« November 2005 | Main | January 2006 »

December 31, 2005

Iraq votes on US troops to stay or go

Smart letter:

A win-win solution for Iraq

Saturday, December 31, 2005

President Bush's Dec. 18 speech stated that there were two options for the United States in Iraq: Win or lose. If the population does not support the occupation, winning (peace) can only be accomplished by an indefinite troop deployment. Whereas in losing, the United States would be viewed as a "Paper Tiger."

Since Iraq elected a governing body by a democratic process (approximately 65 percent participation), it presents a third option: a national vote on the presence of U.S. troops.

By winning the vote, the U.S. presence would be justified. If the United States loses the vote, the troops would be brought home, gaining the moral high ground and becoming a trusted negotiator in Middle East disputes.

This would be a win-win solution for President Bush.

LOREN E. THOMPSON Northeast Portland

The President is fond of telling us that we've saved a nation from their brutal dictator and brought them democracy. Iraqis are now free, he tells us.

So why not let them decide if our troops should remain or leave? It's their country, after all.

Posted by Carla at 02:30 PM |

Racy Blogger Leaves US Attorney's Office

If only I could reveal the seamy underbelly of the judiciary, I too could be in the New Yorker.

Alas...this guy beat me to it:

A young federal prosecutor who was revealed as the author of a spicy blog about the judiciary is leaving the inner circle. David Lat, who had been the anonymous writer of "Underneath Their Robes," left his job as an assistant U.S. attorney in Newark. Lat, 30, sent an e-mail Friday to fellow staff at the U.S. attorney's office, telling them that it was his last day. He said he would soon be going to work in Washington.

The blogger initially claimed to be a young, female lawyer going by the pen name of Article Three Groupie, or A3G. Article III is the section of the Constitution dealing with the judiciary.

It wasn't until an interview for a November issue of The New Yorker magazine that Lat revealed his true identity.

Unfortunately the blog has been scrubbed.

Posted by Carla at 02:03 PM |

December 30, 2005

Drooling toward 2006.

At my house New Year's Day, right now we project a traditional Jan. 1st meal:

collard greens (for financial fortune)
black-eyed peas (for good health)
cornbread (if you don't know why, you've clearly never had good cornbread)

And we have some baby-back ribs which may get grilled and glazed. Rumor has it this glaze is fantastic. And very versatile. You can brush it on almost any type of fish, as well as ribs, chicken, and beef. It also keeps very well (if stored in the refrigerator in a sealed container).

GLAZE:
1 head of garlic
1 tablespoon olive oil
2/3 cup water
1 cup pineapple juice
1/4 cup teriyaki sauce
1 tablespoon soy sauce
1 1/3 cups dark brown sugar
3 tablespoons lemon juice
3 tablespoons minced white onion
1 tablespoon Jack Daniel's whiskey
1 tablespoon crushed pineapple
1/4 teaspoon cayenne pepper

1. Preheat oven to 325 degrees.

2. To roast the garlic for the glaze, cut about 1/2-inch off the top of the garlic head. Cut the roots so that the garlic will sit flat. Remove most of the papery skin from the garlic, but leave enough so that the cloves stay together. Place the head of garlic in a small casserole dish or baking pan, drizzle the olive oil over it, and cover it with a lid or foil. Bake for 1 hour. Remove the garlic and let it cool until you can handle it.

3. Combine the water, pineapple juice, teriyaki sauce, soy sauce, and brown sugar in a medium saucepan over medium/high heat. Stir occasionally until the mixture boils, then reduce the heat until the mixture is just simmering.

4. Squeeze the sides of the head of garlic until the pasty roasted garlic is squeezed out. Measure 2 teaspoons into the saucepan and whisk to combine. Add the remaining glaze ingredients to the pan and stir.

5. Let the mixture simmer for 40 to 50 minutes or until the glaze has reduced by about one-third and is thick and syrupy. Make sure it doesn't boil over. When the glaze is done, cover the saucepan and set it aside until the fish (say, 4 1/2-pound fresh Atlantic salmon fillets, or 2 lbs. chicken breasts) or whatever is ready.

