bush's reactionary Supreme Court struck down at least basic underpinnings of school integration policies in places since 1954. Bush is back to a "Bring It On" posture regarding the subpoenas in the illegal wiretaps controversy. This is sure to wind up in the Supreme Court as a separation of powers case-- i.e.- Bush and Cheney not wanting to be separated from the powers they seized.

Rahm Emanuel's assault on Cheney's lair seems to be taking off, although cranky Republican nutcase Ralph Regula asked in Cheney would be forced to work out of a "Katrina trailer" if the Democrats defund his office. Smart to remind people of one of the Republicans' most disastrous failures-- and I think most Americans would prefer to see Cheney not working and in a cell rather than an office or a trailer.

The Republican philosophy of government continues to undermine the health and safety of all Americans as Miss McConnell's (R-KY) Chinese business partners flood America with poisoned toothpaste and poisoned food (and not just for Fido anymore), while the FDA sits around with their thumbs up their asses.

And even Fox is reporting lowest ever polling numbers on their failed president, while Republican postergirl Ann Coulter publicly melts down so that the whole country can see what these people are really, at their core, all about.

Meanwhile, the most reactionary elements of the GOP coalition, lead by bigots and nativists like Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Jeff Sessions (R-AL), drove a silver stake through the heart of Bush's immigration reform legislation, making it completely clear to anyone paying attention that the only way this problem will ever be dealt with seriously is to replace at least half a dozen Republican senators and another 30-40 Republican House members and elect a Democrat-- any Democrat, even someone as corporately-oriented as Clinton-- to the presidency.

And speaking of Hillary, my pal Matt sent me an hilarious video of Hill with her latest song theme contest, something that will hopefully help you get your mind off this awful day:

BUSH FAILS TO GET HIS EXTREMIST PARTY BEHIND HIS IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION

It's over. Bush didn't have the clout with his own party's extreme right to keep them from sabotaging his immigration package. The bill was defeated this morning 53-46. They needed 60 votes to keep it from falling under the obstructionist tactics the GOP senators have perfected to keep the Democrats from passing important legislation. Although there were a small handful of thoughtful progressives who opposed the bill for principled reasons, the vast majority of the no votes came from KKK Know Nothings, xenophobes, nativists. and gutless wonders with no convictions or backbone.

The only Republicans Bush could muster were Robert Bennett (UT), Larry Craig (ID), Lindsey Graham (SC, the senator most likely to lose his seat over this), Chuck Hagel (NE), Jon Kyl (AZ), Trent Lott (MS), Richard Lugar (IN), Mel Martinez (FL), John McCain (AZ), Olympia Snowe (ME), and Arlen Specter (PA). The most electorally vulnerable Republicans were too afraid to vote yes, knowing that their status as "endangered" means they can't afford to lose any extremists from the GOP base. Rubber stamp regulars Bush counted on but who were too scared to vote with him today were:
Susan Collins (ME)
John Warner (VA)
stoner Norm Coleman (MN)
Saxby Chamberpot (GA)
Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (NM)
Gordon Smith (OR)
Miss McConnell (KY)

While McCain was desperately running around the country trying to save his floundering, moribund campaign for the worthless GOP presidential nomination, Ted Kennedy has been working diligently to pass the flawed immigration bill. I'm sure in his heart he knows it will be a much better bill in 2009 when the Senate isn't burdened with half a dozen of the cowardly Republicans who caused it to die today. There is every likelihood that while Coleman goes back to smoking pot all day, Collins (ME), Sununu (NH), Cornyn (TX), Warner (VA), Domenici (NM) and Smith (OR) will all be working (officially) as lobbyists. Here's what Kennedy had to say today after the bill went down to defeat:

It is now clear that we are not going to complete our work on immigration reform.  That is enormously disappointing for Congress and for the country. 

But we will be back, and we will prevail. The American people sent us here to act on our most urgent problems, and they will not accept inaction.   

I have seen this happen time and time again. America always finds a way to solve its problems, expand its frontiers, and move closer to its ideals. It is not always easy, but it is the American way.     

I learned this first as a child at my grandfather's knee. He taught me that in America, progress is always possible. His generation moved past the cruel signs in the windows saying "Irish Need Not Apply," and elected that son of an Irish immigrant as Mayor of Boston. 

I learned that lesson first hand when I came to the Senate in 1962. Our nation was finally recognizing that the work of civil rights had not ended with the Emancipation Proclamation, nor with the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education. It was up to Congress to take action.

The path forward has never been an easy one. There were filibusters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. But we did not give up, and we prevailed.

The same was true in our battles for fair housing, and for an end to discrimination against persons with disabilities. On immense issues like these, a minority in the Senate was often able to create stalemate and delay for a time. But they have never been able to stop the march of progress. 

Throughout all of those battles, we faced critics who loudly warned that we were changing America forever. 

In the end, they were right. Our history of civil rights legislation did change America forever. It made America stronger, fairer, and a better nation.

Immigration is another issue like that. We know the high price of continuing inaction. Raids and other enforcement actions will escalate, terrorizing our communities and businesses. 

The 12 million undocumented immigrants will soon be millions more. Sweatshops will grow, and undermine American workers and wages. State and local governments will take matters into their own hands and pass a maze of conflicting laws that hurt our country. We will have the kind of open border that is unacceptable in our post 9-11 world.

Immigration reform is an opportunity to be true to our ideals as a nation. Our Declaration of Independence announces that all of us are created equal. Today, we failed to live up to that declaration for millions of men and women who live, work, and worship beside us. But our ideals are too strong to be held back for long.

Martin Luther King had a dream that children would be judged solely by "the content of their character." Today, we failed to make that dream come true for the children of immigrants. But that dream will never die. It has the power to overcome the most bitter opposition.

I believe that we will soon succeed where we failed today, and that we will enact the kind of comprehensive reform that our ideals and national security demand. Soon, word will echo across the country about the consequences of today's vote.

But we are in this struggle for the long haul. Today's defeat will not stand. As we continue the battle, we will have ample inspiration in the lives of the immigrants all around us. 

From Jamestown to the Pilgrims to the Irish to today's workers, people have come to this country in search of opportunity. They have sought nothing more than the chance to work hard and bring a better life to themselves and their families. And they come to our country with their hearts and minds full of hope.

We will endure today's loss, and begin anew to build the kind of tough, fair and practical reform that is worthy of our shared history as immigrants and as Americans. 

Immigration reforms are always controversial. But Congress was created to muster political will to answer such challenges. Today we didn't, but tomorrow we will.

And Doofus has something to say too-- although less intelligently or coherently than Kennedy. Jesus, everything he touches turns to shit. Here is one lame duck:

A BAD DEMOCRAT SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME EXACT WAY AS A BAD REPUBLICAN-- MEET LIPINSKI, JR.

You may have heard me grousing about reactionary Democrat Daniel Lipinski (IL-03) from time to time. He's the Daley Machine's congressman from the South Side of Chicago. Lipinski inherited the district from his reactionary father in 2004, although he hadn't lived in Illinois for 15 years. Lipinksi Sr was the most conservative Democrat in the Illinois delegation; Jr may be worse-- opposed to progressive health care... homophobic, anti-Choice, he has a voting record that no representative from a solidly blue district should have. He won against meaningless Republican opposition with 77% of the vote last November. The only way to stop the Lipinski dynasty is with a primary. And this year there will be one, featuring Mark Pera.

A week from today, July 5, Mark, an environmental crimes prosecutor in the Cook County State's Attorney's Office and president of the Lyons Township School Board, will be speaking at an Edgewater/Rogers Park Democracy for America meeting. A DfA member describes the current occupant of the seat as someone who is

     •     anti-choice (has a 0% rating from Planned Parenthood and a 100% rating from the National Life to Right Committee)
     •     anti-stem cell research
     •     supported government intervention in the Terri Schaivo case
     •     supports a constitutional amendment against flag burning
     •     voted against a bill that would have set a withdrawal deadline in Iraq and voted for the Iraq war supplemental

Details of the meeting are here. If I were in Chicago next week, I'd be there. Knocking off Lipinski won't be easy, but if Pera is a fighter, it's worth giving him a hand. Many in Chicago will.

NETROOTS OUT-RAISED LIEBERMAN IN THE MAINE SENATE CAMPAIGN

The winner

This morning Congressional Quarterly published a story about the dueling fundraisers in Maine's contentious race for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by rubber stamp Republican and fake moderate Susan Collins. Collins, whose voting record mimics that of Joe Lieberman on important issues from Iraq to the confirmation of extreme right judicial activists, has made a career of talking one way and voting another. She is the first of what is expected to be several endorsements of rubber stamp Republicans by Lieberman who owes his continued presence in the Senate to the strenuous efforts of Bush, Cheney and Rove after he was defeated in last year's Democratic primary.

Lieberman's fundraiser for Collins brought together lots of K-Street prostitutes who love him for his consistent willingness to sell out his constituents' most basic interests. Collins' campaign claims that Lieberman helped her raise between $120,000 and $150,000. Between MoveOn and half a dozen blogs raising money for progressive Congressman Tom Allen, Lieberman's efforts were not just countered, but turned upside down. Grassroots and netroots contributions to Tom Allen last week out-raised Lieberman and Collins by between $100,000 and $120,000.

At Blue America, the fundraising arm of Firedoglake, Crooks & Liars, Digby and DWT, the announcement of Lieberman's fundraiser for Collins saw the 50 donors explode into 187. Blue America has brought in over $5,800 for Allen so far and intends to watch closely what sorts of activities Collins and Lieberman engage in between now and the 2008 election. Although Lieberman's assistance for Collins comes in big chunks from lobbyists and corporate management, the average online donation for Tom is $34. Many people donate $5 and $10 and these contributions add up quickly to counter the Insider impact on buying off representative government.


UPDATE: WHO ELSE WILL LIEBERMAN ENDORSE?

As my pal Jane pointed out this morning, "Collins could have raised this money in a variety of ways but there is no way the netroots could have raised this money if it wasn't for Lieberman's involvement. For every TV ad or flyer Collins bankrolls as a result of this, Allen can counter with two. The negative consequences for Collins are huge. She would have come out better if she had just written Lieberman a check and told him to stay home." Gee, I'm hoping he endorses his pal Sununu next.

WHEN IT'S TIME FOR A CONGRESSIONAL PAY RAISE, THERE ARE NO DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS-- JUST GREEDY INSIDER PIGS

Rahm, some guy, Steny and a somewhat disguised Blunt

I wonder how many Americans think Congress should get a $4,400 annual pay raise. Not me-- and judging by the low esteem with which all Americans of all political persuasions hold Congress, I feel safe to wager that almost as few Americans would vote for a pay increase as would claim to approve of Dick Cheney's role in the U.S. government for the last 7 years.

Last year there was no congressional pay raise because Democrats put their feet down and said until there was a rise in the minimum wage for American workers, they would vote against a pay raise. Yesterday Inside the Beltway power-mongers Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Roy Blunt (R-MO), two hideous K Street-walkers, worked together to make sure another million and a half dollars went into congressional salaries this year. Congressmen now make around $170,000 a year, quite a bit more than most Americans. How can they represent us?

On a 244-181 vote Wednesday, Democrats and Republicans alike killed a bid by Reps. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, and Lee Terry, R-Neb., to get a direct vote to block the cost of living allowance, which is automatically awarded unless lawmakers vote to block it. The Senate has not indicated when it will deal with a similar measure.

...The annual vote on the pay hike comes on an obscure procedural move-- instead of a direct up-or-down vote-- and Democratic and GOP leaders each delivered a majority of their members to shut off the move to block the pay hike

Hoyer and Blunt worked the floor together and Hoyer pressured Blunt to force more than a dozen Republicans  to switch their votes including one of the far right's biggest phonies, Mike Pence (R-IN), as well as creeps like Dan Burton (R-IN), Fred Upton (R-MI), Dave Camp (R-MI) and Vernon Ehlers (R-MI).

CAN THE TINY BIT OF DAYLIGHT BETWEEN SCALIA AND ROBERTS KEEP THE SUPREME COURT FROM TURNING BACK THE CLOCK ON SOCIAL JUSTICE BY FIFTY YEARS? NAH

Evil is as Evil does

This morning's NY Times makes a great deal about reading between the lines of supposed dischord between a sour old fascist who fears his own mortality will overtake him before he overturns the last vestiges of all the social justice that came from, and flowed after, the New Deal and a much younger, but no less fascist Chief Justice who feels he has plenty of time to work the poison they both plan to administer to our nation through the packed judicial system. "Openly overturning numerous precedents early in his tenure would invite criticism that the Roberts court has an agenda to 'radically shift American law,' said Thomas C. Goldstein, a student of the court who argues there often. The conservative alliance at the court may be fractious but not fragile, strong enough to withstand Justice Scalia’s 'tweaking and needling,' as Prof. Richard W. Garnett of Notre Dame Law School describes it."

In light of this I look with trepedation at what is likely to come out of the Court today. This isn't something anyone should blame on anyone but the cowardly and purile Democrats who voted to confirm Alito and, especially, Roberts. As we explained yesterday, there are six Democrats who saddled us with this Supreme Court who are up for re-election next year: hideously reactionary Max Baucus (MT), Tim Johnson (SD), Mary Landrieu (LA), Carl Levin (MI), Mark Pryor (AR) and Jay Rockefeller (WV). I wouldn't vote for any of them. And on the Republican side... well they all enthusiastically supported the confirmations of Roberts and Alito. But there are 5 who are in electoral trouble and have been making the case in their home states that they are moderates and independents. None of them are; voting for these two radical right extremists should prove that. The 5 vulnerable Republicans who can be made to pay for the outrages of the Court are
John Sununu (NH)
Joe Lieberman's Susan Collins (ME)
Norm Coleman (MN)
Gordon Smith (OR)
Chuck Hagel (NE)

Now, about that trepedation I mentioned above. SCOTUSBlog has what to watch for. There is some talk about the conservative majority overturning the anti-segregation decision, at least partially, made in Brown v Board of Education. That would put a smile on Scalia's sour face. I wonder how Carl Levin will think about it. It would never have happened without him. Mary Landrieu is hoping African-American absentee voters displaced by Katrina will save her ass next year in the Senate race most likely to see a switch from Democrat (of sorts) to Republican. Any African-American who votes for Mary Landrieu deserves exactly what they get.


UPDATE: AND ALITO? ICING ON THE NEO-FASCIST CAKE

No one ever imagined Alito was going to be anything other than what he always was: a right wing thug with an agenda. He fits right in with Scalia, Thomas and Roberts. "Alito's vote will be key today if the court announces what could be a landmark decision about whether public school districts may consider an individual student's race when making assignments to achieve diverse school populations. 'There's no question that Justice Alito is more conservative than Justice O'Connor; there's no question that his replacement of Justice O'Connor moves the court to the right,' Washington lawyer Roy T. Englert, a frequent Supreme Court practitioner, said yesterday during a forum at the Washington Legal Foundation."


APARTHEID? IN AMERICA? AGAIN?

I know I have been saying for the last week that we had to expect it but I'm still in shock. My friend Adam put up a piece at Daily Kos that starts dealing with the ramifications of the hateful, racist 5-4 decision. I expect we'll be hearing from all the Democrats running for president. I would also like to hear from all the Democrats who voted to confirm Alitio and Roberts. Here's what Hillary, who voted against both of these catastrophic nominations, had to say today:

Today, the Court turned its back on the promise of Brown vs. Board of Education that students of different racial backgrounds deserve an opportunity to attend school together. At a time when our nation's schools are increasingly resegregating, we should be championing local efforts to pursue integration and reduce racial inequities in schools.

On the eve of the 50th anniversary of the valiant struggle to integrate Little Rock Central High School, let us remember the millions who marched, fought and even paid the ultimate price to help ensure every child in America has an opportunity to attend diverse, high-quality schools.

These decisions take away the right of local communities to ensure that all students benefit from racially diverse classrooms. Recent evidence shows that integrated schools promote minority academic achievement, and can help close the achievement gap.

Once again, the Roberts Court has shown its willingness to erode core constitutional guarantees. It is a set back for all of us who are on the long march toward racial equality and the building of a stronger more unified America. As President, I will fight to restore Brown's promise and create an education system where all children have an equal chance to learn and excel together.

UPDATE: THE DISGRACE OF THE ROBERTS COURT-- AND THE DISGRACE OF DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED TO CONFIRM HIM

Tomorrow's NY Times decries the hideous Republican 5-4 ruling in an editorial called Resegregation Now. "The Supreme Court ruled 53 years ago in Brown v. Board of Education that segregated education is inherently unequal, and it ordered the nation’s schools to integrate. Today, the court switched sides and told two cities that they cannot take modest steps to bring public school students of different races together. It was a sad day for the court and for the ideal of racial equality."

Today, the court’s radical new majority turned its back on that proud tradition in a 5-4 ruling, written by Chief Justice John Roberts. It has been some time since the court, which has grown more conservative by the year, did much to compel local governments to promote racial integration. But now it is moving in reverse, broadly ordering the public schools to become more segregated.

...In an eloquent dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer explained just how sharp a break the decision is with history. The Supreme Court has often ordered schools to use race-conscious remedies, and it has unanimously held that deciding to make assignments based on race “to prepare students to live in a pluralistic society” is “within the broad discretionary powers of school authorities.”

Chief Justice Roberts, who assured the Senate at his confirmation hearings that he respected precedent, and Brown in particular, eagerly set these precedents aside. The right wing of the court also tossed aside two other principles they claim to hold dear. Their campaign for “federalism,” or scaling back federal power so states and localities have more authority, argued for upholding the Seattle and Louisville programs. So did their supposed opposition to “judicial activism.” This decision is the height of activism: federal judges relying on the Constitution to tell elected local officials what to do.

So Roberts lied to get the job. Is there any way to remove him?

NO ONE LIKES BUSH OVERSEAS AND FOR SOME REASON NOW THEY'RE NOT TOO KEEN ON THE REST OF US EITHER

It's safer to carry a Canadian one

At 15 I left home and hitchhiked to Florida to visit my grandparents in Miami Beach for Pessach. I was arrested on the New Jersey State Turnpike an hour after I set out and they made my (angry) father come pick me up. He gave me the bus fare so I could continue my trip. A couple years later I hitched to California. A few years later I flew to Europe, bought a VW van and drove to India. I spent over six years overseas, two of them in places like Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan... places where Americans were once feted and adored and are now... no longer quite so welcome. In fact, as recently as the 90's America was clearly the most beloved country in the world and an American passport was always a badge of honor. With the assumption of power by George Bush and the violent and aggressive clique of fascists around him that ended and was turned on its head.

According to tomorrow's Washington Post anti-Americanism has gotten much deeper. I notice it all the time in my travels these days. Everyone who travels does. If you look at my travel blog, AroundTheWorldBlog, it's a topic I often talk about. I didn't need the Post to tell me things have worsened, dramatically, under Bush. Right now I'm planning a long trip to India and I'm being less carefree about where I'm going and what arrangements I make.

The image of the United States has "plummeted" in many parts of the world, with mounting distrust of President Bush and U.S. foreign policy expressed not only in Muslim countries but also among traditional allies, according to a survey of global attitudes released yesterday.

...Respondents harshly criticized the United States for acting without taking the views of other countries into consideration. Support was strong for a U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq, and there was "considerable" opposition among those surveyed to U.S. and NATO operations in Afghanistan... Favorable views of the United States among Pakistanis dropped to just 15 percent, and among Turks to 9 percent.

After the theft of the 2004 election Europeans gave up on Americans at cowards who had been bought off and given in to tyranny. We are looked out by many Europeans as a people who didn't have the backbone to stand up to those who wrecked our democracy, as a people unwilling to risk our creature comforts-- or anything else-- in the face of the blatant destruction of our Constitution. Or maybe it's just the type of Europeans I hang around with.


UPDATE: WHO SHOULD THE GOOD LORD TAKE FIRST-- BUSH OR CASTRO?

You could ask that question almost anywhere in the world and get the same answer-- a four letter word starting with B. But that very same B. was addressing cadets at the Naval War College in Newport today and he got lots of applause and yucks when he said, "One day, the good Lord will take Fidel Castro away."

Castro, a man with some faults, like all of us, has been granted a long life by the Good Lord. He has protected his country from American corporate and military imperialism since the 60s. He has a great deal to be proud of and is one of the most admired men on earth. Bush, as everyone knows, is one of the most hated and reviled men on earth and certainly the worst president of the United States in history.

McCAIN'S CANDIDACY WHEEZING AND LIFELESS-- NOT UNLIKE HIS POLITICAL PARTY

McCain should never have been the front-runner. He was always too old, too Manchurian, too corrupt, too right-wing, too confused, and, without the kind of support inside the GOP that would allow him to exploit his undeserved reputation as a moderate and an independent among low-information voters. Will he be the first of the 10 (or 11) elderly, white dwarves to pull out of the GOP presidential race? Well, donors certainly aren't giving him any money, despite the fact that he's spending more time chasing dough and promising the world than all the other candidates combined.

Someone trying to win a general election, by appealing to independent voters and moderates, is up against an almost impossible task in winning the extremist-dominated GOP nomination process-- unless, of course, they have no bedrock values or scruples whatsoever like, for example, a certain Mormon candidate whose name usually follows the word "flop." McCain was just overwhelmed by the balancing act and most observers think he'll be out of the race before the end of the year. Of course, being generally perceived as the "Bush candidate" isn't exactly helpful at this moment either.

I bet McCain wishes he had switched parties when he had a chance in 2004. Here is how he's being treated by his party after all those years and years of service:



And that doesn't even get into the fact that he's running for the nomination of a party seen by more and more Americans that not only governed abymally when they had the chance but is now nothing but the Grand Obstructionist Party.