6. To cook the fish, preheat your barbecue or kitchen grill to medium-high heat. Remove any skin or bones from the fillets. Brush the entire surface of each fillet with a light coating of the fat-free butter-flavored spread or spray. Lightly salt and pepper both sides of the fillets and place them on the hot grill at a slight angle, so that grill marks will be made at an angle on the fish. Cook each fillet for 2 to 4 minutes, then turn them over, placing them back on the grill at an angle once again. After 2 to 4 minutes, turn the fish over at a different angle so that the grill marks will criss-cross. Cook 2 to 4 minutes more, flip again, and cook until done. The entire cooking time should be somewhere between 8 to 15 minutes depending on the thickness of your fillets and the heat of the grill. Be careful not to burn the fish, and quickly move the fish away from any flare-ups.

7. When the fillets are done, remove them from the grill and spoon a generous portion of glaze over each one. Serve hot with a baked potato and vegetables, if desired.

If by chance you don't make it to your favorite emporium of fine spirits, and you just need to know what you can make with what you have on hand, try the Webtender.

It seems we've found what W's been drankin' for Christmas, him bein' so Christian 'n all: 3 Wise Men.

Posted by Jeff at 10:02 AM |

Who Would Jesus Pop?

The year's end often motivates we humans to opine our fates. It can be a catalyst for navel gazing of the highest order.

During my travels throughout the greater metro area this week, I noticed a bumper sticker with the words Who Would Jesus Pop? pasted across the rear window of a car.

It made me giggle at first...the play on words and the obvious irony. But it also got me thinking about the way religion has changed in this country over the last several decades. The way its wielded over so many. A giant blunt instrument that pushes people into places they've said they hate.

These thoughts came to me again this morning while reading Mannion, who was opining not so much his fate, but the value of mankind in general:

In trying to decide whether life has any meaning at all and if humankind is a vile and noisome parasite uselessly and absurdly struggling to survive and perpetuate its kind without any good reason for what it's up to, so pointless is its existence that mass suicide or a huge asteroid striking the planet could only be considered a favor to the universe, one should not look at natural disasters that cruelly and remorsely wipe out thousands of lives in the blink of an eye with no apparent detriment to the continuation of either the species or the earth, nor should one look at man-made disasters like wars, famines, accidents at nuclear power plants, and smaller-scale mayhem like car accidents and drive-by shootings which, though leaving behind lower body counts, are just as evil and senseless to the individuals involved.

No, all natural disasters prove is that Nature has different reasons and different ends in going about its business than do human beings. That Nature wants a volcano where human beings wanted a city doesn't mean that it was pointless for human beings to want the city, only that Nature was more insistent. Anyway, on the whole, in confrontations between human beings and Nature, human beings win most of the arguments, thanks to things like sun block, central heating, GORE-TEX, and bulldozers.

Were Mannion to sit down for tea with the Reverend Pat Robertson, I'm thinking Rev Pat would write Nature=God with his pretzels or finger sandwiches. After all...we heathen, nonChristian, parasites have been scrubbed from the earth a few times before by the wrath of God/Nature.

The Old Testament is rife with God's pissed off'dness beating down on the hapless humans who didn't do things His way. The God of the Rapture Right is an angry dude who is ready to strike down the nonbelievers through pestilence and war, keeping the cream of the believers to His bosom for all eternity.

So then..is it really humans whose worth we should be measuring? Or is it that vengeful God/Nature that keeps ending humans? And what of the humans who take up against their fellow humans..cheering the beating down of those who don't believe as they do? Where do they fit in the worthiness plan?

Posted by Carla at 07:41 AM |

Pick on someone your own intellectual size

The vomitous spew that substitutes for Little Green Footballs blog has received a belated holiday greeting from Vanity Fair's James Wolcott.

Hackery is no substitute for a good smack by Jane at Firedoglake. Apparently the latest Rasmussen poll is creaming the jeans of the most ardent Bush apologists. Jane gives them the reality based taser.

If only they could have Project Runway with the Jesus Fish as a Polo style logo...this dude would be in Fat City (via Amanda at Pandagon).

I think I'll be cutting and pasting Ron's Fair Use Notice to cover my Preemptive Karma ass.

Posted by Carla at 07:11 AM |

Picking presidential nits

President Bush has gone to great lengths to emphasize the fact that his secret spying program is limited to phone calls and emails which originate here in the United States but which are sent out of the country. He and other administration officials have repeatedly stressed that point-to-point calls and emails which both begin and end inside the United States are not being spying upon without the legally required search warrant.

Doesn't Bush's distinction presume that terrorists are going communicate terror plans with foreign sources? And doesn't that kinda run contrary to the whole point of a terror cell as an entity which doesn't need or require outside direction?

Posted by Kevin at 07:10 AM |

December 29, 2005

The ACLU rocks my world

The good people at the American Civil Liberties Union have taken a full page ad in today's New York Times. The ad lobbies for a special counsel to investigate Bush and the NSA warrantless surveillance:

This is a partial photo of the add courtesy of Talk Left.

The full ad can be seen here.

I wonder if my $50 Oregon Tax Credit is ACLU eligible?

Posted by Carla at 02:20 PM |

Don't bring me down--Question of the day

What happened to the girl I used to know,
You let your mind out somewhere down the road,
Don’t bring me down,no no no no no,
I’ll tell you once more before I get off the floor
Don’t bring me down.--ELO

Yesterday while out trying to purchase my daughter some jeans that actually fit (I never cease to be amazed how fast 12 year olds grow. I'm pretty sure I can actually see her getting taller throughout the day), one of the local radio stations was asking folks to name the all time worst films.

This isn't an exceptionally new or fresh idea. But it got me thinking about movies that left me feeling depressed or bummed out.

A History of Violence is one such film. It's a good film. Well worth watching. But its such a dark piece. The ending bugged the hell out of me and left an unsavory feeling.

The Fellowship of the Ring is a big time downer film. Having never read Tolkien's books, I was at the mercy of the film trilogy for the unfolding plot lines. The end of Fellowship marks the end of Gandalf the Grey, Boromir and the Fellowship, leaving the two hobbits to venture to Mordor on their own. Gloom, despair and agony.

Hitchock's The Birds is entirely creepy. The birds go after people with crazed abandon. And then all of a sudden they just stop. The trapped people leave the house with all those birds sitting around watching them...creepy. But no real rhyme or reason for the end of the attacks. Blech.

Phenomenon kicks you in the teeth and never really lets you get back up again. It's a fluff piece in many ways. Travolta isn't exactly at his Pulp Fiction best here. But this nice guy who would quite obviously never harm anything or anyone is the town pariah. Even after his death the idiots don't truely seem to appreciate who he was.

What movies bugged the hell out of you and left you feeling entirely creeped or depressed?

Posted by Carla at 08:53 AM |

In other news, water is still wet

Headline du jour: DeLay is a big, fat, liar.

Oh yes. He really is.

Newspapers that prints comments from DeLay or his spokespeople as gospel without actually doing any journalistic-type fact checking might just as well be bird cage liner. That's all they're good for.

Posted by Carla at 07:41 AM |

December 28, 2005

Bush pressures newspaper editors...lobbyists buy off winger journalists

One of the most corrupt administrations in US history keeps up the march.

Washington Post:

President Bush has been summoning newspaper editors lately in an effort to prevent publication of stories he considers damaging to national security.

The efforts have failed, but the rare White House sessions with the executive editors of The Washington Post and New York Times are an indication of how seriously the president takes the recent reporting that has raised questions about the administration's anti-terror tactics.

Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, would not confirm the meeting with Bush before publishing reporter Dana Priest's Nov. 2 article disclosing the existence of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe used to interrogate terror suspects. Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times, would not confirm that he, publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Washington bureau chief Philip Taubman had an Oval Office sit-down with the president on Dec. 5, 11 days before reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau revealed that Bush had authorized eavesdropping on Americans and others within the United States without court orders.