• Senate Republicans have obstructed almost every bill in the Senate-- even ones with wide bipartisan support.
• So far, in the first half of the first session of the 110th Congress, there have been THIRTEEN cloture votes on motions to proceed - each one wasting days of Senate time.  (110th Congress, Roll Call Votes #44, 51, 53, 74, 129, 132, 133, 162, 173, 207, 208, 227, and 228)
• In comparison, in the first sessions of the 108th and 109th Congresses combined, there were a total of FOUR cloture votes on motions to proceed.


EIGHT times Republican obstruction tactics slowed critical legislation

• Fulfilling the 9/11 Commission Recommendations (Passed 97-0, Roll Call Vote #53)
• Improving security at our courts ( Passed 93-3, Roll Call Vote #133)
• Water Resources Development Act (Passed 89-7, Roll Call Vote #162)
• A joint resolution to revise U.S. policy in Iraq (Passed 89-9, Roll Call Vote, #74)
• Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Passed 69-23, Roll Call Vote #173)
• Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Passed 64-35, Roll Call Vote #228)
• CLEAN Energy Act ( Passed 91-0, Roll Call Vote #208)
• Funding for the Intelligence Community (Passed 94-3, Roll Call Vote #129) 


FOUR times Republicans blocked legislation from being debated

• Senate Republicans blocked raising the minimum wage. (54-43, Roll Call Vote #23)
• Senate Republicans blocked ethics reforms (Rejected 51-46, Roll Call Vote #16)
• Senate Republicans blocked comprehensive immigration reform (Rejected 45-50, Roll Call Vote #206)
• Senate Republicans blocked funding for renewable energy (Rejected 57-36, Roll Call Vote #223)


FOUR times Republicans stopped bills from reaching a vote

• Senate Republicans blocked funding for the intelligence community.  ( Rejected 41-40, Roll Call Vote #130)
• Senate Republicans blocked raising the minimum wage. (54-43, Roll Call Vote #23)
• Senate Republicans blocked ethics reforms (Rejected 51-46, Roll Call Vote #16)
• Senate Republicans blocked funding for renewable energy (Rejected 57-36, Roll Call Vote #223)


TWICE Republicans blocked bills from going to conference

• Senate Republicans blocked appointing conferees on the 9/11 Commission Recommendations (6/26/07)
• Senate Republicans blocked appointing conferees on ethics reform ( 6/26/07)

FIRST OF THE KILLER AMENDMENTS TO IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION IS KILLED

dual useage: McCain on the hustings and the "Grand Compromise"

Texas Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison's reactionary and xenophobic immigration amendment was defeated today, 53-45. Had it passed, it would have required immigrants to return to their home countries before they could obtain even temporary legal status, and was widely viewed as unworkable.

The vote came as the Senate began to consider a score of amendments to a bill that would bring about the biggest overhaul in immigration policy in more than 20 years. The amendment that was defeated was sponsored by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, and would have required adult illegal immigrants to leave the United States within two years if they wanted to apply for legal status in the form of “Z visas.”

There were five Democrats who voted with the anti-Hispanic Republicans on this:
Max Baucus (MT)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Jay Rockefeller (WV)
Jon Tester (MT)

With McCain out making like a truffle-sniffing pig on the campaign trail-- apparently there is no legislation that means anything to this grasping power-monger-- 8 Republicans joined the 43 Democrats to keep this hateful amendment out of the legislation:
Larry Craig (ID), who's probably retiring anyway-- having been caught in a public toilet having sex with another man.
Lindsey Graham (SC)... a trend seems to be developing here
Chuck Hagel (NE), probably retiring
Jon Kyl (AZ), just re-elected for 6 years
Richard Lugar (IN), needs to mend some Bush fences for some reason
Mel Martinez (FL), um...
Arlen Specter (PA), could always switch parties if someone doesn't like what he does
John Warner (VA), retiring

I'm enjoying a fantastic read these days, Kenneth Ackerman's brilliantly written YOUNG J. EDGAR: HOOVER, THE RED SCARE, AND THE ASSAULT ON CIVIL LIBERTIES. The title gives a lot away, but not the immigration piece. And that was a big piece. The Know Nothing traditions in our country have been long and powerfully rooted-- and always wrong. When Hoover's despicable career was getting started the victims of these reactionary bigots weren't from Mexico or Central America; they were Italians, Eastern Europeans, Russians and, more than anyone else, Jews. The contemporary descriptions that Ackerman has dug up could easily be used by Tom Tancredo, Jeff Sessions and Jim DeMint to push their current racist agenda, just substituting the vile references to Jews with the vile pictures they're painting of Latin Americans. It makes me want to puke to see Claire McCaskill and Jon Tester, two newly elected Democrats in the Senate, buying into this racist claptrap. I expect this from Max Baucus, but not from these two. The irony of Kit Bond (R-MO) standing up for decency and fairness while McCaskill (D-MO) plays to the sentiments of the KKK is truly disgusting.

Oh, and do take a look at this video. I mean, I wouldn't vote for Lindsey Graham either, but for a completely different set of reasons:



More of the same for poor Lindsey, who really just wants to be a Cabinet Secretary for McCain anyway. The other Deep South Senator most associated with Bush's pro-corporate immigration bill so reviled by the Know Nothings is Saxby Chamberpot of Georgia. But a new Republican poll (Strategic Vision) shows he may be weathering it. Although his voter approval rating is only 50%, he's backed away from supporting Bush on this and is trying to butter up the far right extremists who booed him at the Georgia Republican Party convention last month. 59% of Georgians say they oppose the immigration bill (and 51% disapprove of Bush in general).


UPDATE: SAYONARA IMMIGRATION BILL

Bush's immigration package looks cooked to me. It did manage to overcome a bunch of hurdles today and stay alive, but with Republican rubber stampers like Burr (NC), Stevens (AK), Gregg (NH) and Bond (MO) succumbing to intense pressure from the extreme Know Nothing edge of the GOP, it isn't likely to last out tomorrow.

Tomorrow morning the bill "faces a make-or-break vote... when senators will decide whether to cut off debate and move to a final vote." It needs 60 votes and it may be close but it's not going to happen unless Bush really digs deep and see if he has any of that vaunted political capital left that he was bragging about when he tried to kill Social Security. "Top legislative aides in both parties predicted today's vote would be very close but would fall short of keeping the proposal alive. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), a key opponent, crowed last night that 'they tried to railroad this through today, but we derailed the train.' Another opponent, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said, 'I would say to my colleagues: Let's end this thing.'"

And it looks like some key Democrats-- particularly freshmen McCaskill, Webb and Tester-- seem to agree with him. Tomorrow's NY Times explains why.

"I like to keep my word,” said Ms. McCaskill, part of a triad of moderate Democratic freshmen balking at the proposed immigration overhaul and complicating efforts by President Bush and Senate leaders to pass it this week.

Her compatriots in opposition are Senators Jim Webb of Virginia and Jon Tester of Montana. All three represent Republican-leaning states and are breaking with their leadership and most of their Democratic colleagues on the legislation, whose fate in the Senate could be determined on Thursday after a day of votes on amendments left the outcome up in the air on Wednesday.

The Republican Party has been deeply split by its differences over immigration. But Democrats have their own fault lines, and the opposition from Ms. McCaskill, Mr. Tester, Mr. Webb and eight or so other Democrats could be critical in determining the outcome.
Unlike some veteran liberal Democrats who say the measure would be too harsh on illegal immigrants or would cost some American workers their jobs, the three freshmen are lined up against it for much the same reason as its Republican opponents: that it would not do enough to stop the flow of illegal immigrants across the border.

GOP HOUSE CAUCUS WANTS TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT: THEY'RE MUCH MORE BIGOTED, XENOPHOBIC & CRAZY THAN THE SENATE REPUGS

Michigan's Know Nothing Congressman Pete Hoekstra, an immigrant who favors pulling up the ladder

Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) is probably best known for the abysmal job he did protecting the nation's security as the failed chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He's a right-wing fanatic and total rubber stamp loon, the original kook who annoiunced that weapons of mass destruction had been located in Iraq (after seeing satellite pictures of a pomegranate juice dispenser) and who failed to follow up on the proof that his colleague and close friend, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, a member of his committee, was selling intelligence information to the highest bidders.

Although Cunningham is no longer on the committee and no longer a congressman and in fact, is now rotting in prison, Hoekstra was never charged with any crimes in the case and it was all hushed up. But there's more to Pete Hoekstra than abetting treason. He's also a xenophobic and racist extremist. This morning's Hill carries a story about Hoekstra's latest foray into the kind of viciously divisive politics he is famous for. He introduced a resolution at the House Republican Conference that disapproves of the Senate's action on Bush's immigration bill. Never having veered away from his slavish rubber stamp posture, "Hoekstra said that while he preferred not to break with the president, the language and content of the Senate bill compelled him to vocalize his opposition."

His resolution passed the House Republican Conference by a large margin, despite the fact the Senate bill’s language has yet to be finalized.

A spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he has very serious concerns about the Senate bill.

During the discussion of the measure yesterday morning, LaHood attempted to block the Hoekstra resolution but was defeated soundly by a vote of about 114-23, according to sources familiar with the meeting.

According to a source, the failure of the LaHood motion prompted Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), a supporter of the Senate bill, to say that the Hoekstra resolution “demeans the House.”

Yet Flake is in the minority in his conference in his support for the measure; 100 Republicans have already joined the House Immigration Reform Caucus, a fervent anti-amnesty group.

“There’s growing momentum on the House side to have our voices registered on the Senate immigration bill,” Hoekstra said during a press conference yesterday.

Hoekstra said the amnesty provision, no matter how strict the language, was a deal-breaker for most House Republicans.

“That’s why the fundamental bill has no credibility, and basically what we are saying today is it is dead on arrival in the House, we can’t have secret deals, this has to go through committee, it has to go in pieces,” echoed Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.). “A comprehensive bill will not pass the House.”

“The Z visa is unenforceable,” Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif) said, referring to a provision of the Senate bill that would put those in the country illegally on the path to citizenship.

During a press conference yesterday, Bush did little to help his cause when he told reporters that the bill included amnesty. White House spokesman Tony Snow issued a press release shortly thereafter stating that the president had misspoken.

Nothing confuses and divides Republican officials as much as the immigration issue. The ones perceptive enough-- a tiny minority-- who have understood how the GOP ceded California to the Democrats in order to celebrate their bigotry and hatred, understand that a Know Nothing approach could be the long-term death knell for the party. The Know Nothings themselves, whose spokesmen are the Hate Talk radio hosts the GOP has cultivated and nurtured are clamoring for the rest of America to bring it on. Today's Wall Street Journal, who can always be counted on to put the interests of corporate business above all else, recognizes the "danger for Republicans" if the bill fails. They are not blinded by the commercial potential of stoking the raw rage and racism which has made the GOP radio hosts like Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reilly at al unable, or unwilling, to understand that "this is a classic case in which pandering to the base will harm the GOP overall."

That's true most immediately for Presidential hopefuls like Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson, who continue to assail the bill as "amnesty." No doubt this gets applause in some Republican precincts. But in the near term, meaning through 2008, Republicans would be far better off helping President Bush and John McCain pass something that takes immigration off the table. If the issue remains central to the 2008 debate, it will divide the GOP and the media will play up the split. Given the passions that immigration evokes on the right in particular, the issue could easily drown out other domestic policy messages the candidates would prefer to run on.

The longer term danger is that the GOP is sending a message to Latinos that it doesn't want them in the party. And if that message sticks, Republicans could put themselves back in minority party status for a generation or more. Hispanics are the largest ethnic minority in the country, and their voting numbers continue to grow. Hispanics were estimated to be 8% of the electorate in 2006, compared with 6% in 2004 and 5.5% in 2000. Census data show that the number of Latino voters could rise to 10% or more by 2008. The demographic reality is that the GOP can't be a majority party with Anglo-Saxon votes alone.

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY'S WAR AGAINST GAY PEOPLE CONTINUES

Lynne smiles, Cheney tries, but the poor kid...

This morning my old pal Tommy was doing his commute from New Jersey to Manhattan and he decided to while away the time by calling me (at 7AM my time). As always, it was wonderful to hear from him. I got to know him many years ago as a singer/songwriter, when my boss signed him to our record label in the hope of seducing him. He failed in that attempt but was far happier when Tommy had a #1 song and a real recording career. "Boy band" careers, however, aren't actual careers and Tommy had the good sense to go to college, invest wisely and, eventually, marry his college sweetheart, the captain of the football team. Years later I hired him as an assistant in the promotion department and he worked his way up the ladder to become a hugely successful promotion vice president and is now an A&R man, helping young artists make their own musical dreams come true.

He and his husband have two young sons and live in the suburbs and they're the most positive, neighborly guys you're ever going to meet. Today Tommy was telling me that because of their expanding family they moved to a new house in the same town. And who lives next door? Five Roman Catholic priests who teach at the local Catholic college. For the first few days it was a little awkward until the priests figured out what was up and that the nanny wasn't anyone's wife. But now they love the kids and are friends of the family.

Soon after hearing from Tommy this morning, I got an e-mail from John Arovosis at AMERICAblog alerting me to Bush threatening another young gay family-- one with even better connections than Tommy's. This time Bush is taking out his base's bigotry on Mary Cheney, Heather Poe and Vice President Cheney's grandson, David Samuel Cheney. (Don't ask me why they didn't name him David Samuel Poe; these are Republicans so, obviously, out of their skulls.)

Bush says he will veto the DC Appropriations bill because the anti-gay bias in it has been excised. A great way to rally the base. John's got the full story at the link. And here's Tommy, many years ago, singing his biggest hit with his pals, New Kids on the Block, at a charity telethon.




UPDATE: GAY MARRIAGE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE VAST SWEEP OF SOCIAL EVOLUTION

Today's Baltimore Sun published a column by Thomas Schaller that puts gay marriage in social and political context. As one would expect from someone as perceptive and brilliant as Schaller, the column is dead on.

The movement for sexual orientation-based equality is part of a proud, progressive tradition that includes abolition, women's suffrage, the ending of child labor, racial integration of the armed forces, the civil rights movement and anti-miscegenation reforms.

Three patterns hallmark this long tradition: a defiant insistence by conservative doom-and-gloomers that the proposed reforms will undermine the fabric of American life; the inevitable rally by progressive and altruistic-minded Americans to the cause of expanding to others the protections they already enjoy; and, finally, widespread agreement a generation or so thereafter that conservative hysteria was not only misplaced, but America was stronger for having ignored their pinched, wrongheaded warnings.

Read the whole thing; it gets better.

YOUNG PEOPLE LEAN LEFT. IS THIS NEWS?

This morning's NY Times reports that a poll they did in conjunction with MTV and CBS News proves that young Americans are more likely than the general public to favor a government-run universal health care insurance system, an open-door policy on immigration and the legalization of gay marriage. I can't say any of that surprises me. Winston Churchill may be endlessly quotable but one of his best remembered aphorisms was:

"If you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart, and if you're not a conservative at 40, you have no head."

He was half right. Keep in mind that Churchill had a deep-seated aversion to democracy; he was an elitist and a right-wing bigot who is also famous for having said that "the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." The wealthy often share this aversion to the less wealthy.

Today's Times makes the point that young people are drifting away from the GOP. It doesn't explain why they aren't stampeding through the exits.

More than half of Americans ages 17 to 29 — 54 percent — say they intend to vote for a Democrat for president in 2008. They share with the public at large a negative view of President Bush, who has a 28 percent approval rating with this group, and of the Republican Party. They hold a markedly more positive view of Democrats than they do of Republicans.

Sensibly-- and confirming the inevitability of marriage equality-- 44% of young people (as opposed to 28% of the general population) believe same-sex couples have the right to marry. Similarly, 62% support a universal, government-sponsored national health care insurance program, while only 47% of the general public is smart enough to have figured that out yet. "And 30 percent said that 'Americans should always welcome new immigrants,' while 24 percent of the general public holds that view."

In one potential sign of shifting attitudes, respondents, by overwhelming margins, said they believed that the nation was prepared to elect as president a woman, a black person or someone who admitted to having used marijuana. But they said that they did not believe Americans would elect someone who had used cocaine or someone who was a Mormon... By a 52 to 36 majority, young Americans say that Democrats, rather than Republicans, come closer to sharing their moral values, while 58 percent said they had a favorable view of the Democratic Party, and 38 percent said they had a favorable view of Republicans.

This all makes sense although I wonder what would happen if they were introduced to a normal Mormon and not a power-mad, grasping monstrosity like Romney.

And when it comes to the current batch of presidential hopefuls? Well, they were asked if they are enthusiastic about any of them. They were enthusiastic about two: Obama (18%) and Hillary (17%). The only other who had any discernible support at all is Giuliani (4%) And 58% say they are paying close attention to the presidential campaign, far more than in the past.

CIA, MAFIA, CASTRO, JFK, GOP...

I hate conspiracy theories and conspiracy theory buffs. But in light of the CIA publishing-- being forced to pulish-- over 700 pages of documents, The Family Jewels, pertaining to, among other nefarious undertakings of our government, the plot to assasinate Cuban President Fidel Castro in 1960, does anyone think maybe we should get some competent investigators to look into who exactly did kill JFK?

The mass media hasn't exactly jumped all over this, but I found a report in the Chicago Tribune today, probably because of the Mafia connection. The report trivializes the attempted assasination of Castro (and the successful assasination of Congolese President Patrice Lumumba, the effects of which are still being felt today in that most unfortunate of countries).

Some disclosures, such as the CIA's ill-fated attempts to enlist Chicago Mafia boss Sam Giancana to arrange the assassination of Cuban leader Fidel Castro, by hiring someone to slip CIA-manufactured poison pills in Castro's "food or drink," have become the stuff of popular legend and even the subject of movies.

An aside to the plot against Castro was Giancana's concern that his then-companion, singer Phyllis McGuire of the McGuire Systers, was seeing comedian Dan Rowan on the side while both were appearing at the same Las Vegas hotel. Giancana persuaded the CIA to send one of its technicians to bug Rowan's hotel room, but the technician was surprised in the act and arrested.

The U.S. Justice Department signalled its intention to prosecute the technician and also Robert Maheu, the Las Vegas public relations executive who had served as liaison between the CIA and the Mafia, the CIA intervened and "at our request, the prosecution was dropped."

The papers describe the CIA's man to work with on the assasination of Castro as "the chieftain of the Cosa Nostra and the successor to Al Capone." The attempt failed but there are those who think it... inspired the assasination of JFK.

According to an account in the Guardian the plot to kill Castro started in 1960 because he was judged to be a "Soviet stooge."

The documents released yesterday describe how a CIA officer, Richard Bissell, approached the CIA's Office of Security to establish whether it had "assets that may assist in a sensitive mission requiring gangster-type action. The mission target was Fidel Castro."

The dossier continues: "Because of its extreme sensitivity, only a small group was made privy to the project. The DCI (Director of Central Intelligence Allen Welsh Dulles) was briefed and gave his approval."

Following the meeting with the Office of Security, Bissell employed a go-between, Robert Maheu, and asked him to make contact with "gangster elements." Maheu subsequently reported an approach to Johnny Roselli in Las Vegas. Roselli is described as "a high-ranking member of the 'syndicate' (who) controlled all the ice-making machines on the (Las Vegas) Strip and (who) undoubtedly had connections leading into the Cuban gambling interests."

The CIA is careful to cover its tracks. According to the dossier, Maheu told Roselli that he (Maheu) has been retained by international businesses suffering "heavy financial losses in Cuba as a result of Castro's action. They were convinced that Castro's removal was the answer to their problem and were willing to pay the price of $150,000 (£75,000) for its successful accomplishment."

Roselli was also told that the US government was not, and must not become aware of the operation.

Roselli in turn led the CIA to a friend, known as Sam Gold. In September 1960, Maheu was introduced to Gold and his associate, known as Joe. In a development that appears to underscore the amateurishness of the whole operation, Maheu subsequently accidentally spotted photographs of "Sam and Joe" in Parade magazine.

Gold was in fact Momo Salvatore Giancana, "the chieftain of Cosa Nostra (the mafia) and the successor to Al Capone." Joe was actually Santos Trafficante, Cosa Nostra boss of Cuban operations.

At a meeting at the Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami Beach, Gold/Giancana suggested that rather than try to shoot or blow up Mr Castro, "some type of potent pill that could be placed in Castro's food or drink would be much more effective."

He said a corrupt Cuban official, named as Juan Orta, who was in debt to the syndicate and had access to the Cuban leader, would carry out the poisoning. The CIA subsequently obtained and supplied "six pills of high lethal content" to Orta but after several weeks of abortive attempts, Orta demanded "out" of the operation.

Ah... today's Washington Post has a column on the story with an interesting ending I had forgotten about: "Roselli later told columnist Jack Anderson about the plot after the CIA refused to help him fight deportation. He disappeared shortly after testifying to the Church Committee. His body was later found in a 55-gallon oil drum near the coastline of North Miami Beach."

GOP LOOKS FOR REVENGE AGAINST REP. GILCHREST FOR OPPOSING IRAQ WAR AND FOR BEING SLIGHTLY MODERATE

Today's Moonie Times reports that Maryland's recently defeated Republican Governor Bob Ehrlich is surreptitiously supporting state Sen. Andrew Harris in an attempt to unseat Congressman Wayne Gilchrest next year. Gilchrest is viewed in right-wing GOP circles as a moderate and as slightly independent. Harris is a raving right wing loon and would be a total rubber stamp for the extremists who control the party.

Ehrlich's chief fundraiser, Richard E. Hug, has joined Mr. Harris' exploratory committee and cultivated donors for a Harris fundraiser last week in Baltimore that featured an appearance by Mr. Ehrlich.

After being soundly thrashed by then Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley (875,362 to 757,099), Ehrlich became a local hate-talk radio host for WBAL-AM where he is constantly pushing Harris' bid to unseat Gilchrest. Harris and Ehrlich are all worked up because Gilchrest opposes-- like the vast majority of Americans-- Bush's endless occupation of Iraq.