But the meetings were confirmed by sources who have been briefed on them but are not authorized to comment because both sides had agreed to keep the sessions off the record. The White House had no comment.

"When senior administration officials raised national security questions about details in Dana's story during her reporting, at their request we met with them on more than one occasion," Downie says. "The meetings were off the record for the purpose of discussing national security issues in her story." At least one of the meetings involved John Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, and CIA Director Porter Goss, the sources said.

National security issues...right. The White House knows it's gone way over the line. They're trying to cover their asses by silencing the press. This was a story that had already been held for a year. The White House had plenty of time to prepare for its release. They don't want reports of their illegal and immoral activities reported to the public.

And the buy off of "journalists" is another link in the chain of White House malfeasance. Like Armstrong Williams..just another way to get propaganda in the public realm while masquerading it as news:

The admission by two columnists that they accepted payments from indicted Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff may be the tip of a large and rather dirty iceberg.

Copley News Service last week dropped Doug Bandow -- who also resigned as a Cato Institute scholar -- after he acknowledged taking as much as $2,000 a pop from Abramoff for up to two dozen columns favorable to the lobbyist's clients. "I am fully responsible and I won't play victim," Bandow said in a statement after Business Week broke the story. "Obviously, I regret stupidly calling to question my record of activism and writing that extends over 20 years. . . . For that I deeply apologize."

Peter Ferrara of the Institute for Policy Innovation has acknowledged taking payments years ago from a half-dozen lobbyists, including Abramoff. Two of his papers, the Washington Times and Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader, have now dropped him. But Ferrara is unapologetic, saying: "There is nothing unethical about taking money from someone and writing an article."

Ferrara is taking the Bush approach of admitting his transgression while systematically claiming that it isn't wrong. Much the way that Krauthammer claimed in his column that Bush circumvented the law without actually committing a crime.

I'm dumbfounded that anyone could still support this administration. In my view it would at this point, demonstrate a lack of character and common decency to do so.

Posted by Carla at 10:05 AM |

December 27, 2005

What was hot... or not in 2005

The Pew Research Center has released their analysis of public opinion trends for 2005 and some of it is very interesting.

1. Bush's popularity tanked - Bush's approval rating hit new lows in November with just 36% of the public thought he had lived up to his campaign pledge to restore integrity to the White House. By December, a variety of factors shored up the president's approval rating in some major polls although not in others. However, a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll found that by a 47%-38% margin, the public judged that this year the president would make Santa's "naughty," rather than "nice" list, up from 40% who thought so in 2004 and 31% in 2003.

2. Hurricane Damage - Most Americans gave the federal government an F on its handling of Hurricane Katrina's aftermath.

3. Iraq Disillusionment - Following a small post-election bounce, public approval of the president's handling of the situation in Iraq resumed its downward drift, hitting a low of 37% in October and has remained in the mid-30s since then.

4. Reaganomic Anxiety - Even before the 2005 hurricane season the public was apprehensive about the economy. In May, only 44% of Americans rated their personal financial situation good or excellent, down from 51% in January; only 35% approved of the president's handling of the economy. In Katrina's wake, fully 71% of the public (the most in two decades) reported following news about gas prices very closely. As prices receded and economic reports re-brightened in December, prices at the pump were still closely watched by 61% of the public and 40% of Americans said they were finding it hard to make ends meet.

5. Anti-Hegomony - 42% said that America should "mind its own business internationally"—on par with numbers expressing that view after the ends of the Vietnam War and the Cold War. 66% of the public said that the U.S. is less respected than in the past. When asked why, 71% cite the War in Iraq as a "major reason" for global discontent with America. By contrast only 54% cite the War on Terrorism as a major reason. Oddly, 78% of journalists cite U.S. support for Israel as a major reason while only 39% of the public agreed.

6. Domestic Considerations - While terrorism still ranked high among the public's concerns, domestic priorities rose in prominence. At the start of 2005 Americans already disagreed with White House priorities—tax cuts, tax simplification, tort reform—ranking Social Security, health care, aid to the poor and the budget deficit more important. By October, half of the public said Bush should give domestic issues priority over the war on terrorism and a large majority (69%) said the next president should offer different policies.

7. Schiavo Backlash - Public opinion delivered a surprise verdict on a bill rushed into law by Congress in March that would have required federal courts to intervene in a state court decision allowing removal of a feeding tube from a long-comatose Florida woman. Initial reaction was highly negative and four months later, three quarters of the public still felt that Congress should have stayed out of the case, a view essentially unchanged late in the year.

8. Devolution - While 48% say that life evolved over time (26% said it was via natural selection and 18% said God guided it), 42% said that life has "existed in its present form since the beginning of time". According to an NPR segment I heard this evening on this Pew analysis, those basic percentages haven't changed for a number of years. What's changed is that more Americans (64%) are open to alternative explanations being taught alongside evolution in school, with a sizable minority (38%) favoring evolution being completely replaced with creationism. However, the polling analysis indicates a degree of confusion over what the terms "creationism" and "evolution" mean.

9. Social Security - Despite a nationwide push, President Bush's plan to allow individuals to divert part of their payroll taxes to private accounts stumbled. While 70% of the public signaled support for private Social Security accounts in the fall of 2000 and nearly 60% in the fall of 2004, by May 2005 fewer than half (47%) did so, and only 3-in-10 Americans approved of Bush's handling of Social Security.

10. The Feds - Both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government took a beating in the public eye. Congress continued its downward slide with only 45% of the public holding at least a somewhat favorable view of the body by mid-October, including a mere 7% who declared a "very" favorable opinion. Overall the federal government scored no better: Its favorability rating fell from a high of 73% as recently as April 2003 to 46% in December.
    

One section of the Pew analysis that I found particularly interesting as an Independent was the section on religion and politics.

By very similar margins a slim plurality of Americans see religious conservatives as having too much control over the GOP (45% agree, 42% disagree) and non-religious liberals as having too much control over the Dems (44% agree, 42% disagree). However, Independents are more critical of the influence of religious conservatives on the GOP than they are of the influence of secular liberals on the Dems. Most Independents (54%) think religious conservatives have too much influence over the GOP, while fewer (43%) think secular liberals have too much sway on the Dems.

Update: Over at Indie Castle I dig deeper into Indies on the issues

Posted by Kevin at 06:28 PM |

Twisted brother

I wish the real world would just stop hassling me...

"Contrary to the administration, I also believe that as a matter of political prudence and comity with Congress, Bush should have tried to get the law changed rather than circumvent it. This was an error of political judgment. But that does not make it a crime. And only the most brazen and reckless partisan could pretend it is anything approaching a high crime and misdemeanor." --Charles Krauthammer, December 23, 2005

Which part of "circumvent" the law isn't a crime? Circumventing the law, by definition, means to commit a crime.

Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."--US President Oath of Office,US Constitution, Article II, Section 1

The circle is now complete.

Krauthammer breathlessly blasted Bill Clinton for lying about an extra marital affair. His columns reeked of pious indignation against Clinton's actions.

Krauthammer and the rest of the punditry Bush defense squad have become exactly what they say they hated: staunch defenders of a President who has clearly broken the law and thwarted his oath.

I personally believe that Clinton's indiscretion didn't rise to an impeachable offense. It was a personal act in a personal situation. I understand the argument against my position (For those of you who want to hammer about it in comments, feel free. I've hashed it out before and really see no need to do it again).

In my view, what Bush is doing is exponentially worse than anything blowjob Clinton lied about. He's not only breaking the law..he's bragging about it. And it's not about personal indiscretions. It's about issues of policy and conduct within the framework of the Presidency of the United States.

Krauthammer is forced to admit that Bush has committed a crime...whether he likes it or not. The real world is catching up to the thuggery of the Republican Party. Even their defense team is doing some Freudian dance of subconscious knowledge that Bush's law breaking is something they're going to have to come to terms with.

Posted by Carla at 10:49 AM |

Purely coincidental.