Gilchrest’s pro-environment stances have irritated Republicans since he was first elected in 1990. A wounded Vietnam War veteran, Gilchrest has sparked even greater ire recently with his decision to repudiate his 2002 vote supporting the war in Iraq. He was one of only two House Republicans-- North Carolina’s Walter Jones was the other-- to support the Democratic troop withdrawal plan.

Gilchrest, who is hated by the NRA and the Club for Growth, will be running for his 10th term. Democrat Frank Kratovil is running for the Eastern Shore first congressional district, which was gerrymandered to dump as many Maryland Republicans into one district as possible.

IF YOU THINK GIULIANI OR ROMNEY IS THE MOST DESPICABLE OF THE GOP PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFULS, YOU MAY NOT HAVE MET LOBBYIST FRED THOMPSON YET

Unidentified lady in striped jacket with two very dangerous men

A couple weeks ago, after bloggers started pointing out that Fred Thompson had spent two decades as a well-paid and thoroughly corrupt Inside the Beltway lobbyist, a hack from his campaign staff mentioned what an honorable profession lobbying is, He mentioned neither Jack Abramoff, another Republican lobbyist, currently in prison, nor Haiti's deposed president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, who was widely criticized for endorsing "necklacing," the gruesome practice of execution where gasoline-soaked tires are thrown over a person's neck and set ablaze.

Today Thompson, who never personally necklaced anyone as far as we know, decided to defend his lobbying past himself. He didn't mention the words "prostitute" or "whore" anywhere in his defense, although in an instance of classic Republican misdirection he claimed that "Nobody yet has pointed out any of my clients that didn't deserve representation."

Thompson, who likes to cast himself as a political outsider, earned more than $1 million lobbying the federal government for more than 20 years. He lobbied for a savings-and-loan deregulation bill that helped hasten the industry's collapse and a failed nuclear energy project that cost taxpayers more than a billion dollars.

Thomas Edsall dealt with Thompson forthrightly at HuffPo yesterday, which may have been what sparked his sudden need to talk about the issue.

If Fred Thompson is elected president, he will be the first federally registered lobbyist to become Commander in Chief. Since his days as top minority counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee, Thompson has collected over $1 million in lobbying fees. In return, he has provided exceptional access to those in power.

Thompson's prospective presidential bid stands out in another respect: No campaign has been so dominated by staffers and advisers who have worked on behalf of Philip Morris, one of the world's leading tobacco conglomerates and a leading force in promoting cigarette smoking.

Thompson's lobbying career demonstrates his striking skill in capitalizing on his own government service and on the success of his friends in public office.

As CNN pointed out today Thompson raked in the cash for 20 years selling his access to powerful members of Congress and to White House staffers, just the way Abramoff did. During the 20 years Thompson was whoring out his services to billion dollar corporations, "he was close to two Senate majority leaders, both from his home state of Tennessee-- his political mentor Howard Baker and, more recently, his former colleague [Dollar] Bill Frist. During Baker's tenure, Thompson lobbied for a savings-and-loan deregulation bill that helped hasten the industry's collapse and a failed nuclear energy project that cost taxpayers more than a billion dollars. More recently, while Frist led the Senate, Thompson earned more than $750,000 lobbying for a British reinsurance company that wanted to limit its liability from asbestos lawsuits. That history as a Washington insider is at odds with the image Thompson has sought to convey to voters. When he first ran for the Senate in 1993, Thompson cast himself in the part of the gruff, plainspoken everyman, leased a red pickup truck and drove around Tennessee in his shirt sleeves."

In terms of income, lobbying has been Thompson's life's work and his true career. Many voters have only the haziest of ideas about what lobbying is. Thompson's approved biography certainly doesn't explain it. But if you think about what a high priced call girl does to earn her money, you'll get a clearer picture.

But sucking up to the K Street Republican Culture of Corruption isn't all Thompson has been doing since he left the Senate (besides playing District Attorney Arthur Branch on the NBC TV show Law & Order). "Thompson also helped run the Scooter Libby Legal Defense Fund Trust, an organization that set out to raise more than $5 million to help finance the legal defense of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, who was convicted in March of lying and obstructing Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into the leak of a CIA operative's identity. 'This is no political outsider,' said Craig Holman, a lobbyist for government ethics and campaign finance reform with Public Citizen. 'He clearly gained a network of contacts in Congress though Howard Baker that he cashed in on and would represent anyone who would pay him.'"

WILL VOINOVICH'S TURN FROM BUSH'S IRAQ POLICIES HELP SAVE WHAT'S LEFT OF THE OHIO REPUBLICAN PARTY?

Five years too late for these two dunces

Last November Ohio Senator George Voinovich saw his state political party devastated and swept out of power. After November the all-powerful Ohio Republican Party-- a failed experiment in one-party government which Karl Rove was eager to emulate nationally-- was barely standing. Extremist and reactionary politics combined with uncontrolled corruption left the GOP losing votes in every part of the state, including the reddest heartlands. Ted Strickland beat the Republicans' far right candidate for governor, Ken Blackwell by nearly a million votes. Even more ominous for Voinovich, his close friend and senatorial colleague was beaten by Sherrod Brown, 2,133,705 to 1,681,015 in an election that was supposed to be too close to call. Republican congressional incumbents lost votes-- both in terms of percentages and totals-- from their 2004 races in every single district in the state:

Steve Chabot (R-OH-01) took 60% in 2004 and 53% last year
Mean Jean Schmidt (R-OH-02) took 52% in a 2005 special election and 51% last year
Mike Turner (R-OH-03) took 62% in 2004 and 59% last year
Mike Oxley (R-OH-04) retired
Paul Gillmor (R-OH-05) took 67% in 2004 and 57% last year
David Hobson (R-OH-07) took 65% in 2004 and 61% last year
John Boehner (R-OH-08) took 69% in 2004 and 64% last year
Pat Tiberi (R-OH-12) took 62% in 22004 and 58% last year
Steven LaTourette (R-OH-14) took 63% in 2004 and 58% last year
Deborah Pryce (R-OH-15) took 60% in 2004 and 50% last year, coming within around 1,000 votes of losing her seat
Ralph Regula (R-OH-16) took 67% in 2004 and 59% last year
Bob Ney (R-OH-18) couldn't run because he's in prison for taking bribes but his 66% victory in 2004 turned into a 62% victory for Zach Space, a Democrat, last year.

Meanwhile every single Democratic incumbent increased his or her margin of victory.

Now, Voinovich may not be a genius but he isn't a complete idiot either and he certainly sees which way the wind is blowing and knows how to read a poll. So when respected Republican foreign policy maven Richard Lugar came out and blasted the BushCheney Iraq policy train wreck last night, Voinovich was the first to sign on. Almost identical to Lugar's, Voinovich's Iraq voting record can't be described as anything but slavishly rubber stamp. I truly believe that if every citizen in Ohio were to read it, he wouldn't get 40% of the vote.

A day after Indiana Republican Sen. Richard Lugar declared that Bush's "surge" policy of adding troops was not working, Voinovich sent Bush a letter "expressing his belief that our nation must begin to develop a comprehensive plan for our gradual military disengagement from Iraq," Voinovich's office announced.

Big Tent Democrat points out, as many non-Beltway Democrats have, that so far it's all talk. He points out that neither Voinovich nor Lugar is ready to insist on a timetable to end the occupation; in fact, neither is ready to insist on anything. And their records-- and the records of other Republican self-proclaimed "moderates" who have tread these paths before (Chuck Hagel, Gordon Smith, Susan Collins, John Sununu, Norm Coleman...) are all talk and almost no action.

What this position stakes out is the view that it is acceptable to SAY you oppose President Bush's Iraq policy without actually doing anything about it. Forget for a moment the policy fact that saying you oppose the President's policy and then voting to fund it will effect no change in policy. Consider the crass politics of the situation. If the Lugar/Voinovich/Smith/Hagel position is treated as politically acceptable, even admirable, Democrats will be creating a political safe harbor for Republicans to avoid having to run on supporting Bush's Iraq Debacle.

Let me be clear, I find it unacceptable policy for Republicans AND Democrats to stake such a position. It will do nothing to end the Iraq Debacle. It is why I condemned such Dem favorites as Webb, Tester and Levin for their position and statements on Reid-Feingold.

But for those who are only concerned about the politics, they too should find the position unacceptable. For it kicks away the Iraq issue against vulnerable GOP moderates in 2008. It also does serious damage to the Democratic Party's relationship with its base. In short, it has no redeeming feature, policy-wise or politically.

EMANUEL VS CHENEY CONTINUES

Yesterday I made light of the Inside the Beltway tussle between two horrible monsters, Rahm Emanuel and Cheney. I didn't think the dustup would amount to anything. But I may be wrong. Chris Matthews addressed Emanuel on Hardball last night: "I'm betting on Cheney because the guy never loses, ever, a fight. He wins every bureaucratic fight you and I have ever seen him fight. And this time, you're up against him. You got to get a lot of votes to beat this guy."

But Emanuel, who may still actually believe he single handedly beat a Syrian tank on the Golan Heights, isn't backing down. Go, Rahm, go! It would be incredible to see him do something good for the very first time in his hideous political career, marked primarily by doing hatchet-jobs on progressives and grassroots activists and on ramming NAFTA down Democrats' throats. But he says he has Pelosi's backing on this-- and since he calls the shots with Hoyer-- he's got the House leadership on his team. Now we get to see if the ex-ballerina has the balls to follow this through to the end. He says he's got House Rules Committee chair Louise Slaughter, even less of a Cheney fan than Emanuel, to let him offer an amendment tomorrow to the financial services and general government appropriations bill that would withhold funds for Cheney's office until it is "fully declared to be part" of the executive branch.

"He is acting like he's unaccountable to anybody. ... He's taking an unbelievable step, saying he's not a member of the executive branch, he's a member of the legislative branch. ... So I said, If that's your logic, then we shouldn't be funding you through the executive branch. And either Wednesday or Thursday, my amendment will be on the floor because the funding for the executive branch is on the floor. And I'll strike the money for the vice president's office. He can live off the Senate presidency budget that funds him up here. And that's fine."

But can Emanuel win this one-- or is Tweety right? "I feel pretty strong right now, based on everything I've heard from my colleagues, that they think this is unconscionable, his actions, that he is unaccountable." OK, if Emanuel gets this through I'll stop reminding everyone of how he was, legally speaking, an accomplice to Foley's serial child molestations of the House pages. If Emanuel makes this happen, I'll never bring it up again... well, I'll never gratuitously bring it up again and I won't say one bad thing about Emanuel for a full month from the day the amendment becomes law.

NEW HAMPSHIRE MONEY PARTY CANDIDATE KATRINA SWETT CAN'T GET THE LIEBERMAN STINK OFF

317 days ago Lieberman fake-Democrat Katrina Swett (co-chair of his pathetic 2004 presidential "campaign") was using typical DLC/Lieberman talking points to chastise progressives and grassroots Democrats for rejecting a treacherous corporate whore and warmonger like Lieberman. It wasn't even a year ago and Swett was still all sweaty with Liebermania:

Swett believes Lieberman lost because of three perceived Democratic "sins": the sin of supporting the Iraq war and being tough on defense, the sin of being bipartisan and the sin of displaying religious faith. Swett said those traits might make Lieberman undesirable to many Democrats but they could be key for Democrats in winning future national elections.

"Round two in Connecticut is going to be a battle between two Democrats: Joe Lieberman, a centrist Democrat, and Ned Lamont, a pretty-far-left-of-center Democrat," said Swett. "I'm convinced that Joe Lieberman is the better leader . . . and I'm also convinced that he's the better positioned politically for the future of the party that I love."

The party she loves? That would be the Money Party, represented on her side of the aisle by the corporately sponsored DLC. But today, in the hopes of advancing her floundering career and taking over the New Hampshire Senate seat of another Money Party shill, Republican John Sununu, Swett is singing a different tune, a very different tune. She can't get far enough away from Lieberman, nor fast enough. In her desperation to not be associated with the Lieberman branch of the party she has always been a part of, she is donating money to progressive Rep. Tom Allen, the progressive running against Lieberman's candidate in Maine, the hapless Republican rubber stamp Susan Collins. Swett not only donated $1,000 to Allen, she did it through MoveOn.org, a group she has chastised as being a bunch of left-wing extremists. Swett is the absolute worst kind of Democrat you'll ever find-- and the only way to ensure that John Sununu is re-elected.

Meanwhile, the race keeps heating up. Like Swett, Portsmouth Mayor Steve Marchand has been campaigning for months. Jay Buckey, a Dartmouth medical professor and former astronaut, threw his hat in the ring this month. Meanwhile, many Democrats are publicly pining for former governor Jeanne Shaheen, led by former Democratic party chairwoman Kathy Sullivan, who is leading a Draft Shaheen campaign.

I hope that by election day we will have a page up entitled: Vote No On Lieberman Treachery, with a list of all the candidates he is endorsing. Meanwhile, I want to urge you to contribute to Tom Allen, Donna Edwards and Victoria Wulsin and to withhold donations from Katrina Swett.

IMMIGRATION BILL CLEARS A PROCEDURAL HURDLE THROWN UP BY REPUBLICAN FAR RIGHT EXTREMISTS

Bush's Immigration legislation is horribly flawed and needs drastic work. But it's good that it hasn't been destroyed by the racist and xenophobic wing of the GOP. They've been trying-- and threatening revenge against any Republicans who support Bush on this. Just minutes ago the bill survived a do-or-die test the extreme right had put up.

The senators voted, 64 to 35, to invoke cloture, or move to consideration of the bill itself. Since 60 votes are required for cloture, and only 45 voted for cloture two weeks ago, the measure’s supporters were heartened by today’s vote. Had the cloture vote failed today, the bill would have been dead for the foreseeable future.

The Senate’s next step is to consider a batch of amendments, some designed to be easier on illegal immigrants, some meant to be tougher. The amendments’ differing intentions underline the fragility of the coalition behind the bill. Another make-or-break cloture vote could come before this weekend, and it is by no means certain that those who vote for cloture will vote for the bill itself.

The only Democrats voting to join the Republican extremists in an attempt to filibuster the bill to death were:
Max Baucus (MT)
Evan Bayh (IN)
Robert Byrd (WV)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Mary Landrieu (LA)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Jay Rockefeller (WV)
Debbie Stabenow (MI)
Jon Tester (MT)

The Republicans standing with Bush on this and abandoning the hysterical ranting and raving from the extreme right of their party (for a change-- in fact, in many cases, for the very first time) were:
Robert Bennett (UT)
Kit Bond (MO)
Sam Brownback (KS)
Richard Burr (NC)
Norm Coleman (MN)
Susan Collins (ME)
Larry Craig (ID)
Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (NM)
John Ensign (NV)
Lindsey Graham (SC)
Judd Gregg (NH)
Chuck Hagel (NE)
Jon Kyl (AZ)
Trent Lott (MS)
Richard Lugar (IN)
Mel Martinez (FL)
McCain (AZ)
Miss McConnell (KY)
Lisa Murkowski (AK)
Olympia Snowe (ME)
Arlen Specter (PA)
Ted Stevens (AK)
George Voinovich (OH)
John Warner (VA)

The worst of the Republican kooks and nuts are already screaming for the heads of Republicans who voted for this. They seem to be focussing on MCain and McCain's Mini-Me, Lindsey Graham and on Norm Coleman. I can't believe they're giving corporate whore Miss McConnell a pass-- not to mention Susan Collins.

Today's "Quote of the Day": comes from South Carolina's extreme right wing xenophobe, Jim DeMint, talking about immigration to his pals at the Wall Street Journal: "The White House has climbed way out on a limb, and we're going to cut it off."

WILL DOOLITTLE GET A HARSHER SENTENCE THAN CUNNINGHAM?

Republican John Doolittle was up to his eyeballs in the worst corruption scandal since Teapot Dome-- all the while proclaiming his innocence and hiding behind his Mormonism. His involvement in taking gigantic bribes for his support of schemes to set up forced prostitution and slave labor industry in the Northern Marianas Islands is far, far worse than anything fellow crooked Republican Randy "Duke" Cunningham ever did. Many decent people in Doolittle's low-info northern California red, red district wondered if he would ever be brought to Justice.

The Associated Press has a story out on the wires today that bodes ill for Doolittle, very ill. Many have suspected that Abramoff has been supplying federal investigators with information about his former congressional crony Doolittle. And the involvement in the case of the Abramoff-Doolittle go-between, another GOP criminal, Kevin Ring, seemed to seal the fates of both Doolittle and his moll/wife, Julie. Their home and offices were raided by the FBI and evidence was hauled away.

But today's news involves yet another top Doolittle staffer, David Lopez, turning on his former boss. Lopez is cooperating with the FBI as they build a devastating case against Doolittle. Lopez was Doolittle's chief of staff until 2005-- and then his campaign consultant until last year when the roof began collapsing-- and according to his attorney, he has provided the FBI with "several hundred pages of campaign finance records... under subpoena."

Although the Republican Party has no intention of backing a re-election effort by Doolittle next year, they are hoping he won't be indicted and forced to resign before then. Last year, as details of Doolittle's corruption just started emerging, Democrat Charlie Brown held him to under 50% of the vote-- in a district where Bush had taken 61%-- and it is inconceivable that he could win another election. A score of similarly far right GOP extremists just like Doolittle have lined up to jump in once he officially bows out. Charlie Brown has continued to work with his neighbors in the district to help them understand the connection between the Republican philosophy of government and the kinds of corruption that has swept up not just their own congressmen but other crooks from Cunningham, Ney and Abramoff to Tom DeLay, Rick Renzi and Jerry Lewis. You can contribute to Charlie's campaign here at the Blue America ActBlue page.

WILL THERE BE A MUD-WRESTLING MATCH BETWEEN RICHARD LUGAR AND CHENEY?

Richard Lugar, one of the more knowledgeable and serious-minded of the woeful nitwits who make up the Republican Senate caucus, could have been in a coma for the last seven years. And before he entered the coma, he could just as well asked Dick Cheney to cast all his votes for him. Look at Lugar's Iraq voting record; Cheney could have cast these votes without so much as a grimace.

So it may have surprised a few people today when Lugar suddenly woke from his long coma, with a start, looked around at what had been done, and said, "Oh, my! What's happened here?" He's demanding that Bush and Cheney start looking at diplomatic and economic options and start de-emphasizing the role of the military. Suddenly he's telling his fellow senators that the Bush Regime's reckless and deceitful policies in Iraq have "lost contact with our vital national security interests in the Middle East and beyond. Our continuing absorption with military activities in Iraq is limiting our diplomatic assertiveness there and elsewhere in the world. The prospects that the current “surge” strategy will succeed in the way originally envisioned by the President are very limited within the short period framed by our own domestic political debate. And the strident, polarized nature of that debate increases the risk that our involvement in Iraq will end in a poorly planned withdrawal that undercuts our vital interests in the Middle East. Unless we recalibrate our strategy in Iraq to fit our domestic political conditions and the broader needs of U.S. national security, we risk foreign policy failures that could greatly diminish our influence in the region and the world."
 
It sounds very much as though the first thing that Lugar picked up when he awoke from his long sleep was a copy of the Center For American Progress Iraq exit strategy. His speech incorporates it's most salient ideas. C.A.P. has a video of the speech online.

So with Capitol Hill all abuzz about Lugar's new state of alertness and trying to figure out what it means, Sally Quinn drops a not unrelated bombshell in this morning's Washington Post, A GOP Plan To Oust Cheney.

As the reputed architect of the war in Iraq, Cheney is viewed as toxic, and as the administration's leading proponent of an attack on Iran, he is seen as dangerous. As long as he remains vice president, according to this thinking, he has the potential to drag down every member of the party-- including the presidential nominee-- in next year's elections.

Removing a sitting vice president is not easy, but this may be the moment. I remember Barry Goldwater sitting in my parents' living room in 1973, in the last days of Watergate, debating whether to lead a group of senior Republicans to the White House to tell President Nixon he had to go. His hesitation was that he felt loyalty to the president and the party. But in the end he felt a greater loyalty to his country, and he went to the White House.

A careful read of Quinn's column seems to indicate that even if Barry Goldwater wasn't doing bong hits with her parents in the living room in 1973, she is certainly doing them-- or something akin to them-- in 2007. Her column is a kind of "Everybody loves Fred" fantasy about Thompson being appointed vice president and rescuing the GOP from certain doom at the polls next year.

He could be just the partner to bring out Bush's better nature -- or at least be a sensible voice of reason. I could easily imagine him telling the president, "For God's sake, do not push that button!"-- a command I have a hard time hearing Cheney give.

Not only that, Thompson would give the Republicans a platform for running for the presidency -- and the president a way out of Iraq without looking like he's backing down. Bush would be left in better shape on the war and be able to concentrate on AIDS and the environment in hopes of salvaging his legacy.

Cheney is scheduled this summer for surgery to replace his pacemaker, which needs new batteries. So if the president is willing, and Republicans are able, they have a convenient reason to replace him: doctor's orders. And I'm sure the vice president would also like to spend more time with his ever-expanding family.

Time for Ms. Quinn to look for another job, like reading Mother Goose in pre-schools. And time for Cheney, if he really intends to stick to his claim to be a member of the legislative branch, to start listening to what the legislative branch is saying. He might start with this clip from Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ):

WHO TO BLAME FOR TODAY'S SERIES OF DISASTERS AT THE SUPREME COURT (AND THOSE THAT WILL FOLLOW THEM)?

Two men with a mission

The Supreme Court handed down some hideous 5-4 decisions today, no doubt harbingers of more tyranny and inequity to come. This is not unexpected and it is important to keep in mind which Democrats voted to confirm the very predictable fascist John Roberts to be the 17th Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Every single Republican voted to confirm, of course, including rubber stamp fake "moderates" and self-proclaimed "independent voices" Lincoln Chafee (RIP), Chuck Hagel (NE), Susan Collins (ME), Olympia Snowe (ME), Norm Coleman (MN), Arlen Specter (PA), John Sununu (NH), McCain (AZ), and Gordon Smith (OR).