"As far back as I can remember, I've always wanted to be a gangster. To me, being a gangster was better than being President of the United States."

Jane at firedoglake notes some curious goings-on.

The nomination of Viveca Novak's husband to the FEC is nothing if not a giant "fuck you" to Fitz, and if it happened in say the Gotti organization it would definitely raise the eyebrows of a prosecutor. It's also a big "who's your daddy" moment for Viveca Novak, as she is probably out of a job and now the key defense witness for a man who is now going to be her husband's boss. Those who want to argue they nominated him purely on his merits with no notion of any larger implication? Please. This is Karl Rove we're talking about here.

"For us to live any other way was nuts. To us, those goody-good people who worked shitty jobs for bum paychecks, who took the subway to work every day and worried about their bills, were dead. They were suckers. They had no balls. If we wanted something, we just took it. If anyone complained twice, they got hit so bad they never complained again. It was routine. You didn't even think about it."
-- Henry Hill, Goodfellas

Anyway, here's wishing everyone a Joyous Fitz-ukah-wanzaa Season! Won't you sing with me?

"See indictments, yes indictments,
and they'll be handed down soon.
In the air there's a feeling of Fitzmas...

Rule of Law, Rule of Law!
It's Fitzmas Time in the city...!"

Posted by Jeff at 08:36 AM |

December 24, 2005

Hand to hand combat in the Christmas War

Historically the holiday season has been one in which Americans embrace peace on Earth and good will toward men. Peace and good will have become the latest casualty of the righwing radio war on America...via their war on Christmas.

Enter Wil Wheaton... actor cum Vegas poker celeb:

This year we had our dinner a few weeks early, and it looked as though it would be a typical family gathering. But that all changed when I walked through the living room on my way to get some eggnog. I asked my younger sister, who was flipping through the channels on the television, what she was looking for.

"I'm trying to find Court TV," she said.

"Why?" I said.

"Because the governor is supposed to announce whether he is granting clemency for Tookie Williams at 3 p.m.," she said.

I was surprised to hear she cared, because my sister has always been pretty nonpolitical. "I don't think he will grant clemency ...," I began to say. But before I could add, "because he's going to try to win back his hardcore base with this," she spat at me, "He'd better not!"

My sister was a death-penalty proponent? That was news to me. I didn't want to upset the family gathering, so I decided to just let this one go.

"OK," I said, "I guess we'd better not talk about this."

But just then, my father walked into the room.

"Wil thinks Tookie Williams shouldn't be executed," she said.

Oh boy.

"What?" My dad said. Not to my sister, to me.

Here we go.

"Well," I said, "I don't believe in the death penalty, so ..."

You know those optical illusion drawings, where you're looking at a smiling man, then suddenly he's become a werewolf? Faster than you could say "Fox News," my dad was screaming at me, Bill O'Reilly-style.

"An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth! He killed four ..." -- he stabbed at the air with four fingers on his left hand -- "four people in cold blood and deserves! to! die!"

I briefly made eye contact with my stepson, Nolan, who sat just behind my father on my parents' couch. His face flushed and he quickly looked away. My sister had stopped her channel surfing on a shopping network, and he looked awfully interested in putting a sapphire ring on easy-pay. While my dad continued to scream about biblical vengeance, I went into shock. Just minutes earlier, we'd stood together outside on the deck and laughed with each other as he congratulated me for a great finish I'd had the previous day at a poker tournament in Las Vegas. In fact, I'd cut my trip short, specifically so I wouldn't miss the family Christmas.

What a difference five minutes makes. While he screamed at me, I wanted to ask, "Who are you, and what have you done with the man who raised me to be tolerant, patient, peaceful and charitable?" Instead, I said, as calmly as I could, "Dad, I just don't believe in the death penalty. It is unevenly applied to poor people, and clearly doesn't work as a deterrent."

"It doesn't work as a deterrent because they allow these scum to stay alive for 25 years before they give them what they deserve!" I hadn't seen my dad this angry since I was a sophomore in high school and my friends and I woke up my mom after midnight one night because we got a little worked up in a Nintendo game of "Blades of Steel."