Joining the Republicans to saddle us with this multi-generational catastrophe were:
Max Baucus (MT)
Jeff Bingaman (NM)
Robert Byrd (WV)
Tom Carper (DE)
Kent Conrad (ND)
Chris Dodd (CT)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Russ Feingold (WI), proving that no one is perfect
Tim Johnson (SD)
Herb Kohl (WI)
Mary Landrieu (LA)
Patrick Leahy (VT)
Carl Levin (MI)
Joe Lieberman (CT, who was still posing as a Democrat at the time)
Blanche Lincoln (AR)
Patty Murray (WA)
Bill Nelson (FL)
Ben Nelson (NE)
Mark Pryor (AR)
Jay Rockefeller (WV)
Ken Salazar (CO)
Ron Wyden (OR)

22 Democrats voted with the Republicans and 22 Democrats voted with the American people. Of the Democrats running for president, Hillary, Obama, and, surprisingly, Biden voted with the people. Dodd voted with his corporate allies and the GOP.

Every senator who voted to confirm Roberts voted, in effect, for these decisions today. If they say these decisions surprised them, then they are, on top of idiots, liars. Even worse, are the Democrats who voted with the GOP to also confirm Sam Alito, who, if anything, is even further to the extreme right than Roberts. This vote was for cloture and again, every Republican voted to to confirm by shutting off debate, and only 25 Democrats voted with the people of this country in mind. The Democrats who joined the GOP that day were:
Daniel Akaka (HI)
Max Baucus (MT)
Jeff Bingaman (NM)
Robert Byrd (WV)
Maria Cantwell (WA)
Tom Carper (DE)
Kent Conrad (ND)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Daniel Inouye (HI)
Tim Johnson (SD)
Herb Kohl (WI)
Mary Landrieu (LA)
Joe Lieberman (CT)
Blanche Lincoln (AR)
Bill Nelson (FL)
Ben Nelson (NE)
Mark Pryor (AR)
Jay Rockefeller (WV)
Ken Salazar (CO)

Names that are bold indicate that these senators will face the voters next year. Try to remember.

A BETTER IDEA FOR A MEREDITH VIERA INTERVIEW

Today DWT contributor Kevin Laffey was moved to send a letter to the staff of NBC-TV's Today Show. He and I thought some people here might want to reflect on what he had to say-- and why.
Kevin's letter:

Dear Today Show Staff,

While the exclusive Paris Hilton interview may have gone to Larry King, you were able to hit your own new low today by exploiting the death of Jessie Davis and her unborn child. It may have been with disgust that I watched Meredith Vieira interview Bobby Cutts’ ex-girlfriend Nikki Giavasis in the 12th minute of her 15 minutes of fame, but it was disbelief and nausea that I felt as Ned Davis and Meredith emoted together in a hushed, private moment for just a few million mourning viewers only two days after the discovery of his daughter’s body. Mr. Davis should not have been on TV and NBC should have had the ethics and good taste to resist temptation to land that “exclusive”. It was tawdry and cheap yellow journalism or, more to the point, infotainment. Journalism had nothing to do with it.

When was the last time the Today Show, or NBC News overall, had the compassion and courage enough to interview the parents of a child killed from the collateral damage caused by US forces in Iraq or Afghanistan? Maybe then an American public lulled by entertainment news will begin to wake up to the fact that there is a war going on that we are all responsible for and that there are faceless deaths of those as innocent as Jessie Davis and her child happening every day, if not every hour, that are the result of our reckless engagement.

Granted, the tens of thousands of Middle Eastern civilians may not look or speak like us nor be as delicious a news item as a murder in an adulterous, mixed race, Midwestern affair, but the impact of those deaths on our world is exponentially greater than that one grisly crime will turn out to be not just “Today”, but for generations to come.

Shame on you. Shame on us.

Sincerely,

Kevin Laffey

NOW WHY DO MORMONS THINK THEY'RE TOO GOOD FOR THE MILITARY? WE'LL HAVE TO ASK THE ROMNEY FAMILY

Army? Navy? Air Force? Marines? Nope-- all fortunate sons

You probably remember a few days ago when Republican billionaire presidential wanna be, Flip Flop Mitt Romney explained away the fact that none of his right-wing, pro-war sons has ever joined any of the military services. Turns out, it's kind of a family tradition. Just like Flip Flop Mitt, Matt and Togg and Twigg and Winky, Blinky, Stinky, Merrill and Lynch all used their service trying to seduce normal people into Mormonism as their excuse for not joining the U.S. military.

"Each of my five sons gave two years of their life to the service of their church, and I consider that service to be laudable. But I very highly value those who serve in the military. But it is a volunteer military and I hope that we keep it that way."

Rich white people, particularly of the Republican variety, regardless of how pro-war they are, tend to not serve in the military. And where did the Romney boys learn that? Well, according to today's Boston Globe the role model was good old dad, who avoided compulsory military service through the machinations of the Mormons. "As the Vietnam War raged in the 1960s, Mitt Romney received a deferment from the draft as a Mormon 'minister of religion' for the duration of his missionary work in France, which lasted two and a half years."

The deferments for Mormon missionaries became increasingly controversial in the late 1960s, especially in Utah, leading the Mormon Church and the government to limit the number of church missionaries who could put off their military service. That agreement called for each church ward, or church district, to designate one male every six months to be exempted from potential duty for the duration of his missionary work.

Romney's home state was Michigan, making his 4-D exemption as a missionary all but automatic because of the relatively small number of Mormon missionaries from that state.

...By serving as a missionary and being given the deferment, Romney ensured that he would not be drafted from July 1966 until February 1969. Romney's draft record from the time describes him as "minister of religion or divinity student."

And Romney learned what Mormon divinity is all about-- bamboozling poor souls out of their hard earned cash, through accounting tricks and corporate predatory practices, which is how he became a billionaire and how he is attempting to buy the White House... along with the Mormon cult, which is funneling huge amounts of money into his campaign.

Like Tom DeLay, who claims he was discriminated against by Hispanics and African Americans when they grabbed up all the spots in Vietnam, forcing him to stay home and waste his days in a hot tub and then learning the bug extermination trade, Romney claims he yearned to be in 'Nam. "I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam." He then flip flopped when his father, also a kooky Mormon Republican, claimed the U.S. government had "brain-washed" him on Vietnam. "When my dad said that he had been wrong about Vietnam and that it was a mistake and they had been brainwashed and so forth, I certainly trusted him and believed him." Yes, you did. And it looks like Winky and Blinky and Merrill and Lynch and the rest of them all believed you too: send other people's sons and daughters to die in the nightmare you and your venal political party created in Iraq.





UPDATE: WHAT ELSE DID ROMNEY TEACH THOSE POOR DEFECTIVE, UNPATRIOTIC SONS?

Cruelty to animals?

WILL JOE LIEBERMAN ENDORSE AL WYNN? STEVE BLACK? ...MEAN JEAN SCHMIDT???

Corporate lawyer Steve Black, one of them big money Republicrats-- he's voted for Republicans in primaries but never for Democrats for as long as the Ohio Secretary of State has kept records-- smells blood in Mean Jean Schmidt's water. Black looks at Mean Jean's near-death experience last November-- when Vic Wulsin drew 117,595 votes against her 120,112-- and he thinks the grassroots and progressive Democrats in OH-02 are just sitting around waiting for him to step up to the plate. So he's filed a primary challenge to Vic (as has anti-choice loon Jeff Sinnard). These two are entitled to challenge Vic in a primary. Her problem-- our problem-- is that she'll have to divert funds that should be going towards educating voters in southwest Ohio about Mean Jean's voting-record-from-another-planet.

So I was sitting around wondering how to help Vic and another extraordinarily good progressive with a tough primary coming up-- Donna Edwards (MD-04)-- and it dawned on me that something that worked really well for Tom Allen last week, might work well for Donna and Vic too.

Black says he's running as a Democrat because our party has moved in his direction lately. He has loads of cash-- and rich Cincinnati blue-blood connections-- but is he going to be a fighter for the issues that make Victoria Wulsin such an attractive candidate? Will he even have any credibility when he talks about the values and issues that matter to us? And who even knows if he-- like Al Wynn-- will sell us right out at the first opportunity. If issues like universal health care, ending the occupation of Iraq, environmental concerns not always being trumped by Big Business and developers, and women's right to choice are meaningful to you, it's time to think up ways to make sure candidates like Vic and Donna have the resources they need to compete with wealth and corporate power.

Al Wynn is totally a Lieberman type incumbent, a corrupt slimebag and Bush/corporate rubber stamp. Steve Black will fit right in that mode as a candidate. Now, is Lieberman only endorsing Republicans in this cycle or will he help treacherous and reactionary Democrats too? My gut tells me an endorsement for one's opponent by Lieberman-- which helped us raise over $4,000 in 2 days last week-- is a gift that will keep on giving and giving. Other than an embrace from Bush or Cheney, nothing will help a progressive more than Lieberman jumping on board with the opposition. He's far more toxic, politically speaking, than reactionary DLC chairman Harold Ford (who has, as expected, endorsed Wynn) or than Rahm Emanuel or than Ben Nelson. How do we get Lieberman interested in OH-02 and MD-04? Steve Black and Al Wynn are both right up his alley.

The Blue America Page is open (24-7) and happy to accept contributions, no matter how small, for Victoria Wulsin, Donna Edwards and Tom Allen, as well as a host of other progressive, grassroots candidates, none of whom, are Joe Lieberman Insider Money Party pols.

Oh, oh, oh... I just thought of something! Victoria Wulsin and Ned Lamont were actually college housemates for a while! Now, how do we get that information to Lieberwhore?

EVEN THE WORST BUCKET OF SLIME GETS IT RIGHT SOMETIMES: RAHM EMANUEL VS DICK CHENEY

Who did you root for when the Vampire Woman met the Werewolf or when Rodan battled it out with Godzilla? Dracula vs Frankenstein? Yeah, I don't remember either. But I have to admit that in the coming battle royale between two of the most despicable characters in contemporary politics, Rahm Emanuel and Dick Cheney, I'll be cheering for... hmmm... Well, to be honest, I can't say. I wish all the worst in the world on each. The two of them epitomize all that has gone wrong with our country's political system. It's hard to imagine that anyone, anywhere at anytime could bring on the kind of destruction and pure evil that has followed in Cheney's wake. But I would not be willing to bet against Emanuel should he-- God forbid-- ever achieve any kind of executive power. Too many Democrats make excuses for the inexcusable. "Every party needs someone with a Machiavellian approach," one lawmaker who has felt Emanuel's sting told CongressDaily. "He does what he is supposed to do." Unacceptable in a democracy-- as many Democrats will agree (in private). "You need an enforcer to play that role... but there is a sense that he's gone a little bit further than many expected in the way he pushes people to do what he wants," said a senior aide to a prominent liberal Democrat.

Emanuel hasn't had the opportunities to commit the kinds of crimes Cheney has-- everyday, before breakfast. I'd rather he not mature into his full Cheney-like potential. But even I have to admit that I love it that Emanuel is turning his evil Machiavellian self against Cheney now (instead of his usual victims-- progressives and grassroots and anti-war Democrats).

If Vice President Cheney believes his office is not an "entity within the executive branch," then a House Democratic leader says taxpayers shouldn't have to finance his executive expenses.

Cheney's office has claimed his constitutional role as president of the Senate also makes him part of the legislative branch and therefore is not covered by a presidential order requiring executive branch workers to report their numbers of classified and declassified government documents.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said Sunday that a court should decide whether the vice president belongs to the executive or legislative branch. "The vice president needs to make a decision," he said.

I don't expect much to come out of Emanuel's nastiness but there are people who have started actually working on remedies for the great wrongs that Cheney has brought about. I want to urge you to read a brand new report from our pals at the Center for American Progress, "Strategic Reset-- Reclaiming Control of U.S. Security in the Middle East." Here are some of the main points:

Accept the Reality of Iraq's Political Fragmentation

Immediately phase out the unconditional arming, equipping, and training of Iraq’s security forces.

Shift reconstruction, governance, and security assistance to provinces where practical and possible.

Implement a Phased Military Redeployment from Iraq within One Year

Extract U.S. troops from Iraq’s civil wars before the end of 2008.

Make counterterrorism our country’s No. 1 priority.

Redeploy U.S. troops to neighboring countries and temporarily station 8,000 to 10,000 soldiers in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq until 2009 to prevent a cross-border conflict involving our key ally Turkey, and to protect the region from an expansion of intra-Iraqi violence

Initiate Regional Security and Diplomatic Efforts to Contain Iraq’s Conflicts

Promote collective security efforts with active working groups on counterterrorism, refugees, and security confidence-building measures.

Use the forthcoming review of the United Nations mandate for Iraq to secure formal commitments from other countries to help Iraq as the United States redeploys from Iraq.

Develop a Strategy to Resolve the Arab-Israeli Conflict and Stabilize the Middle East

Appoint a special Middle East envoy with support from two senior ambassadors who would work on two key tracks-- containing and managing Iraq’s multiple conflicts and resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Work with partners in the Middle East Quartet as well as regional organizations such as the Arab League to manage and resolve conflicts in the region.

DEMOCRATS COULD TAKE VIRGINIA AND TENNESSEE SENATE SEATS NEXT YEAR

WILL JOHN WARNER'S EFFORTS TO BEQUEATH HIS SENATE SEAT TO TOM DAVIS, LEAD TO A VICTORY FOR SENATOR MARK WARNER?

This morning's Moonie Times indicates what DC Insiders have long suspected: that 80 year old fossil, Senator John Warner, will not seek re-election next year. In recent years the Virginia GOP has been torn up-- like so many state Republican parties-- by battles between conservatives and neo-fascist extremists. When the extremists win the primaries, they often lose the general elections.

"There has been considerable discussion about the possibility that [Mr. Warner] might delay an announcement of candidacy, then announce he wasn't going to run, to allow Congressman Tom Davis to build up at the beginning of the campaigns, which would give Davis an advantage," said Morton C. Blackwell, chairman of the Virginia's Republican National Committee and leader of the conservative Leadership Institute.

...Speculation about Mr. Warner retiring increased this spring after filings with the Federal Elections Commission showed he had raised only $500 during the first quarter of the year.

Another indication was the resignation last year of Susan Magill, who was Mr. Warner's chief of staff for 18 years.

Mr. Warner's resignation would likely result in a tough political battle to replace him that would begin inside the Republican State Central Committee, which decides how the party will picks its nominee.

Members could choose a convention or a primary election, which would likely benefit a more moderate candidate.

Among the unelectable extremists eyeing Warner's seat are Rep. Eric Cantor (VA-07), Rep. Randy Forbes (VA-04), and the as yet unindicted bribe taker Rep. Robert Goodlatte (VA-06).

Republicans hope for a candidate who can succeed in Northern Virginia where the party has won too few votes in three straight losses for top statewide office.

"I hope the George Allen election caught the attention of the rest of the state," said Delegate David Albo, Fairfax County Republican. "Republicans used to say, 'We are going to win big in the rest of Virginia, and try not to lose bad in [Northern Virginia.]' But when you have 90,000 people a year moving into [Northern Virginia], eventually that strategy is not going to work."

House Majority Leader H. Morgan Griffith, Salem Republican, agreed.

"We have to do better in [Northern Virginia] if we are going to win," he said.

Much of this would be moot if former Governor Mark Warner decides to run for the seat since he is widely popular and much admired throughout the state and could easily beat any of those Republicans who are unknown statewide. Mark Warner's close friendship with John Warner has keep him out of the race to date-- as well as huge speculation that he is Hillary's #1 choice for vice president.

AND TENNESSEE COULD BE SOME NICE FROSTING ON THE CAKE

Conventional wisdom lists Lamar Alexander's Senate seat in Tennessee as a safe one. But with 2008 shaping up to be a year of discontent with incumbents and a year of disdain for Republicans-- one that could make 2006 look like a dress rehearsal-- Alexander might not be that safe. He has, after all, been a craven rubber stamp for a Bush-Cheney agenda that is no more popular in Tennessee than it is anywhere else in America (not counting Utah). Tennessee Democrats and the DSCC are convinced they can win this one and they both have the same moderate candidate with crossover potential in mind.

Short of a Fred Thompson candidacy at the top of the ticket or a suicidal Harold Ford nomination by the Democrats, which will leave progressives sitting on their hands, Alexander could be vulnerable to a well-run campaign from a big-name Democrat. And this morning one of the savviest political pundits in Tennessee, Jackson Baker, is suggesting that Mike McWherter is getting ready to jump into the race. McWherter's dad was popular 2-term Governor Ned McWherter.

Fresh from his service as treasurer in state Senator Lowe Finney's win last year (taking back a Democratic seat from Don McLeary, considered by McWhrerter a "turncoat" after changing party affiliations in 2005), the 52-year-old activist is now focusing on Alexander, whom McWherter sees as a slavish follower of President George W. Bush.

"With one or two exceptions, he's done everything the president has wanted him to do. He's toed the party line," said McWherter, who has recently paid courtesy calls on ranking Democrats, both in Tennessee and in Washington, D.C. , informing them of his interest in running next year and soliciting their support. He is getting active encouragement from Gray Sasser, state Democratic chairman and son of an influential former officeholder himself, former Senator and Ambassador Jim Sasser.

Last week, the Nashville Post ran a similar story about the prospects of McWherter offering Alexander a serious challenge. The Post reports Sasser's enthusiasm. "Should Mike decide to run, he would be a terrific candidate for the U.S. Senate. I firmly believe that Sen. Alexander is beatable in 2008. Tennesseans, like the rest of America, are ready for a change and are disappointed that Sen. Alexander continues to back the failed policies of George Bush and Karl Rove, voting with the Bush administration more than 90 percent of the time."

IS McCAIN'S STRAIGHT-TALKER BULLSHIT GOING TO BACKFIRE SO BADLY THAT HE'LL BE BRANDED THE LOBBYIST CANDIDATE OVER THE TWO ACTUAL LOBBYISTS?

Last week it was big news that McCain had more lobbyists signed up for his campaign than any other GOP candidate. Something tells me Hillary isn't doing too badly on that front either. And far be if for me to deny that lobbyist-affiliation should be a disqualifier from serving in public office (or, for that matter, walking freely among humanity). But, come on, McCain may be the most hypocritical of any candidate in eons-- and the most likely to drop out of the race first-- but he has two rivals who are lobbyists themselves, Giuliani-- who started reaping his lobbyist bonanza on 9/12-- and 18 year vet of ultimate sleaze, Fred Thompson.

Mark Silva in the Chicago Tribune and Thomas Edsall in Huffington Post claim McCain has more lobbyists than even Hillary. Edsall says "all the campaigns pale in comparison to McCain's, whose rhetoric stands in sharp contrast to his conduct."

"Too often the special interest lobbyists with the fattest wallets and best access carry the day when issues of public policy are being decided," McCain asserts on his web site, declaring that he "has fought the 'revolving door' by which lawmakers and other influential officials leave their posts and become lobbyists for the special interests they have aided."

In actual practice, at least two of McCain's top advisers fit precisely the class of former elected officials he criticizes so sharply. On March 7, 2007, McCain named ex-Texas Representative Tom Loeffler, who has one of the most lucrative and influential practices in the nation's capital, as his campaign co-chair. In the same month, McCain named former Washington Sen. Slade Gorton, now a heavyweight lobbyist, as his honorary chairman for Washington state.

Loeffler's client list includes PhRMA, the drug industry association; Southwest Airlines; Toyota; and Martin Marietta. Gorton represents, among others, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp., Weyerhaeuser and Fidelity National Financial.

In addition, David Crane, now the campaign's senior policy advisor, was a senior executive at The Washington Group, a firm with 2006 billings of $10.4 million and 52 clients, including Delta Airlines, the Association of American Railroads, and the governments of Panama and Bangladesh. And Charlie Black, who is now a campaign spokesman appearing on McCain's behalf on radio, television, and as a "spin-doctor" after debates, is chairman of BKSH & Associates, with lobbying billings of $7.6 million in 2006, representing J.P. Morgan, Occidental and General Motors.

All told, there are 11 current or former lobbyists working for or advising McCain, at least double the number in any other campaign.

EVEN WITH GIULIANI PROTECTING A PRIEST-PREDATOR, WILL THE CATHOLIC CHURCH DUMP HIM BECAUSE OF HIS PRO-CHOICE STAND?

Last week we looked at one of Giuliani's closest associates, Alan Placa, another priest who has been a little too close to some of his youngest and most vulnerable male parishioners. But it's starting to look like the Catholic Church may not stand by Giuliani as strongly as he stands by their pervert priests. Today's NY Times say Roman Catholic Church, Inc is frustrated with him.

One American bishop, Thomas J. Tobin of Providence, R.I., recently wrote a caustic column for his Catholic newspaper calling Mr. Giuliani’s position “pathetic,” “confusing” and “hypocritical.” Other bishops said that they would not criticize a candidate by name but would not hesitate to declare Mr. Giuliani’s stance contrary to Catholic teaching.

Archbishop John J. Myers of Newark said: “I think he’s being illogical, as are all of those who take the stand that ‘I’m personally opposed to abortion but this is my public responsibility to permit it.’ To violate human life is always and everywhere wrong. In fact, we don’t think it’s a matter of church teaching, but a matter of the way God made the world, and it applies to everyone.”

Not too many people Giuliani, generally believed to be a power-mad dog with no sense of morality whatsoever cares what a bunch of bishops thinks-- except insofar as it hurts his already absurd imagine. "Communion may be a moot point for Mr. Giuliani, who was seen leaving Mass at a church in Washington before the Eucharist. Some church officials said it might be that Mr. Giuliani refrains from taking communion because he had married a third time without receiving a church annulment for his second marriage. A Giuliani spokeswoman, Maria Comella, confirmed that Mr. Giuliani had his first marriage annulled, but not his second."

It is widely expected that the hierarchy of the Church will rally round whatever Republican is their party's candidate. It's one thing to chastise John Kerry for being pro-choice, but when it comes to a Republican, they are likely to grumble but most unlikely to tell parishioners they will go to hell if they vote for him.

And for a putative front runner, there's even worse news: voters prefer non-candidate, lobbyist/actor Fred Thompson-- who though know far less about than the 10 stooges now running for the GOP nod. Of course, it could be worse. He could be poor old John McCain, whose camapign is falling apart and about whom the speculation is when, not if, he will drop out of the race entirely. The speculation is "sweeping Republican circles after a disastrous few weeks" according to London's Sunday Times. "The former presidential front-runner, John McCain, may drop out of the 2008 race by September if his fundraising dries up and his poll ratings continue to drop, according to Republican insiders."

Dan Schnur, McCain’s communications director during the 2000 presidential campaign, said it was “possible” that he could drop out: “There are all sorts of challenges McCain is facing, from fundraising to Fred Thompson and the Iraq war, but the biggest single boulder in his path is the immigration issue.”

One veteran Republican consultant put the odds of McCain remaining in the race beyond the autumn at 3-1 against. “He’ll be gone by September,” predicted Tom Edmonds, who is not affiliated with any campaign.

“The wheels are coming off his wagon and it’s hard to see how he can recover. He won’t be able to pay all the good talent he has hired and they’ll want to drift away from a loser.”

UPDATE: ON THE BRIGHT SIDE...

The most despised of all GOP harridans has denounced Giuliani, snarkily attacking his transvestitism and the fact that one of his wives was a dramatic performer. And her pick: the bribetaking Republicrook from the San Diego suburbs.

Immigration debate? Huh? Has there been an immigration debate going on? (Um, has anybody broken the news to poor old Emma Lazarus?)

The Staten Island Ferry chugs past Liberty Island in New York Harbor.

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."
--from "The New Colossus," by Emma Lazarus

I was writing to a friend on another subject entirely, and in the course of my rambling, I had to dig out these famous--or perhaps once-famous?--lines by Emma Lazarus.

I haven't been to the Statue of Liberty since I-don't-know-when, but I see it semi-frequently.

Sometimes I venture down to the Battery, the lower tip of Manhattan Island, just to look out on New York Harbor. When you look out on the harbor, the eye is drawn quickly to the Statue.

A few times a year it's not enough for me to look out on the harbor, I have to get out on it. So I take my version of an ocean voyage: the Staten Island Ferry trip to Staten Island and back, which gives you a sort of drive-by of the Statue. (The trip also suits my budgetary preferences. You used to pay a quarter in one direction only. Now it's totally free.)

A bunch of years ago, after the renovated Ellis Island reception hall was opened to the public, I took the ferry there. The same ferry made a circuit of Ellis and Liberty Islands, but I hadn't left myself that much time, and chose to spend it all on Ellis. I have to confess that what resonated most vividly for me was the episode of the difficult arrival of little Vito Andolini (about to become Vito Corleone) from Sicily in Godfather II.

Nevertheless, I don't have to visit the Statue to think of its famous poetic inscription. I admit that I looked it up to be sure I had it right, but I would have come pretty close if I'd quoted it from memory.

But then, looking at the words on-screen in front of me, I suddenly realized that I can explain why I feel so isolated from what has recently passed for a "debate" on immigration: I haven't heard anybody quote these lines.

We do all know that we Americans are all immigrants here, don't we? I suppose you could argue, based on the submoronic ignorance of Tom Tancredo and the other anti-immigration loonies, that the immigration thing hasn't worked out as well as we like to pretend. Some of the "wretched refuse" still sounds pretty wretched.

As a point of curiosity, does anyone know whether Twitty Tom and the other hate-spewing xenophobes have ever visited the Statue of Liberty? Or ever heard of the Statue of Liberty? For that matter, the proponents of the supposed immigration "reform" bill don't seem to get it either. They seem mostly interested in immigrants as a ready source of cheap labor--a far cry from the promise and hope of the Statue of Liberty.

It used to stand for something. It used to stand for, you know, the idea of America. If somebody wants to talk about that, give me a holler.

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS NOT THE PRO-BUSINESS PARTY

I was in New York for the last few days and I actually read, as I always do when I'm there, the old fashioned version of the NY Times. The first one that came to my door was on Friday morning and I was struck by... well I'm still trying to figure out how to grasp what it was that struck me. I mean I know what the story was: Stephen Labaton's Investors' Suits Face Higher Bar, Justices Decide. And I know where it was: top right, front page, where I was always told to look first for the most important Times story. But I can't figure out how to process it, or something about it.

Why is it conventional wisdom that the GOP is the buisness-friendly party and the champion of capitalism. I know the history, thanks. But once the GOP was the African-American-friendly party and the champion of the slaves and their descendants that their party freed. That took nearly a century to do an about face. But when I was in high school, most of the most infamous bigots and racists in Congress-- and on TV-- were Southern Democrats and they prevented the dismantling of apartheid in this country right into the 1960s. I don't know how many of these names will ring a bell in your head, but I heard about them all through high school-- the forerunners of the modern southern-based GOP and the Blue Dog Democrats: Harry Byrd of Virginia, John Stennis and James Eastland of Mississippi, Lister Hill and John Sparkman of Alabama, Richard Russell and Herman Talmadge of Georgia. A worse bunch of racist slime you would never have uncovered, and thru dint of the inflexible seniority system, they held an iron, reactionary grip on Congress, especially on the U.S. Senate. Their political descendants are overwhelmingly Republicans now. Instead of Stennis and Eastland we have Trent Lott and Cochran and Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby (first elected as a Democrat) have replaced Hill and Sparkman. But it's really the same loathsome, reactionary garbage.

Since Ed Brooke (R-MA) no one would make the mistake of calling the Republican Party friendly to Blacks. I mean, of course there are a handful who have sold out their race many of whom are psychologically twisted and even mentally deranged-- the Ken Blackwells, Vernon Robinsons, Clarence Thomases, Alan Keyeses... a couple of hate-talk radio whores-- but in terms of looking for a political party interested in equality and helping to lift up the downtrodden, the Republicans aren't the place to go.

And over time, the GOP hasn't just gone from the party of Abraham Lincoln to the party of Jeff Sessions. They have also abandoned first small business and then business itself in order to enshrine themselves as the party of management. The two Supreme Court decisions last week to limit the power of business owners of their managers is violently anti-business, yet neither the Republican Party, nor the NY Times, sees it that way.

The Supreme Court on Thursday dealt a blow to investors who want to sue companies and executives because of suspected fraud, setting a higher standard for class-action lawsuits to go forward.

The decision was the second one this week by the court that was a defeat for shareholders and a victory for the defendant companies. On Monday, the justices ruled that securities underwriters on Wall Street are generally immune from civil antitrust lawsuits.

It came as senior officials, led by Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., have been pushing for limits on shareholder lawsuits. Mr. Paulson, along with other administration officials and some senior lawmakers, have maintained that such lawsuits and regulations, written in the aftermath of corporate scandals like those involving Enron and WorldCom, may be discouraging investment and causing too many companies to look overseas to raise capital.

With only 18 months left until President Bush leaves the White House-- and even less time for contentious policy issues to make their way through a capital that is preparing for elections-- corporations and political supporters of the administration are pressing for a relaxation of some of those regulations and new restrictions on lawsuits.

OK, Republicans are anti-worker and anti-consumer; they always have been. But who exactly is "Business" if not the owners (shareholders)? As it turns out, I was one of the shareholders in the suit Labaton is writing about-- Tellabs. The management painted a grossly false picture to sucker investors and it worked-- to the benefit of the managers. It isn't uncommon in corporate business and the GOP is not the place to look for investors to seek protection anymore than it is the place for minorities to seek protection.

Where can they go to seek protection? On Friday Maxine Waters challenged Bush's current Treasury Secretary/ex-Goldman Sachs Chairman Henry Paulson to get the Regime to support shareholders in the Supreme Court case that will determine whether the Enron victims can recover from the banks that schemed with Enron to defraud them. Paulson admitted-- or even bragged-- that "he personally initiated his department's role in a Supreme Court case that could hurt shareholders' efforts to recover losses in securities fraud lawsuits."

The issue arose because of a shareholder suit before the Supreme Court that seeks to recover money in a securities fraud case against two suppliers to a cable TV company. The outcome probably will determine whether a similar lawsuit by Enron investors against investment banks is allowed to proceed.

The Securities and Exchange Commission urged the solicitor general to file a brief in support of investors. But President Bush, Treasury, the Federal Reserve Board and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency weighed in on the opposite side of the issue, which is referred to as third-party liability.

UPDATE: AND THEY DON'T PAY THEIR DAMN TAXES

Corporate management has gamed the system and the underpinnings of American democracy are being corroded as a result. The Republicans are contemptible beyond redemption. And the Democrats, as a party... well, the congressional caucus elected Rahm Emanuel and Steny Hoyer and if you think either of those guys is one iota less corrupt than the worst Republican, I have a nice bridge in Brooklyn I want to show you in a very up-and-coming neighborhood.

Lucy Komisar did a story last week that Steven Porter passed along to me, Corporate Profits Take an Offshore Vacation. It succinctly describes why our political system is in big trouble and why it doesn't seem to be righting itself. Last week Merck agreed to a $2.3 billion back taxes settlement based on tricks that the requested and received from the Bush Regime and its congressional allies rubber stamps. They owe almost as much to Canada.

Merck had cooked its tax books by moving ownership of its drug patents to its own Bermuda shell company-- an entity that has no real employees and does no real work-- and then deducting from U.S. taxes the huge royalties it paid itself. While setting up a shell company is not inherently illegal, it is if tax authorities determine that its only purpose is to evade taxes. Bermuda is a tax haven that has no levy on royalties.

...What Merck did isn't unusual but in fact is becoming common for multinationals in the era of globalisation. It's one of the ploys in a corporate bag of tricks called profit laundering. A company figures out how to move its book profits offshore so it can evade millions and even billions in taxes to the country where it really operates. In an era where much of a company's assets may be intangible intellectual property -- patents, logos, manufacturing processes -- this strategy can make reported profits and taxes disappear.

People understand that nations' economies are hurt when jobs move overseas. But what happens when intellectual capital, on which the increasingly knowledge-based economy depends, is also moved out?

IRS Commissioner Mark Everson said last June, "Tax issues associated with the transfer of intangibles outside the United States have been a high risk compliance concern for us and have seen a significant increase in recent years. Taxpayers, especially in the high technology and pharmaceutical industries, are shifting profits offshore."

...Although almost 60 percent of U.S. pharmaceutical companies' sales take place in the U.S., where the government's refusal to control drug prices makes profits higher than elsewhere, the companies report to the IRS that their profits come largely from international sales. The world's biggest drug firm, Pfizer, with most of its sales in the U.S., said that in 2004 it had 4.4 billion dollars in pretax profits in the United States and 9.6 billion dollars internationally.

And it isn't only Pfizer and Merck. Google and IBM, for examples, pulled similar stunts. Just before the advent of the Bush Regime $88 billion in tax revenues were lost to this kind of fraud. Under CEO-President Bush's enthusiastic stewardship the amount had already risen to $149 billion by 2002. There are a growing number of fake subsidiaries of U.S. corporations now generating "profits" mainly in tax havens rather than in locations in which they conduct most of their actual business. As many as two-thirds of companies doing business in the U.S. report they owe no taxes whatsoever.

Jack Blum, an expert on tax evasion and former counsel for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said, "Since the 1960s the percentage of tax revenue at the federal level that comes from corporations has declined from around 30 percent to around 8 percent. A substantial portion of this decline is the consequence of the ability of companies with global operations to shift income to jurisdictions where tax collectors cannot find it."

The U.S. Treasury and IRS say they are reviewing accounting rules on transactions involving intellectual property, but the U.S. government has failed to adopt tough measures to end royalty-shifting.

Most of the 2.3 billion dollars Merck has to pay is back taxes and interest; only 100 million dollars is penalty. No Merck official has been charged with a crime. That signals that companies have little to lose by continuing their tax scams.

I WAS WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! RUDY GIULIANI IS PERFECT FOR THE REPUBLICANS AFTER ALL

Forget that Giuliani's record on the issues that matter most-- at least ostensibly-- to Republicans is out of sync with what these people believe. Because there really is something that overrides all that choice stuff and gay stuff and family values and all that, even the gun stuff. Because in the end people identify with right wing parties-- whether the Conservative Party, the Nazi Party, any fascist party, or the Republican Party-- are looking for... Daddy. They desperately crave an authority-- or authoritarian-- figure who will tell everybody what to do and make everything orderly. It's the easy way out for people who are lazy, fearful and who know, down deep, that they are in all ways inferior to what they imagine is... out there.

McCain is trying but he's so confused and senile that he can't pull it off anymore. And no matter what kind of image Romney's million dollar spin doctors have manufactured for him, he still comes off as a flippity floppity mess and an effete crybaby and varmint hunter who's going to blame his inevitable loss on Republicans' anti-Mormon bigotry. Easy to buy-off right wing propagandists can talk all they want about his broad shoulders and square chin and his nice sense of humor; he's still just a rich guy with no moral compass trying to claw his way to power.

Now Rudy, on the other hand, this is the scumbag Republicans crave-- and deserve. Former Republican governor of New Jersey and head of Bush's EPA at the time of 9/11, Christie Todd Whitman, doesn't paint a picture that normal Americans want to look at-- regardless of what Republican lemmings demand. Yesterday's NY Daily News published a report claiming she knew and insisted that it was crucial for Ground Zero workers-- many of whom have now comes down to debilitating and fatal respiratory diseases-- to wear respirators. Giuliani blocked her efforts.

She also said city officials didn't want EPA workers wearing haz-mat suits because they "didn't want this image of a city falling apart."

In an interview scheduled to run the day before Whitman testifies in front of Congress on Monday, she told WNBC-TV she warned the city of the risks almost every day.

And she said she believes illnesses killing first responders can be blamed on the city's lack of action.

Above I referred to Rudy McRomney as the only (dismal) choice Republicans have. There is another. Although Jack Abramoff is still in prison, another slick'n'sleazy multimillionaire Republican lobbyist wants to be president: Fred Thompson. He's the one no one knows much about other than that he's a TV actor who plays a law and order role on the small screen. Today's Moonie Times takes a look at his conservative credentials-- and shows he comes up lacking. All the other candidates with legislative records-- except Ron Paul-- come up more conservative than Fred .

BLUE AMERICA IS HONORED TO WELCOME CONGRESSWOMAN HILDA SOLIS (D-CA)

Two strong, beautiful, really smart leaders making a difference in our world

There are 16 different congressmembers who represent Los Angeles County and they go right across the political spectrum-- from the extreme right (Gary Miller, the corrupt Republican congressloon from a godforsaken suburban hellhole where L.A., San Bernardino and Orange counties smash into each other) to two of the most progressive in the country, Linda Sanchez and Hilda Solis. In March Jane and I went to meet Hilda for the first time at our friend Rick Jacob's house. She's as impressive as her voting record and we invited her to come and meet the Blue America community.

Hilda is probably best known as someone who's always ready to pitch in and lend a hand to a fellow progressive. In fact, a disgusted member of Pombo's Natural Resources Committee, she was a big supporter of Jerry McNerney and, in fact, the next time I saw Hilda she had come to a McNerney campaign event to tell Angelinos how well he was doing in his new job. Last week when I was on the phone with Angie Paccione she told me how Hilda had given her lots of support in her bid to oust homophobic maniac Marilyn Musgrave. And just a few days ago I was talking with Russ Warner, the Democrat taking on David Dreier and he told me how Hilda had taken some very Republican parts of Dreier's district into her own, which will make it more likely for a Democrat to unseat him. (When I asked her about that she laughed and said she gets hate mail from those zip codes.

Despite the hate mail, last November she took 83% of the ballots cast in CA-32, the highest percentage of anyone from Southern California. The district includes parts of East L.A. and the adjacent suburbs Mexican-American families moved to from there. The district is 62% Hispanic, 18% Asian. A NY Times restaurant critic claims her district has some of the best food in America and described his time there as a "memorable week in the gastronomic trenches." The neighborhoods are bristling with the energy, enthusiasm and the infectious community-spirit of new homeowners.

They couldn't have found a better suited representative. But they already knew that; she represented the area in the Assembly and then the state Senate. Her dad was a Teamsters union shop steward from Mexico and her mom was an assembly line worker from Nicaragua. They met while they were taking citizenship classes in L.A. Hilda was the first Latina elected to the state Senate and when she ran for Congress she took on entrenched incumbent Matthew Martinez, a reactionary Democratic hack who was backed by the Insider machine. With the help of feminists, Labor and environmental groups, and running as an unabashed progressive, she kicked his right-wing ass from Azusa and Covina to Rosemead and East L.A., taking 62% of the vote. (He switched parties and ran against her in the general election as a Republican; Hilda took 79% of that vote, one of the highest percentages in history by which a challenger beat an incumbent.)

Aside from women's issues (more on that below), her career work, to a great extent, has been tied up with health care and the environment, particularly where they intersect. and she told Jane and I a tragic story about her father getting an environmentally-related lung disease. She was the first woman to receive a JFK Profile in Courage Award (2000) for the work she did, first showing the connection between polluting projects and minority neighborhoods and then battling it with the first environmental justice legislation in California. Today she's working with Barack Obama on national legislation on brownfields, particularly in regard to commercial pollution that has increased leukemia rates and the kinds of thyroid problems and hormone imbalances that effect pregnant women. "The EPA," she told me, "hasn't done anything about this in a decade. California's standards are fine but this has to move into other parts of the country too." Simultaneously she's one of the most consistent sparkplugs behind the movement to have the federal government set safety standards for perchlorate (literally, ultra toxic rocket fuel from Department of Defense projects) that gets into the drinking water.

A top lieutenant of Nancy Pelosi's, Hilda is a senior whip, a vice-chair Democratic Steering and Policy Committee and the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Task Force on Health and the Environment. Last year she was also chair of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues, where she was able to bring the force of her intellect and personality to push issues that were systematically being sidelined by the Bush Regime and it's rubber stamp allies in Congress, particularly matters pertaining to violence against women. She was one of the leaders of the efforts to put a stop to the epidemic of murders of women in Ciudad Juárez, just on the other side of the river from El Paso.

I want to do a commercial now. Stick with me. Do you remember when the netroots was tearing its hair out of its virtual head because the battle for leadership of the congressional Democratic caucus came down to a fight between a corporate shill and K Street whore who backs Bush in Iraq (Steny Hoyer) and a social reactionary who has spent a career voting with Republicans on almost everything but has suddenly changed his tune on one-- Iraq-- (Jack Murtha). I spoke with both at length and couldn't back either. Many of us asked why there were no real progressives in the race. We wonder why we get stuck with corrupt leaders we're ashamed of and can't back-- like Hoyer and Rahm Emanuel in the House, and Schumer, Baucus and even Reid (who has a very poor voting record on women's choice issues) in the Senate.

Electing Democrats is crucial because the alternative is right-wing destruction of the values and principles we cherish-- like what we've just gone through for nearly 7 years. But helping our proven progressive leaders, men and women like Barbara Lee (CA), Raul Grijalva (AZ), Janice Schakowsky (IL), Tammy Baldwin (WI), Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL), Lynn Woolsey (CA), John Tierney (MA), Ed Markey (MA), Jim McGovern (MA), Linda Sanchez (CA), Maurice Hinchey (NY) and, of course Jerry Nadler and Hilda, is the next step. "People assume," Hilda told me, "that because I'm in a safe district that I don't need any campaign support. But because my district is relatively safe I can help elect Democrats like Jerry McNerney. Being active that way gives me a place at the table when the decisions are made."


If we don't help people like Hilda Solis to get a place at that table, all the priorities, decisions and strategies will be made by the Rahm Emanuels, Steny Hoyers and Collin Petersons. If you're not satisfied with that, if you think we can do better, please join me in contributing what you can to the campaign of this extraordinary congresswoman. What does Hilda bring to the party? She has a point of view that needs to be in the debate-- that we need to have in the debate... loud and clear and fearlessly.

Watch what you wish for, Montana! You're getting your U.S. attorney back--the latest rat to abandon the sinking ship of AG Idiot Al "The Torture Guy"

"The attorney general is running out of fall guys."
--New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, responding to the news that William W. Mercer is giving up his gig as acting associate attorney general, the no. 3 person in the Justice Department

Rats, of course, are famous for deserting sinking ships. Which becomes a problem when you staff an entire U.S. administration with them. As the rat-brigade exodus from the Bush Justice Department picks up speed, It looks as if there soon won't be anyone left there to play with--or serve as fall guy for--the boss, AG Idiot Al "The Torture Guy" Gonzales.

William Mercer, you may recall, has been holding onto his job as U.S. attorney for Montana while acting as associate attorney general, third in command at the DoJ behind the AG and deputy AG. "Holding onto" the job, you may also recall, is not the same thing as doing the job. In fact, our Bill has been so busy in Washington trampling on federal law and the Constitution, including active participation in the cover-up of the purge of competent U.S. attorneys, that the folks back home--including some testy U.S. judges--have been feeling neglected. As the Washington Post's Dan Eggen reports (on page A4!):

Democrats were most critical of Mercer for spending much of his time in Washington over the past two years rather than in his permanent job as U.S. attorney in Montana. Mercer spent an average of three days a month in Billings, according to testimony. Montana's chief federal judge often criticized Mercer's absences and asked Gonzales to replace him. The attorney general refused and assured the judge in a November 2005 letter that Mercer's appointment was lawful.

On the same day that letter was written, however, Mercer instructed a GOP staff member to insert language into a USA Patriot Act reauthorization bill allowing federal prosecutors to live outside their districts to serve in other jobs, according to documents and interviews. The provision -- which retroactively applied to Mercer's tenure in Washington -- was passed by Congress last year. Lawmakers are considering legislation to repeal the measure.

Well, Montana boys and girls, you're in luck! Your boy is coming home! Back to the job he was already confirmed for, back before anybody knew what a sleazebucket he is (or, perhaps more accurately, in the days when the Republican-controlled Senate didn't care what sleazebuckets Bush appointees were). Days before our Bill was to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee in furtherance of his increasingly dubious struggle for confirmation for this job he's been doing for two years, he packed it in, writing his boss, Idiot Al:

"After much consideration, I have concluded that it is highly unlikely that both the Judiciary Committee and the Senate will take prompt action on my nomination in the near term, if ever."

Once our Bill is back on the job in Billings, perhaps he'll get some more much-deserved attention as part of an official inquiry into the real question about Purge-Gate: What did the Bush-appointed U.S. attorneys who kept their jobs have to do to keep them?

JIM INHOFE (R-OK) MAY HAVE FORGOTTEN TO TAKE HIS MAALOX BEFORE GOING TO BED THE OTHER NIGHT

photo by Conium

There are many versions of how this god or that god created the earth and mankind and all the little birds and bees and fishies. One version currently in vogue is that shortly after caveman time, the Jewish tribe's god created everything in 6 days and then took a rest on the seventh day-- which was Saturday but has more recently come to be Sunday. But... how exactly do you define a day? Some religionists are now interpreting it to mean-- and I think I heard one religionist kook, a certain primitivist senator from Kansas currently making a fool of himself by running for president, get into this on TV-- that a "day" might actually mean something different in god-time than in man time. I mean, do what David Byrne did and look at god backwards and-- voila!-- a day might be measured in some kind of dog-years formula. So God created the earth in 6 days but it was actually four million, three-hundred and fifty-seven thousand, six-hundred and twenty-two years, ten months, three weeks, seven hours and nine minutes. The guys from the Bronze Age tribes that made this stuff up had crude measuring devises and limited imaginations.


Anyway, speaking of primitive people who make things up and have limited imaginations, what do you know about Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe other than him being a crazy religionist fanatic who goes bonkers when anyone mentions Global Warming? The Oklahoma loon, on a lifelong jihad against evolution-- and he is certainly living proof that we don't all evolve at the same rate-- has taken to sneaking up behind his colleagues and trying to eavesdrop. But then he can't seem to figure out if the discussions he imagines hearing took place 3 days ago or 3 years ago or it was just his (limited) imagination. Use your imagination and picture Jim Inhofe running for election in your state. (Or, imagine something far, far better.)

Anyway, I woke up this morning and I used my own imagination to figure out how Jim Inhofe might explain his claims about Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton if Saint Whomever asked him to sing a little song at the pearly gates on a big ole cloud in the sky to explain the bearing false witness charge someone might make against him:

SONG LIST FOR SHILLARY

Most of my friends from the music biz are long gone and moved on to other endeavors. DWT correspondent Noah has hung in there. But he rarely takes his eyes off the ball and he noticed a candidate for president (of the United States... of America) looked for a song to symbolize her campaign and chose one-- a lame one at that-- from a Canadian artist. And not even a hip or insightful Canadian artist like Joni Mitchell, Neil Young, Leonard Cohen, Barenaked Ladies or Alanis Morissette, but from a schlocky Las Vegas poseur, a kind of empty suit, something you might expect from... Mitt Romney. Noah's got an idea though; let's find our own song for Hillary or any of our favorite candidates. Here's Noah:

I couldn't help but gag this week at our psychophantic media's response to Hillary Clinton's "Select-O-Song" machinations in choosing a campaign theme song for her mega-cash dash to the White House. Just as they've spent years now kissing Dubya's butt, now the media hacks are marching along with the favorite of corporate board rooms across America. The Daily News in New York praised the video as "stunningly brilliant." Well, in a world where Paris Hilton can be called a recording artist, I suppose it's possible. I think everyone has, by now, seen the Clintons' ironic version of the last Sopranos scene. Is it more ironic than they know, or is it just an obvious comparison? After all, Bill has been spending a lot of time with godfather Daddy Bush these days.

The clip is a good example of well-orchestrated viral marketing. More and more politicians realize they need to use the Internet, however, this one is a fine example of how corporations and corporate types take something hip and cool and pollute it. I liken it to how, when a big pop recording artist comes out of nowhere, the record companies rush to imitate the success but that imitation always pales next to the real thing; sort of like the Beatles/Monkees thing, or, in the media world, when some lame-o like Chris Mathews or any other mainstream media hack starts up a blog on the network website in a pathetic attempt to be relevant. In any event, I've seen better video clips from high school kids.

Hillary's choice of a Celine Dion song is also a perfect match. Critics of Celine often refer to her as mechanical and bereft of true feeling. Hillary does, however, reveal a talent-- acting, but then, isn't she ALWAYS acting? She knows how to follow a script, no matter who might be writing it. It's also a laugh that the chosen Dion song, You And I was originally written for a COMMERCIAL. Not only that, it was a commercial for a CANADIAN company, Air Canada. Is this some sort of NAFTA thing? Whatever. Hillary? She's DEAD to me.

Lest anyone think I'm just all about spitting venom, I thought DownWithTyranny fans might find some humor and release in coming up with BETTER, more appropriate song selections for Shillary's campaign theme song; no need to limit it just to her either! So, I've decided to start a list of songs. Some even have brief explanations or key lyrics. Please feel free to contribute your own ideas. I'm sure we can come up with a very nice list, a whole box set's worth! My list follows.

The Who- Won't Get Fooled Again ("Meet the new boss, same as the old boss")
Bob Dylan- Positively 4th Street ("You've got a lot of nerve to say you are my friend," indeed!)
The Ramones- Beat On The Brat (a reference to Bill, perhaps?)
Alice Cooper- Elected or Billion Dollar Babies
Brite Eyes- When The President Talks To God
Neil Young- Just about anything from his most recent album.
Jackson Browne- Running On Empty
Midnight Oil- Read About It ("The rich get richer. The poor get the picture")
Romeo Void- Never Say Never ("I might like you better if we slept together")
Leonard Cohen- Chelsea Hotel #2 (The name of the hotel is mere coincidence. It's what happens at the hotel that may remind the listener of something.)
John Lennon- Cripple Inside or Gimme Some Truth
The Clash- Should I Stay, Or Should I go?
The Psychedelic Furs- President Gas (The title says it all.)
Cream- Politician
The Byrds- I Wanna Grow Up To Be A Politician ("and take over this land.")
Stevie Wonder- Big Brother
Phil Ochs- Love Me, I'm A Liberal
Woody Guthrie- Howdido!
Nick Lowe- Little Hitler

NOAH

equal time:

WYOMING SENDS CONGRESS A FOURTH HOMOPHOBIC GAY REPUBLICAN SENATOR-- MEET JOHN BARRASSO

When right wing extremist Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY) died 2 weeks ago, state law dictated that the Wyoming governor, Dave Freudenthal, a conservative Democrat, pick a Republican. The Wyoming State Republican Party submitted 3 candidates and today Freudenthal picked conservative state Senator John Barrasso, an orthopedic surgeon, to fill the Senate until next year's general election. Barrasso is said to have a good working relationship with Freudenthal and isn't considered as much an extremist as most Wyoming Republican officials. In 1996 when he ran for the Senate seat being vacated by retiring Alan Simpson, he ran as a pro-choice Republican (and was beaten by extremist maniac Michael Enzi, an anti-choice fanatic and complete Bush Regime rubber stamp).

Barrasso wrote, "I believe in limited government, lower taxes, less spending, traditional family values, local control and a strong national defense. In the state Senate... I have voted for prayer in schools, against gay marriage and have sponsored legislation to protect the sanctity of life." I guess he learned his lesson about being in pro-choice in the GOP. As for the anti-gay stuff, this is especially interesting because it has long been rumored that the 54 year old doctor is homosexual himself. He doesn't talk about his sexuality but it is pretty well known in Wyoming politics that he has a lover and is only semi-closeted. A Wyoming gay rights organization has rated his voting record on issues impacting gays and lesbians an F- ("extremely anti-gay").

Completely closeted Senate Minority Leader Miss McConnell welcomed Barrasso to the Senate and said he hopes Barrasso can be sworn in as soon as Monday. Now there are 4 gay Republican U.S. senators all of whom opposed gay marriage equality. I should add that one looks like he may be a political goner. Lindsey Graham's approval ratings in South Carolina have sunk to 31%, not because he's a hypocritical closet case but because he favors what extreme right wing elements of the GOP consider an "amnesty bill." Luckily for Graham the right wing extremist who was being pushed by the religious right, State Treasurer Tommy Ravenel was busted for selling cocaine. (He was also the director of Giuliani's South Carolina presidential campaign. Graham, of course, is supporting McCain, whose cabinet he hopes to serve in.)

RUDY GIULIANI AND SUSAN COLLINS EACH HAS A VERY TOXIC FRIEND

Last night the American senator who has done the most to undermine any chance of ending the Iraq occupation-- and who most participated with Bush and Cheney in creating the atmosphere to allow the public to be deceived into supporting the war against Iraq, Joe Lieberman-- threw a fundraising party for Susan Collins. Lieberman is one of the worst corporate whores in the history of the Congress. Lobbyists all know if you'll pay him enough, you can own him. Last night he supplied the K-Y while they lined up to get to know his pay Collins.

Many bloggers decided to alert the public of the Lieberman/Collins/K Street love triangle, and, at the same time, urge concerned Americans to stand up to Lieberman by contributing campaign funds to progressive Democratic Congressman Tom Allen, who is taking on Collins next year. So far Blue America has seen over 100 new donors from Crooks & Liars, Firedoglake and DownWithTyranny kick in $5,709. Although many donors have given $5 and $10, the average contribution has been $35.30.

Tom noticed too. Jane and John and I just got a great thank you letter from him to the whole Blue America community:

I want to thank communities of Firedoglake, DownWithTyranny!, and Crooks and Liars for your efforts and support over the last week. I am astounded by the blogosphere's effort to counter Joe Lieberman's fundraiser for Susan Collins. The response from the netroots community in the last few weeks shows the incredible power of small donors to make a big difference. Such activism sends a strong message that we must end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home. Unfortunately, my opponent and Joe Lieberman have consistently voted to support the President's failed policies on Iraq.

Again, I thank you. I cannot do this without you-– and I look forward to working with you to end the war and beat Susan Collins!

Tom

Please consider even a small contribution to Tom's campaign. This is the time to rid the Senate of rubber stamps like Collins and getting strong anti-occupation senators like Tom elected. And let's let Lieberman know what we think of treachery. Click here to donate. Of course, Susan Collins isn't the only Republican with sleazy, unsavory friends and supporters.

Rudy Giuliani has a lot of sleazy friends. He's made tens of millions of dollars capitalizing on and exploiting 9/11. In fact he was so busy raking in the dough that he never attended an Iraq Study Group meeting (and was eventually kicked off the panel). Some of his closest associates are mobsters and crooked exploitation artists. Forget his best bud/Mafia connection Bernie Kerik for a minute and go to a more recent Giuliani associate: the director of his South Carolina presidential campaign. South Carolina is HUGE for the GOP field and you'd think Giuliani would pick someone he trusts to handle the state for him, right? I mean he's supposed to be a leaders and an even better version than Bush of a potential CEO president.

Well, Giuliani's South Carolina, the state's Treasurer was just indicted on federal drug charges. But Giuliani has a far more potentially hazardous pal he may have to start explaining. Today Salon published the story of
Giuliani's child molesting priest friend, Alan Placa. Placa is one of Giuliani's tightest cronies and, like lots of other crooked players-- Kerik is the most famous example-- works at Giuliani's suspicious and notoriously unscrupulous lobbying firm, Giuliani Partners. Placa, like many Roman Catholic priests and mentally deranged Republican closet cases, is a serial groper of young boys. He also helped the Church cover up for other priestly child molesters, like 60 of them.

Placa and Giuliani are extremely close. Placa conspired with Rudy on his multiple marriages, divorces, annulments, incest cases, transvestitism, etc. and Rudy has consistently protected Placa from charges that he was having sex with underage boys. Giuliani runs with a bad crowd, a very, very bad crowd. I doubt decent Republican family values voters in South Carolina and Iowa are aware that Giuliani's priest bud felt his role as God's spokesman was to cover up rapes and molestations in churches and on camping trips and even in the homes of minors that priests could gain access to easily from trusting parents. Placa would transfer his fellow molesters from parish to parish to keep them out of the hands of the police. I wonder what cabinet position Rudy has in store for him.

Sometimes you really do have to make a judgment about someone you want to feel you can trust. Looking at the friends they have chosen to stay close to may tell you a great deal about them. Susan Collins picked Joe Lieberman, one of the most disliked and untrustworthy and duplicitous members of the Senate, someone more bloodthirsty than anyone in government outside of Cheney. And Rudy picked a child molester.

MISS McCONNELL'S KENTUCKY GOP GOES ON A VICIOUS SMEAR CAMPAIGN AGAINST DEMOCRATS, ACCUSING THEM-- FALSELY-- OF BEING LIKE McCONNELL

For many years-- over a decade-- "everyone" knew Republican congressman Mark Foley was gay. "Everyone?" Well "everyone" who read DWT knew because we often complained when he voted for the viciously homophobic Republican agenda. We call that hypocritical and... well, insane. Many other websites all talked about Foley's hypocrisy. Then there are the gay communities in South Florida and Washington, DC. Long before he was trying to drunk and trying to break into the boys dorm of the congressional page program after midnight, he had gradually stopped being circumspect about being gay, even around his fellow homophobic colleagues. He had gotten away with so much he was, for all intents and purposes "out" to official Washington. Both Republicans and Democrats knew he was gay and many-- far too many-- knew he was molesting underage pages. "Everyone," on the other hand did not include the sugar cane farmers and churchgoers in the mostly rural district west of West Palm Beach Florida and goes right across the middle of the state from the Atlantic to the Gulf of Mexico. No one bothered to tell the voters that their congressman, who voted a straight party line-- voting against the most crucial interests of ordinary gay men and women-- was an anguished, alcoholic, self-medicating and mentally disturbed closet queen, having sex with young men while being torn apart mentally and emotionally by his severe psychological conflicts. "Everyone" never includes the voters back in the district.

And "everyone" knows that the far more closeted and discreet Miss McConnell is another Republican who has been gay for decades, hiding in the closet, pretending to be married to another Bush Regime automaton, while pushing through an agenda that is destructive to the well-being of gay men and women who are not afforded all the opportunities that millions and millions of dollars in legalized bribes give Kentucky's highest ranking-- albeit hidden-- closet case.


All that said, it strikes many as rather odd that Miss McConnell's Kentucky Republican Party should launch a smear campaign against Democratic politicians, implying--falsely-- that they are gay (as though there is inherently something wrong with being gay. The KY GOP isn't accusing the Democrats of being hypocritical the way McConnell is-- sneaking around and getting some nookie on the sly while maintaining a career by proselytizing for a gratuitously homophobic agenda, bringing misery and destruction to the lives of countless gay and lesbian Americans. They're just accusing them of being "limp-wristed," or a "switch-hitter" and "not a man."

Jack Conway, one of the victims of the GOP smear campaign, is a respected Louisville attorney and former candidate for Attorney General reacted angrily. "'They start a false rumor and they peddle it,' he said in an interview, referring to Robertson and Gov. Ernie Fletcher. 'When they can't lead, they lie. They are hate-mongers and fear-mongers that owe my wife an apology.' The other Democrat the State Republican Party is accusing of being gay is Dan Mongiardo, currently a candidate for Lt. Governor.

It's not the first time Republicans have made such a suggestion about Mongiardo.

They were accused of gay-baiting in his 2004 campaign against Republican U.S. Sen. Jim Bunning. State legislators campaigning for Bunning said that Mongiardo, a state senator from Hazard, was "limp-wristed," a "switch-hitter" and "not a man."

...Jimmy LaSalvia, president of the Kentucky chapter of the Log Cabin Republicans, a group that supports gay rights, said Robertson's letter was an "embarrassment" to him. He called the reference to Mongiardo and Conway "despicable."

"I'm just disappointed, and it really makes me sad that he is the head of our party. We need strong leadership and smart leadership," LaSalvia said.

Miss McConnell, of course, was barricaded in his closet and refusing to comment.

THE REPUBLICANS HAVE MORE TO WORRY ABOUT THAN JUST BUSH'S TOTAL REJECTION

Bush may be the Republicans' most visible problem, but he's certainly not their only problem. No one thought the 28% approval rating he's had almost all year could possibly go down. But it just did; Newsweek has a new poll out that shows only 26% of Americans approve of the job Bush has been doing. It's worse when you just look at Iraq. "A record 73 percent of Americans disapprove of the job Bush has done handling Iraq."

The 26 percent rating puts Bush lower than Jimmy Carter, who sunk to his nadir of 28 percent in a Gallup poll in June 1979. In fact, the only president in the last 35 years to score lower than Bush is Richard Nixon. Nixon’s approval rating tumbled to 23 percent in January 1974, seven months before his resignation over the botched Watergate break-in.

Bush's problem-- and the GOP's problem-- is that virtually no one believes anything he says anymore. Sidney Blumenthal opened the heavy curtains and what's he's exposed bodes badly for Bush and his party. And for good reason.

In private, Bush administration sub-Cabinet officials who have been instrumental in formulating and sustaining the legal "war paradigm" acknowledge that their efforts to create a system for detainees separate from due process, criminal justice and law enforcement have failed. One of the key framers of the war paradigm (in which the president in his wartime capacity as commander in chief makes and enforces laws as he sees fit, overriding the constitutional system of checks and balances), who a year ago was arguing vehemently for pushing its boundaries, confesses that he has abandoned his belief in the whole doctrine, though he refuses to say so publicly. If he were to speak up, given his seminal role in formulating the policy and his stature among the Federalist Society cadres that run it, his rejection would have a shattering impact, far more than political philosopher Francis Fukuyama's denunciation of the neoconservatism he formerly embraced. But this figure remains careful to disclose his disillusionment with his own handiwork only in off-the-record conversations. Yet another Bush legal official, even now at the commanding heights of power, admits that the administration's policies are largely discredited. In its defense, he says without a hint of irony or sarcasm, "Not everything we've done has been illegal." He adds, "Not everything has been ultra vires" -- a legal term referring to actions beyond the law.

I suspect that Cheney's latest above the law, extra-Constitutional power grab isn't going to help matters, not at all. It may be hard to imagine anyone making someone as sleazy and corrupt as Rahm Emanuel look good. Cheney does.

GOP propagandist Robert Novak feels the spill over will be devastating for the GOP. "The private outlook for '08 by Republican leaders is gloomy-- not a Democratic blowout, but probable Democratic wins for President, Senate and House, with the best GOP chance being in the race for President. It may be premature, but Republican insiders are already talking about the outlook for 2010."

And he's being optimistic. Less biased observers do see a Democratic blowout in the making. There isn't a Republican presidential candidate that is satisfactory to any sizable part of the fracturing Republican coalition. But even worse than the dislike so many Republicans feel towards senile and untrustworthy John McCain who's out of sync with America on Iraq and out of sync with the GOP base on immigration or with Giuliani's bizarre and highly unorthodox personal life and his closeness with criminal figures is the explosive "religion issue" embedded in Romney's thirst for the presidency.

The kind of bigotry that fuels Fundie-Christianist hatred for Mormonism-- not that they don't hate everything and everyone else-- is something that doesn't get spoken about publicly, at least not with strangers around. The GOP candidates themselves are, to a greater or lesser degree, sincere about being opposed to blatant religious bigotry. However, the trick is to keep your goddam supporters' mouths shut. The fundie nuts have had permission and even encouragement to hate the Mormon cult for years and decades. They also quietly-- more or less-- hate Jews, Catholics, Muslims (no one has to feign politeness about that any longer; I mean it's almost acceptable to be an anti-Islam bigot in polite company in much of America and it the Buy Bull belt it's practically required), and even non-fundie Protestants. Lately it's been spilling over into the presidential campaign, where Mitt Romney is getting more crap because he's a cult member than because he's flip flopped on every major issue that's important to the Republican base.

GOP crackpots can say any loony thing and be treated like statesmen while Dems taking aim at the chaos are ridiculed. So what else is new?

Chimpy has the gall to say, "All human life is
sacred," and doesn't get pelted with rotten fruit?

"All human life is sacred."
--Chimpy the Prez, vetoing his second stem-cell bill yesterday in the East Room of the White House

"I'm sure you've already noticed that the media has decided that the next president looks like Mitt Romney, sounds like Fred Thompson, is a strong leader like Rudy Giuliani and is fiercely independent like John McCain. On the progressive side, I guess, we've got a bunch of inexperienced, inauthentic, lightweight, shrill, cold, calculating hypocrites."
--David Brock, president of Media Matters for America, in a speech yesterday at the Take Back America conference

I don't know about this here 2008 presidential campaign. Even listening to the candidates, I don't get the feeling that I'm learning much about who they are or what they would do as president--and naturally, the closer each comes to "serious candidate" status, the more you get the feeling that the tone and content have been consultant-processed to sound like what the consultant thinks voters want to hear.

Oh wait, did I mention that I'm only talking about the Democratic candidates? I'm confident that I know all I need to know about the Republican horrors. My goodness, what a bunch! In greater or lesser degree I admire all the Democratic hopefuls; I just despair of crystal-balling what sort of presidency each might shape. Where the Republicans are concerned, the only question is, in what way(s) exactly would this thug's administration differ from the nightmare we've lived through these last seven years?

It's useful to be reminded, however, that this isn't at all the image that's being conveyed to the country at large. Maybe this has been obvious to all of you out there, who have probably been paying closer attention than I have, but I was really struck by this chunk from David Brock's speech at Talk Back America which was highlighted in the release sent out by his estimable organization, MediaMatters:

We're going to have a big challenge in the next 18 months. I'm sure you've already noticed that the media has decided that the next president looks like Mitt Romney, sounds like Fred Thompson, is a strong leader like Rudy Giuliani and is fiercely independent like John McCain. On the progressive side, I guess, we've got a bunch of inexperienced, inauthentic, lightweight, shrill, cold, calculating hypocrites. So we've made a commitment that we are not going to go through another election cycle accepting those caricatures, and today you make that commitment with us.

Of course, as soon as I read it, I realized that he's exactly right, as he usually is.

I don't suppose I really imagined that campaign coverage was going to give me a clearer picture of the substance of the candidates' projected administrations. But I don't think it occurred to me that, while some inescapable truths (McCain's casual dishonesty, Mitt's total lack of belief in anything except self-promotion, Rudy's sleight-of-hand about what he has claimed to believe in the past, not to mention the skeletons in his historical closet, etc.) may not be escaped for the duration of the campaign, the images are likely to become even more grotesquely phantasmagoric.

But then, isn't this the country where a lying sack of shit can proclaim, "All human life is sacred," without being pelted with catcalls and rotten tomatoes, if not actual thunderbolts? And then it gets reported in the media as if it weren't as great an affront to truth and decency as the human mouth is capable of delivering.

Sigh.

CAST A VOTE AGAINST JOE LIEBERMAN'S PERNICIOUS POLITICS TONIGHT

A few weeks ago Blue America hosted progressive Congressman Tom Allen (D-ME) for an insightful and exciting chat at Firedoglake. Tonight Joe Lieberman, the treacherous and reactionary former Democrat, is hosting a fundraiser for Republican rubber stamp Senator Susan Collins. I would like to ask every DWT reader who can afford $5 or $10 to meditate for a few minutes about Lieberman and then click our Blue America page and make a donation to Tom's campaign. The Senate will be a much better place with one less war supporter, one less fake moderate, one Lieberman crony, replaced by someone who wants to-- and always voted to-- end the U.S. occupation of Iraq and is a genuine progressive and no friend of the odious Lieberman.


UPDATE: ANY OF THIS LOOK FAMILIAR?

ARE THERE ANY JEWISH REPUBLICANS?

Bloomberg at least was smart enough to realize that one sure bet in this presidential cycle coming up is that unless the Democrats decide to nominate Al Sharpton, there is no chance a Republican is going to be president. Americans have had enough. The party's over.

I often comment on how sick and self-loathing a gay person has to be-- how severely mentally and emotionally disturbed-- in order to somehow justify being part of the GOP, a party forever running on a platform that declares that gay men and women are somehow less than the rest of us. But there are gay Republicans, even above and beyond the loony bin known as the Log Cabin Republicans and above and beyond the predators like Mark Foley (R-FL) and Jim West (R-WA) and Larry Craig (R-ID) hiding behind anti-gay rhetoric to pursue a personal agenda of anti-social behavior, instead of a normal, healthy gay lifetsyle-- which the GOP is hysterical to nullify-- but a lifetstyle based on fear and shame and self-hatred, Gay the Republican Way, a lifetsyle that leads to molesting children (Foley and West) and seeking out relationships in public toilets (Craig). Yes, beyond this are gay Republicans whose politics are driven by greed and avarice and ditziness and ignorance. And, of course, there are gay racists and bigots too, who think by kicking someone perceived as slightly down the ladder of contempt they can find some kind of acceptance among the master class.

Formerly this kind of analysis would have worked perfectly well in discussing Jews who joined the party of Hatred and Bigotry as well. But things have changed. The evangelical psychopaths who have come to power inside the GOP have embraced Zionism. In fact, one of the most extreme nutcases in the whole fascist wing of the GOP, Eric Cantor (R-VA) is Jewish! A few weeks ago my friend Seymour asserted that there are good Republicans but when I asked him to name one he couldn't come up with one beyond Jacob Javits (RIP). I wish I could say there are no Jewish Republicans beyond Eric Cantor-- or even no Jewish evil Republicans beyond Eric Cantor. But that would be wishful thinking.

Now with Bloomberg switching-- party affiliation, not religious creed-- there is one less Jewish Republican (albeit of the not especially evil kind). I have to believe that if enough Jewish Republicans contemplated what their zionist evangelical "allies" had in mind for them, there might be considerably more ex-Republican Jews. In fact, I'd love to ask, Congressman Cantor-- he of the voting record so far right that even Hitler might look the other way for a few moments-- how he feels about this lovely story by J. Grant Swank, Jr., one of the allies, Bible Predicts Middle East Blood Flow. And just to be clear, that's Jew blood he's writing about, but just the stubborn ones who refuse to see the Light.

Prophecy continues to unfold. The Bible has warned about Middle East turmoil increasing "in the latter times."

In Ezekiel 36-39, God speaks of bringing Jews from around the world to Israel, not because they deserve their own land but to vindicate His holy name. They besmirched deity's holy name by repeatedly sinning over centuries; but God will not tolerate His holiness smeared without vindication, hence Jews gravitating to Israel "in the end times."

So look to the divine miracle: May 14, 1948, when Israel became a nation for the first time in centuries. Jews from all over the globe went to Israel, their homeland.

Ezekiel predicted Israel's flourishing: herds, flocks, fruitage, ruined cities rebuilt.

With Israel having settled in, however, biblical predictions go on to state that the enemies surrounding Israel attack Jews mercilessly. Blood flows like rivers.

Natural calamities come also upon Israel, convincing Jews and Gentiles alike that God is God and that His holiness must be recognized.

Far be it from me to try to convince these Bronze Age mentality primitives that their savage fairy tales are a waste of time. However, when the Founder Fathers' collective wisdom can be shunted aside by a mental pygmy like George Bush and the syncophants and Machiavellians-- Mayberry and otherwise-- around him, I have to at least start to worry. And I really do have to worry about someone like Eric Cantor for not worrying. Cantor is the only Republican in the House. In the Senate there's Arlen Specter and Lieberman and former Jew (I guess he already saw the light) Norm Coleman and Hawaii has the only Jewish Republican Governor, Linda Lingle.


UPDATE: WE'RE #1, WE'RE #1

A Jewish DWT correspondent sent us something today similar to what Adam, our former Art Director, sends every week or two:

HERITAGE STUDY

The Heritage Institute did a study showing that of all the distinct ethnic groups in the United
States, including those of English heritage, the Jewish community had the highest "community" score of any other group.

Jews ranked...

Number 1 in providing medical advancements that saved American's lives in the last 100 years.

Number 1 in authorship of both biographical and fictional materials.

Number 1 in per capita income.

Number 1 in the creative arts

Number 1 as educators, (grade school through college level)

Number 1 in the legal profession

Number 1 in the banking/investment banking business.

Number 1 in providing the most charity/philanthropy per capita.

Number 1 in journalist/media participation.

Number 9 in military service. (they made the top ten, out of 20 ranked ethnic groups)

Number 10 in athletics. The Jews squeaked into the last top spot with their participation in ice skating, tennis, track and baseball. (Rod Carew was allowed)

Number 1 in the lowest incidents of anti-social behavior. Jews commit the least amount of violent crime of any ethnic group. (The best neighbor to have is a Jew)

America has always honored Jews and that is why Jewish representation in Congress is at an all-time high and vastly exceeds their numbers in the population.

They didn't mention that the only Jewish Republican congressman is the Number 1 nut in the House of Representatives.

Allow us to be the very last to pontificate on the political significance of Mayor Mike Bloomberg's tearless formal kiss-off of the Republican Party

Since everybody else has already run his/her mouth off about New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's much-heralded announcement yesterday that he's changing his party registration from Republican to None-of-the-Above, and since DWT does after all have an NYC outpost, we keep thinking we ought to say something about this news, if only for the record.

(1) We don't believe he's running for president, though we have no difficulty believing he's had his people research all the ins and outs of it. Funny thing about our Mike: He seems to like to gather information--lots and lots of it, and on all sides of the question--before he commits to a course of action. Any contrast between this quaint old practice and the decision-making process of certain other public officials we could name is . . . well, possibly instructive. For the record, our Mike didn't become a billionaire by accident.

(2) Is he keeping his options open? Well, duh, isn't that what smart people usually do? This is politics, after all, which means you never know.

(3) So why this elaborately orchestrated public spectacle? Oh, come now! Even the Washington Post's Howie "Don't Got a Clue" Kurtz was speculating yesterday that, as a term-limited NYC mayor with no obvious immediate political stepping stones, Mike is about to vanish into a media black hole. And while he never quite got around to making what seemed to be his point, the inevitable attention Mike knows he will get as a possible presidential candidate makes it easier for him to keep those options open (see No. 2 above), and perhaps even expand them. (When Hapless Howie gets it, you figure it's either blindingly obvious or preposterously wrong.)

(4) Uh, hold on a sec, you say this Bloomberg fellow was a Republican?


UPDATE FROM HOWIE, NEARLY ARRIVED IN MIKE'S TOWN

Well, I was born in Brooklyn, so it's my town too. But when I checked into my hotel, much earlier than normal-- since I'm usually flying from L.A., not Montreal like today-- the hotel didn't have my apartment ready. They were terribly apologetic and asked me to give them 30 minutes. Not a problem; I was anxious to see if Saks has a sale on underwear. It's always hit-and-miss for me. Their own brand is my favorite boxers and when they're on sale, you get the highest quality for the lowest price (my favorite thing). But I've never been able to figure out when they do those super-sales. It's only half a block from the hotel and-- BOOM!-- 30% off. I stocked up. And then, even more glorious, I was told that Mayor Mike had abolished the sales tax for any purchase under $110. He must be running for something!

Don't forget, it's Seersucker Thursday. Hide the kids! And if Rick Santorum or Billy "White Shoes" Frist should show up, just throw the bum out!

Note to Senate bouncer: You see either of these
lovebirds, toss him out on his ass. They're history.

Yes, friends, the dreaded day is here! Our friend Melody, who's been providing the background material for DWT's extensive Seersucker Thursday 2007 coverage, also dug up these photos for us--from Seersucker Thursday 2004! Setting aside the small matter of this being Your U.S. Senate at Work, if this doesn't make you feel better about wherever you are and whatever you're doing, nothing will.


POSTSCRIPT: A SEERSUCKER FAN'S DILEMMA

The DWT Ethics-in-Style Department has received the following heart-rending e-mail:

Dear DownWithTyranny Ethics-in-Style Dept.:

I've been following DWT's Seersucker Thursday 2007 coverage with fascination and horror, and seen the stomach-churning pictures. My problem is that I own a seersucker suit, which I used to like to wear sometimes in the summer. Oh, it creases like crazy, and stains something awful, and is hell to try to keep clean, but on those really hot days it can feel a lot cooler than a normal "summer" suit. (Would you believe, in my lousy job I've got to wear a suit! It really is a lousy, low-paying, dead-end job, but these days I figure I'm lucky to have it.) And I have to say, I even kind of like the look of it.

Or I used to. Now that photo of Rick Santorum with the pink tie is causing me nightmares. What do I do? I mean, I have this powerful impulse to burn the damn thing. Help!

Tom in Cincinnati

Well, Tom, this is a tough one. We would never encourage you to destroy property that you paid for with your oh-so-hard-earned money, all the more so since you once liked the suit.

On the other hand, there's no getting around those photos--although perhaps the Seersucker Thursday 2007 coverage will make it seem less like a perversion of ultra-right-wing loons. (Will we see Harry Reid in seersucker? Would that be good news or bad for seersucker fans?)

Maybe other DWT readers will have some helpful thoughts for you, but in the end, Tom, this is strictly a matter between you and your conscience. With one obvious caveat: for the love of God, no white shoes.

BUSH ADDS ANOTHER DRIP TO THE DRIP, DRIP, DRIP OF REPUBLICAN POLITICAL SUICIDE

An editorial in today's NY Times points out that the babies Bush is charging Congress with wanting to kill in his narrowly partisan veto of the broadly popular stem cell research bill "is smaller than the period at the end of this sentence." They don't mention that the entity may be small but it has the same brain power as the president.

Instead Bush says that he supports research, just not the research that the scientific community wants to do. You see, aside from being a brilliant military leader, a celebrated religious and spiritual leader and renowned ethicist, a sublime diplomat and an economist without peer, Bush is also a medical scientist and researcher with great vision. Didn't North Korea have a leader just like him once?

Mr. Bush knows that most Americans support embryonic stem cell research-- while his political base does not-- so yesterday he sought to at least blunt their dismay by touting new scientific studies focused on deriving potent stem cells from amniotic fluid, placentas and the skin of laboratory mice. Some of the alternative work is indeed promising. But almost all scientists in the field consider embryonic stem cell research the most promising. It is foolish to crimp that research by withholding federal funds to placate a minority of religious and social conservatives, including Mr. Bush, who deem the work unethical.

The Times urges Congress to override Bush's veto. It won't be easy. "The Senate, which has the best shot at overriding the veto, will vote first, in hopes that a victory there will inspire the House to follow. Americans will need to keep a close eye on which legislators favor the most promising stem cell research and which try to impede scientific progress." That is probably not terribly difficult, since it is safe to assume that almost all members with a "D" after their name favor stem cell research and that almost all with an "R" after their name do not. Two important "almosts" there. There were 16 Congressional Democrats-from-The-Dark-Ages cheering Bush's veto and each merits a serious primary based solely on this issue, almost the vast majority of them deserve primaries because they are reactionary assholes who don't support Democratic Party values and principles and don't belong in the Democratic Party at all, at least not as leaders.Although 37 Republicans shunned their idiotic leaders to vote with the Democrats and the American people in favor of the bill Bush vetoed yesterday, the disgraced Democrats should not be forgotten:

Jerry Costello (IL),
Lincoln Davis (TN),
Joe Donnelly (IN),
Brad Ellsworth (IN),
Marcy Kaptur (OH),
Daniel Lipinski (IL),
Jim Marshall (GA),
Mike McIntyre (NC),
Alan Mollohan (WV),
James Oberstar (MN),
Collin Peterson (MN),
Nick Rahall (WV),
Rahm Emanuel's Heath Shuler (NC),
Bart Stupak (MI),
Gene Taylor (MS),
Charles Wilson (OH)

The only genuine Democrat in the whole is Marcy Kaptur; most of the others might as well be Republicans when it comes to crucial issues.

What Bush has done, in reality, is hand the Democrats a potent campaign issue. The next president will decide whether or not stem cell research will go forward. All the Democrats favor it. Each Republican either hysterically opposes it-- at least during primary season when they're courting that 28% of Bush supporters-- or is confused and muddled about it (McCain and Giuliani, the strong leader guys). In fact one of the Republicans who is in sync with most Americans on this issue and who does support stem cell research, Mike Castle of Delaware, told the Times that it is unlikely that progress will be made on the issue until the American people elect a new president. "We’re going to have to wait either for a change of mind at the White House, which seems unlikely unless there are some major medical breakthroughs, or the next president."

MORE ON GEORGIA... THIS TIME IT'S THE DWT PROFILE IN COWARDICE AWARD TO-- WHO ELSE?-- SAXBY CHAMBERPOT

Johnny Isakson helps his pal Chamberpot unloading toilet paper

Senator Chamberpot (R-GA) thought he was a big shot. He swaggered into the Georgia state Republican party convention last month and told them he was standing firmly behind Georgia Bush and his plan for immigration. The Republican activists and bigwigs booed and hissed him and scared him out of his wits. Chamberpot-- like Lindsey Graham (R-SC) who was also booed at his state's GOP convention the same week, and for the same reason-- will have to face these voters next year. In fact he has an anti-immigration quasi-Democrat, Dale Cardwell, running against him. But unlike Graham, who has been targeted for political annihilation by the extreme right of the GOP, Chamberpot (and fellow Georgia crackpot, Johnny Isakson) has told Bush he's on his own. Chamberpot and Isakson have thrown in their lot with the Know Nothing and bigoted extremist end of the Senate GOP caucus, Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Jim DeMint (R-SC).

A close friend of Chamberpot's says he still has barely controllable loose bowels and severe headaches after facing the booing, hissing Republican conventioneers. Yesterday he and Isakson have told the anti-immigration leaders that they will vote against cloture-- the process that Reid and Bush want to use to move the debate forward. Chamberpot is trying to put lipstick on this pig but the trail of diarrhea spells out one word: "coward." Miss McConnell and Trent Lott, who are trying to round up the votes for Bush-- 22 are needed-- say they think they can do it, but DeMint, leader of the anti-immigration wing of the GOP, is laughing.

It's hard to imagine a movement on the extreme bigoted that Lott isn't part of. But, rather than a coward he's playing another of his signature public roles, that of an out and out lying sack of goat shit. And, of course a racist, a xenophobe and... just plumb out of his mind. You'll recall, of course, how loudly and aggressively Lott (R-MS) pushed for funding a hugely expensive wall to keep the undocumented workers his party tries luring to America in order to hold down labor costs, in a state of anxiety and fear. Today he belched these two little ditties out. First: "If the answer is, 'Build a fence,' I've got two goats on my place in Mississippi. There ain't no fence big enough, high enough, or strong enough you can keep those goats in that fence. Now people are at least as smart as goats, maybe not as agile."

And he soon followed that with: "One of the ways I keep those goats in the fence is I electrified it. Once they got popped a couple times, they quit trying to jump it. ...I'm not proposing an electrified goat fence, I'm just trying ... there's an analogy there." Yes, and there's a murderous fascist too.

From the DWT You Can't Make This Stuff Up Bureau: The State Department calls in Foreign Service volunteers to help with the passport crisis

In the tradition of former FEMA Director Michael "Heckuva Job, Brownie" Brown, those wily small-government (but whopping-big-deficit) Republicans are continuing their campaign to prove that government can't do anything right. The more logical conclusion would be that they can't do anything right, but do we have time to quibble when the Bush State Department is sitting on a summer-travel-ruining backlog of three months for issuing passports.

As often when we enter the realm of You Can't Make This Stuff Up, our tour guide is the Washington Post's Al Kamen, who leads off today's "In the Loop" column with the startling revelation that the beleaguered State Department is calling for volunteers to help with the passport crisis.

No, not you-or-me-type volunteers. They're reaching out to consular officers stationed around the world who have leave time coming and expect to find themselves in or near a city that has a passport office. They'll even get paid a few bucks.

In Washington? On Home Leave?
A Passport Office Needs You.

By Al Kamen

Maura Harty [above], the State Department's designated flak-catcher for the public furor over three-month-plus passport issuance delays -- which are ruining many, many thousands of family vacations and educational and business trips -- is working overtime to reduce the backlog.

Seems the department, where Harty is assistant secretary for consular affairs, grossly underestimated the effect of a new rule requiring passports for people coming back by air from Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean.

Harty, grilled yesterday by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is working to move money around to hire hundreds of workers to handle the avalanche of applications. But that won't be enough, she said in a recent cable to consular officers around the world.

"Our domestic passport agencies are all working flat out," she wrote. "We need your help."

So if you might be passing through Washington this summer while going to a new assignment, she wrote, or maybe going through "another city where we have a domestic passport agency, please consider spending a few days helping out."

There's a task force here "specifically for [Foreign Service] consular volunteers and we would welcome your participation."

"If you are taking home leave near" a passport office "and would be interested in adding a few days of passport work there to your summer . . . plans, we would be happy to arrange that as well." They'll even pay you a per diem -- but not travel costs.

So sign up "if you are interested in helping your colleagues," Harty said, "and in gaining new insight into the important world of domestic passport processing." Nothing like insight. And you can watch as some of the hundreds of thousands of rabid passport seekers try to jump the counter to rip your lungs out.

After that, you can work for the D.C. DMV.

IT'S 2007-- TIME TO GET OUT FROM UNDER THE BOOT OF THE MASTER CLASS YET?

Blue America often thanks contributors to our Saturday progressive fundraisers with little gifts, especially CDs, DVDs and autographed books. Last weekend we offered people who contributed to Angie Paccione's campaign in Colorado, a copy of the phenomenal and breathtaking new book by Kenneth Ackerman, Young J Edgar: Hoover, The Red Scare, And the Assault on Civil Liberties. Ken was kind enough to send an extra copy signed to me which bowled me over and which I explained to myself when I read an anarchist document he quoted-- one I was cheering as I read it-- that ended "Long live the social revolution! Down with tyranny! THE ANARCHIST FIGHTERS." [Bold is mine; caps are the Anarchists'.]

This morning, sitting safely in my apartment in cosmopolitan, friendly, multicultural Montreal I forced myself to put down YOUNG J. EDGAR long enough to take a look at Glenn Greenwald's latest article at Salon, a look at what motivates Bush based on Greenwald's about to be released (June 26) next book, A TRAGIC LEGACY, which I'm very much looking forward to. Salon has published an excerpt today.

Today Greenwald writes about the Republican obsession with justifying their greed, avarice and plentiful human failings in terms of Good v Evil.

One of the core premises enabling such practices -- I'd say the principal one -- is the moralistic proposition that the U.S. is engaged in an epic battle of Good against Evil, that we are on the side of Good, and therefore any means and instruments we employ in service of our battle are, by definition, justifiable. Review any defense from Bush apologists on these issues -- or examine the arguments of GOP presidential candidates in defense of the extremist Bush policies -- and what you will find is the "justification" that America has the right to take any actions to defend itself against the forces of Evil which seek to destroy it. Actions taken by the Force of Good (the U.S.) against the Forces of Evil (the Enemy du jour) are themselves inherently Good.

The use of the Orwelian "Enemy du jour" construct coupled with the Machiavellian concept of the ends justifying the means, at least if the struggle can be painted to be a big enough deal and a horrible enough threat-- sounds, in many ways, like terrorism-- took me right back to Ackerman's book.


In a footnote he takes up the case of the case of Eugene Debs, a socialist who ran for president and was later thrown in prison. "Debs, for instance, was convicted for violating the Espionage Act solely for giving a speech in Canton, Ohio, in June, 1918, in which he criticized the war, and the imprisonment of fellow socialists, and said, among other things: 'The master class has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles. The master class has had all to gain and nothing to lose, while the subject class has had nothing to gain and all to lose-- especially their lives.'" The speech was deemed an obstruction of the war effort and Debs' conviction and imprisonment was upheld by United States Supreme Court in March, 1919.

Some things next change-- although I will never lose hope that they can. Down With Tyranny!

"Live large and plunder!" The Smithsonian crawls out from under seven years of old-time Republicrookery-style mismanagement

"The independent committee criticized [former Smithsonian sheik Lawrence M.] Small's hiring by 'a very small group of regents.' That group included Chief Justice William Rehnquist, former senator Howard Baker (R-Tenn.), Rep. Barber B. Conable Jr. (R-N.Y.) and Wesley S. Williams Jr., a former partner at Covington & Burling law firm."
--a paragraph buried way, way deep in James V. Grimaldi's front-page report in today's Washington Post


If you go to the Smithsonian Institution website, you can find a link for "Mission," which brings you to the following "Vision Statement":

James Smithson's Gift
"I then bequeath the whole of my property...to the United States of America, to found at Washington, under the name of the Smithsonian Institution, an Establishment for the increase & diffusion of knowledge..."
James Smithson (1765-1829)

The, uh, rest of this webpage is blank.

An oversight, no doubt. Avant-garde Web design. The Smithsonian knows its mission, and so do we. It's the gathering of everything we as Americans have accomplished, who we are, and what we dream. It is, well, "an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge."

Unless you're a thieving Republicrook, that is. Republicrooks, like modern-day Republicans in general, don't believe in knowledge. It seems to make them crazy, in fact. They seem to resent people who have any, and especially smarty-pantses who actually believe in increasing and diffusing it. Elitists, they're apt to call such people. Those people think they're just so smart.

It turns out that to this worm Lawrence M. Small the Smithsonian was his own personal sugar daddy. He wangled himself a contract that seems to have entailed no obligations on his part and infinite ones on the institution's. As Washington Post reporter Grimaldi writes, referring to the about-to-be-released report of an independent committee:

The investigators found that "Mr. Small placed too much emphasis on his compensation and expenses." Small's compensation far exceeded that of prior Smithsonian secretaries -- 42 percent higher than his predecessor's when he began in 2000 and 250 percent higher when he left seven years later.

Small "aggressively guarded each and every element of what he viewed as his rightful compensation package," including his $150,000-a-year housing allowance. Small's contract stated that the allowance was meant to compensate Small for his use of his home for job-related entertainment, but the review board determined that it was "simply additional salary."

Of course we'll be hearing noises from Mr. Small--who, incidentally, vamoosed from his job in March--that he's the victim here, that he offered his peerless services to a public institution for a minuscule fraction of their market value, and this is the thanks he gets!

In fact, there doesn't seem to be much evidence that he did a goddamn thing for the Smithsonian besides rob it blind. The Post report begins:

Former Smithsonian secretary Lawrence M. Small took nearly 10 weeks of vacation a year during seven years running the vast museum complex and was absent from his job 550 workdays while earning $5.7 million on outside work, according to an independent commission report to be released today.

What's more, Mr. Small seems to have had his own personal Mini-Me:

The Smithsonian's second-ranking official, Sheila P. Burke, was absent from her job as deputy secretary for 400 days while earning $10 million over six years on non-museum work.

(Ms. Burke quit on Monday, we learn. At a guess, she was overtaken by a sudden desire to pursue other opportunities.)

Of course, no one really knows what Mr. Small did, apart from drain money out of the Smithsonian. Least of all the Board of Regents that nominally oversaw him:

The report, obtained yesterday by The Washington Post, concluded that Small "created an imperialistic and insular culture" that discouraged dissent, kept secrets and limited the flow of information to the Board of Regents, whose job it was to hire and oversee Small.

"Mr. Small's management style -- limiting his interaction to a small number of Smithsonian senior executives and discouraging those who disagreed with him -- was a significant factor in creating the problems faced by the Smithsonian today," the report concluded. "His attitude and disposition were ill-suited to public service and to an institution that relies so heavily, as the Smithsonian does, on federal government support."

What the clueless Smithsonian regents apparently thought Mr. Small was doing was raking in money like the fundraising dynamo he claimed to be:

Smithsonian officials had defended Small's salary and housing allowance earlier this year by saying that Small had been a prolific fundraiser, "personally" raising about $1 billion. However, the independent review committee found that many of the largest gifts in Small's tenure had been initiated by predecessor [I. Michael] Heyman.

While Small helped bring in three large donations totaling $155 million, "those donations originated from the work of others," the report stated.

The committee found that Small, who received a $1.1 million housing allowance for making his home available for institution fundraising, rarely did so. Small entertained 47 donors at 18 fundraising events at his home from 2000 to 2007, mostly in the early years of his tenure.

"Calculated as a per person venue fee for fund-raising, this works out to be over $25,000 per potential donor or almost $70,000 per fund-raising event," the report said.

In fact, Mr. Small seems to have done a fairly crappy job of fundraising.

The report found that fundraising declined and business revenues dropped during Small's tenure, "making the Smithsonian more reliant on federal appropriations and grants."

But our Mr. Small seems to have been at the top of his game when it came to handling the people who were supposed to be watching him, especially this comical episode when he got slightly caught with his hand in the cookie jar:

Earlier this year, the Smithsonian inspector general wrote a confidential report, later obtained by The Post, finding that Small had $90,000 in unauthorized expenses. When two top institution officials attempted to modify the terms of his contract, Small objected.

"I'm not willing to discuss giving up one iota of what the institution agreed to provide me before I came to work," Small wrote in an e-mail. "It would represent the highest form of naiveté to think . . . I would entertain some form of 'give up.' "

Small further demanded that the Smithsonian pay his attorney's fees if he needed legal counsel and suggested that if he lost his first-class travel he would demand an increase in his housing allowance. He also insisted that the two officials, James Hobbins, his executive secretary, and John Huerta, the general counsel of the Smithsonian, not disclose the discussions to the Board of Regents or to [head regent Roger] Sant, who also chairs the board's audit committee.

I don't know about you, but I find this not just appalling, but nauseating. Think of poor, foggy old James Smithson envisioning his "Establishment for the increase & diffusion of knowledge." Lawrence Small seems to have seen it as just a giant pot of gold to be plundered, to support himself in the lifestyle to which he unaccountably imagines himself to be entitled.

FORTUNATELY, I HAVE A PLAN TO MAKE IT RIGHT--

Or at least somewhat right. What's more, it can also be used as a pilot plan for the eventual repayment of some of the other more egregious plunderings of the public till perpetrated on the Republican watch.

First, in the spirit of Mr. Small's famous "housing allowance," the successor to supreme regent Roger Sant [at right in the photo, with National Symphony Orchestra music director Leonard Slatkin], who must surely be resigning (just a little joke: he's not resigning if he can help it--management has already announced "reforms"), will begin by presenting Mr. Small with a bill for "room & board" in the amount of, oh, $2.500 a day. I don't know his precise length of employment, but if we figure it as seven years, that comes to $6,387,500.

Then, figuring Mr. Small should certainly have been entitled to two weeks' vacation, and maybe 10 sick days--and, what the hell, let's give the old boy two floating holidays a year--he reimburses the Smithsonian for all those other days off he took. (As for the $5.7 million he raked in for "outside work" during his tenure, well, that's between him and the outside employers. But if the work he did was of a caliber with what he contributed to the Smithsonian, they should certainly be encouraged to review their compensation issues.)

It goes without saying that all of Mr. Small's expense reports for those seven years--indeed anything else he was involved in that included $$$$$$--should be audited, with any shortfall added, with appropriate penalties, to his total tab.

Mr. Small may argue that it's unfair to leave him holding the bag alone. This is a wee bit churlish, considering how little enthusiasm he showed for sharing the wealth when he was looting the premises, except in the case of his number two, Ms. Burke. Still, if he wants to try to seek contributions from the regents who hired him and made a joke of overseeing him, I say go for it! With special emphasis on the "small group" who dug him up.

Chief Justice Rehnquist has passed on, of course. But if his estate can't handle its share, I'll bet his spiritual as well as judicial heir, Chief Justice John Roberts, would be happy to pitch in.

MORE REPUBLICAN PARTY PROBLEMS IN ALASKA-- DO THEY HAVE ENOUGH PRISONS UP THERE?

No one from DWT made it to the incredible Take Back America Conference in DC this week, although I've been following the events via Firedoglake where Jane and much of the crew are in attendance-- and making an impact. But good news: almost the entire DWT staff will be at a Taking Back 6th Street Conference in NYC on Thursday at an Indian restaurant (although the exact restaurant hasn't been chosen yet; any suggestions?) Now I'm sorry we didn't hold our conference in Alaska. I really wanted to go, mostly because I need to examine the Sitka area to see how close the on-the-ground realities of geography correspond with Michael Chabon's Yiddish Policemen's Union, which I just finished reading. Oh, and because I want to be in Alaska to celebrate.

Celebrate? Sure. Alaska is so far away that people in the other 49 states barely realize that the entire Republican Party of Alaska has been caught with their paws in the cookie jar. I would like to experience the mass frog walks and resignations. Just today Republicrook State Representative Vic Kohring raised the white flag "to focus on his defense against federal bribery and extortion charges."

I'm not sure when Don Young, Ted Stevens and Lisa Murkowski, all implicated in the burgeoning Alaska Republican scandals, will be indicted, arrested or charged. But I hope it's soon and it could certainly be any day. (And I'm in Montreal today, so halfway there anyway.) I also don't know if Rep. Kohring is going to plead guilty to murder, although he seems to imply there's something to that.

"I take the job as a legislator very seriously, but my life is on the line, so I have chosen to defend myself so I can prevail in court," Rep. Vic Kohring told The Associated Press. "It's a very, very ugly decision to have to make, frankly."

Kohring and two former state lawmakers were indicted May 4 on federal bribery and extortion charges related to alleged dealings with Anchorage-based oil field services company VECO Corp.
Federal prosecutors accuse the lawmakers of selling their votes to VECO officials while they were considering a rewrite of the state's petroleum production tax, which could have levied a 20 percent tax on profits and a 20 percent credit on capital investments.

VECO executives Bill Allen and Rick Smith pleaded guilty May 7 to federal charges of bribery and conspiracy. They have since resigned their positions but have not yet been scheduled for sentencing.
Kohring and former Republican Reps. Pete Kott and Bruce Weyhrauch all have pleaded not guilty and have had their original July trial dates pushed back to the fall.

VECO and their executives have long had Congressman Young and Senator Ted Stevens and his family-- as well as Senator Murkowski and her notoriously corrupt family-- on their payroll. All of them have been taking gigantic bribes from the oil services company in return for special treatment in Washington and Juneau. That's illegal; very illegal. Stevens is expected to plead not guilty by virtue of severe senility but Young and Murkowski will have a far tougher time.


UPDATE: WHY IS TED STEVENS STILL ALLOWED ON THE FLOOR OF THE U.S. SENATE?

Actually, he hasn't been indicted yet so it makes sense that he still be allowed to sit at his desk in the Senate and it even makes sense that the collegial senators address him as "the distinguished gentleman from Alaska." But it makes no sense at all that a crook like Stevens, who-- along with his crooked legislator son-- has taken hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes from VECO, be allowed to work on energy legislation!

Sen. Ted Stevens (R., Alaska) is in the final stages of crafting a fuel economy compromise amid contentious debate on Capitol Hill.

The compromise, a summary of which was obtained by the Wall Street Journal, softens a current Senate mileage proposal under debate and could be offered as an amendment as early as Wednesday night or Thursday, according to a person familiar with the matter.

For some reason I had no doubt that VECO's paid whore in the U.S. Senate would do whatever he could to soften and proposals that force any kind of social responsibility on them or cost them any profits whatsoever, regardless of how many lives are saved. But that's ole Ted and the GOP.

IN PREPARATION FOR THAT SCHLEPP TO THE SEERSUCKER STORE TODAY...

As Ken points out below, another Seersucker Thursday is almost upon us. It just sort of creeped up when no one was lookin'. Compliments of our pals at PoliticsTV and The Young Turks, here's some music you may find as appropriate as we did to listen to while you're getting ready to brave the heat before going out on this, the last shopping day before Seersucker Thursday, 2007. Share with us-- and the whole nation (minus 28% of insane people)-- a bit of a dream, a dream the whole world is more or less praying for. And, although infinitely better than the Air Canada ad jingle-- or, for that matter, any Celine Dion song-- I have a feeling these particular musicians may be part of the 28% who might prefer a third Bush/Cheney term.

In any case, here's Sweet Home Gore-Obama:



And, along those lines, every day can be Seersucker Thursday with humor like this:

President Bush, First Lady Laura and Dick Cheney were flying on Air Force One. George looked at Laura, chuckled and said, "You know, I could throw a $1,000 bill out of the window right now and make somebody very happy." Laura shrugged her shoulders and replied, "I could throw ten 100 bills out the window and make ten people very happy." Cheney added, "That being the case, I could throw one hundred $10 bills out of the window and make a hundred people very happy".
Hearing their exchange, the pilot rolled his eyes and said to his co-pilot "Such big-shots back there. I could throw all of them out of the window and make 256 million people very happy."

The pilot underestimates-- by several billion.

RE-WRITING THE HISTORY OF NANKING-- IT CERTAINLY COULD HAPPEN HERE AND PROBABLY WILL

When I lived in Europe I couldn't afford the International Herald-Tribune, the ex-pat paper for Americans abroad put out by the NY Times and Washington Post but I often managed to get my hands on second-hand copies, especially when American tourists left them in the restaurant I worked in. These is pre-Internet of course, so getting semi-American paper-- it is published in Paris-- was a big deal to me. These days when I travel I never even glance at it. Today I did-- and I'm only in Montreal!-- because a headline caught my eye: 'No massacre in Nanking,' Japanese lawmakers say.

Do you remember the little discussion we had a couple months back about the need for national redemption in the form of facing up to what we allowed Bush and his cronies-- in the widest sense-- to get away with? Without a serious-- albeit difficult-- confrontation of what actually happened in the past 7 years, one day Republicans will be saying Abu Gharaib never happened and Bush never even stole one election, let alone two!

After World War II ended, the Japanese got away with murder-- unlike the Germans (primarily because of the Soviets who were adamant about their pound of flesh). But the Soviets were right. Germany is a real democracy. Japan is... God knows.

About 100 Japanese governing party lawmakers denounced the Nanjing Massacre as a fabrication on Tuesday, contesting Chinese claims that Japanese soldiers killed hundreds of thousands of people after seizing the Chinese city in 1937.

The members of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's Liberal Democratic Party said there was no evidence to prove mass killings by Japanese soldiers in the captured Nationalist capital, then known as Nanking. They accused Beijing of using the alleged incident as a "political advertisement."

...Historians generally agree that the Japanese Army slaughtered at least 150,000 civilians and raped tens of thousands of women.

Wikipedia has the conventional wisdom the Japanese don't want to face up to. A few years ago I read Iris Chang's book, The Rape of Nanking, which led me to look into the wealth of historical evidence the Japanese have done all they could to distort the truth of one of the most hideous atrocities on the 20th century.

Take a look at this little film on YouTube. Obviously the Japanese political elites won't:



That's why Nancy Pelosi, for all her political astuteness, is woefully wrong-- tragically wrong-- about not impeaching Bush and Cheney. America needs to not bury what we've done. And, don't be fooled-- we is not just Bush and Cheney. And now the Japanese militarists and fascists are our friends.

Oh man, is it Seersucker Thursday already? And all my seersucker's at the dry cleaner! (I get all my fashion tips from Trent Lott and Thad Cochran)

"It's crinkly, cool and comfortable," says Hattiesburg haberdasher John White.

You're chugging along, trying to keep the wolf at bay, and suddenly you realize that this Thursday is Seersucker Thursday! One of the fashion-savvy days on the Senate calendar. Man alive, where does the time go? My goodness, do you realize that this is the last shopping day before the big day?

Yup, seersucker's in the air. The biggest event on the fashion calendar since Spats Saturday. Boys and girls across the country dressing like mini-versions of their fashion gurus, Trent Lott [the fashion god pictured here], Thad Cochran, and apparently Dianne Feinstein (see below).

So mothball those heavy wool suits and the thermal underwear, and break out your seersucker.

Hattiesburg (Mississippi) American

Seersucker: A classic Southern look for summer

By Rachel Leifer Norman

Seersucker - like any timeless classic, it never goes out of style. And with summer's official kick-off this week, it's time for the Pine Belt to settle in to seersucker. [Pictured here: seersucker aficionado, Mississippi's other senator, Thad Cochran.]

"To me, it looks like the South," said John White, owner of John White Ltd. men's and women's fashion boutique on South 40th Avenue. "It makes you think immediately about a Southern guy in his suit going to church in the summer, or pairing the pants with some white bucks and a navy blazer and heading to an afternoon wedding."

Few fabrics are as evocative of a particular place and culture as seersucker, the light-weight woven cotton material traditionally presented in blue-and-white-stripes. It's generally more economical than wool and more low-maintenance than linen - but that it's all but synonymous with steamy Southern summers is its true attraction.

Think seersucker and the image instantly springs to mind of a prosperous businessman taking a stroll on a honeysuckle-scented evening, or a shrewd attorney working after hours in his office under a lazily rotating ceiling fan.

But seersucker isn't just for silver-headed gents anymore. In the last few years, White has begun carrying seersucker shorts, shirts and other separates in tropical colors like lime, pink and orange. Women are donning the fabric in skirts, suits and sleeveless summer button-downs.

"You can dress it up or down," White said, noting that a seersucker blazer does wonders for a pair of jeans, and that a surcingle belt in the proper shade is a perfect accompaniment.

For more formal occasions, "you can set it off just right with a white or a pink button-down shirt, even a yellow tie," he said.

Unfortunately, the fabric's mix-and-match versatility seems to have diminished the appeal of the classic look, a full seersucker suit. But the tradition is being maintained in the U.S. Senate, where lawmakers observe "Seersucker Thursday." Officials as unexpected as Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. [right], are taking their summertime fashion cues from Mississippi's Republican Sens. Thad Cochran and Trent Lott, who according to published reports never fail to don their seersucker every week.

So be bold - set those dull khakis aside and be a part of this Southern summer fashion tradition. White said he can order seersucker in a kaleidoscope of colors and cuts and have it specially tailored within three days.

"It's crinkly, cool and comfortable," he said.

For the record, last year (according to The Hill) "some 20 senators" showed up in seersucker, the list headed by then-Majority Leader Doctorbill Frist, who went whole-hog, donning white shoes. Since then, the Tennessee fashion magnet has all but disappeared from public view. Reason enough to celebrate, I think. But there's more. Last year's Seersucker Thursday, which apparently coincided with Pretty in Pink Day on the fashion calendar of then-Sen. Rick Santorum, left this unforgettable image, which reportedly sent small children all over the country screaming into their mothers' arms, and had them suffering nightmares for months to follow:

Can you believe that a mere year ago this yutz was still taken seriously?

GEORGIA TEN-- NOT ON MANY PEOPLE'S MINDS

So what happened in Georgia today? Not much in the way of participatory democracy. Like we explained on Monday, the Republican field was atrocious-- the very worst of the pernicious Know Nothing fear and loathing that have made The South a hopeless political swamp since England started sending convicts and idlers to colonize it in the early eighteenth century. As expected, racist, xenophobe and all around bigoted ignoramus Jim Whitehead won-- but not outright. The last time I looked at the Secretary of State's site, 87% of the precincts were accounted for and Whitehead was leading with 41%, Marlow coming in second with 22% and Broun, an even further right maniac and hate-monger than Whitehead, was nipping at Marlow's heels with 21%. (Greene, the one who wants to build walls around everything and seal America in saran-wrap had only appealed to 3% of his fellow northeast Georgians. In fact, two other Democrats were running ahead of Greene.

I noticed this morning that ole Mac Collins, the former Republican extremist congressloon who tried, unsuccessfully, to win his seat back last year from pro-war right-wing Democrat Jim Marshall wants to try again. With progressives finding no reason whatsoever to go to the polls and support someone as reactionary as Marshall, he came closer to any other Democratic incumbent in the House to losing his seat in a breakthrough year for Democrats. Out of almost 160,000 votes, Marshall only outpolled Collins by 1,752. Another extremist maniac, retired Air Force Major General Rick Goddard, has already declared he's running for the GOP nomination. I imagine he and Collins will get into a pissing contest of who's further to the right-- which is kind of like trying to figure out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Like the contest we just watched in GA-10, immigration will be the big issue. These folks don't care who they hate as long as some demagogue can direct it somewhere. Collins wrote an Op-Ed for the local paper called "Mr. President, On Immigration You Are Dead Wrong!!!"

Collins is trying to make hay out of Marshall's vote for Nancy Pelosi to be Speaker. I suppose a vote for someone as corrupt as Denny Hastert, Collins' idea of a Speaker would have been preferable. Too bad Marshall doesn't have the balls to ask Collins how he feels about his Speaker covering up-- for years for predatory child-molester Mark Foley (R-FL). Now that's a Republican Speaker of the House. And speaking about votes for your party's leadership, is anyone going to ask Mac Collins about why he consistently voted for Tom DeLay, an indicted criminal?

If you want to know about real, non-"fringe" American values, just read "The Fred Thompson Report" on the ABC Radio Networks website

Will the ABC Radio Networks website reconsider "The Fred Thompson
Report" when our Fred makes his presidential candidacy official?

"Took my son to the driving range with me. While we whacked golf balls, we discussed our lack of family values and my little boy stunned me with this question: "Dad, why haven't you been divorced a bunch of times like Fred Thompson and the other Republican presidential candidates?" "Now son," I said. "Senator Thompson's only been divorced once. You're thinking of Rudy Giuliani or Newt Gingrich."
--blogger Bob Geiger, in a post responding to a charge by presidentia