"Dad," I said, "living in prison for 25 years isn't anything to be happy about ..."

"Like hell it isn't!" he bellowed. "They get satellite television, and weights, and free meals, and jobs, and a library ..."

"And raped, and beaten by guards, and sold as slaves by prison gangs," I said. "That really sounds good to you? Because it sounds like a pretty lousy life for violent criminals, which is exactly what they deserve."

He violently shook his head at me and drew a deep breath. "The victims' families get to watch that animal die! If they don't get to watch him die, how can they get the closure they deserve?" Before I could reply, and he could launch into another round of talking points, I was unintentionally saved by my brother, who called our dad to come outside and help him with the turkey on the barbecue.

Wil could be taking a page out of my family's own notebook.

We avoid political discussion among our family members like it was the black plague. Nothing squelches a happy family gathering faster than a discussion of the war in Iraq or the conservative vs liberal political landscape.

I also share his frustration at the way many of our elders have enveloped themselves in rightwing talk radio and Fox News. They've abdicated their responsibility as thinking beings...mired in propaganda and one-sided babble.

Its slowly starting to turn. Air America and liberal political books have worked to dent the rightwing echo chamber. Every once in a while, the Democrats have a spark of courage (which they showed consistently this last session..thwarting much of Bush's top tier legislative agenda). But there's a long way to go.

Mostly, I relate to Wil's alarm at the way these self-anointed pundits have further polarized us as a nation. Its almost to the point where we can't have a substantive and serious discussion among ourselves as a people. This is a dangerous turn in American history. If we can't have sober discourse about what's happening in our nation, then will most certainly go the way of Rome.

Perhaps this so called War on Christmas that O'Reilly and his ilk have contrived, and so many Americans seem to be rejecting as silly propaganda is the worm that will turn this thing around.

Posted by Carla at 10:28 AM |

December 23, 2005

Archery league: political chat with weapons

A few years ago I started participating in an archery league with my son.

There are quite the cast of characters that shoot in our league: lawyers, doctors, truck drivers, microprocessor engineers, homemakers...you name it. It's a real soup to nuts group.

Last night's league generated the first politically oriented banter that I've noticed:

Man: (overheard by me while he was addressing someone else): You must be a Democrat.

Me (injecting myself into someone else's conversation): I am.

Man: That's your problem to deal with.

Me: It's my privilege, actually.

Man: You must be terrible with money.

Me: I'm great with money.

Man: All the Democrats want to do is take our money away and spend it.

Me: As opposed to Bush, who will tell you he isn't taking your money..takes out loans against your money and makes you a wholly own subsidiary of the Chinese.

(other archers stop and stare..some start giggling)

Man: Well I won't have to worry about that. At least I have my Social Security.

Me: Social Security, eh? You can thank the Democrats for having it in the first place. And you can thank them again for keeping the Republican's grubby paws off of it.

(Other archers are guffawing now)

Man walks away red faced.

***Full disclosure*** He easily outshot me in archery. Guess he had to compensate.

Posted by Carla at 02:53 PM |

On the move

Two of our favorite blogs have picked up stakes and moved to new URLs.

Long time PK blogrollee The Higher Pie has made the transition to a more internets friendly URL. Please click over Ryan's way.

Graphics master The Heretik also has a shiny new home.

But you can still find the same great images and interesting writing.

Adjust your blogrolls accordingly.

Posted by Carla at 08:19 AM |

Opinions are like...

_____________, everyone has one.

Feel free to fill in the blank with your own ideas.

Whilst you're pondering the noun for this simile, consider offering up an opinion laced recommendation or two for my 2006 reading project.

My blogobud Roxanne is in search of some good book titles for her 2006 reading list. Roxanne's is an admirable and ambitious project indeed.

I'm a little less motivated than she (possibly because I have two teenagers--ok, one is 12, close enough-- a job, a dog, a good sized hobby garden and an aspiration to write more journalistic style stuff) to do a lot of heavy lifting in the book realm. Or maybe I'm just lazy.

I don't want 2006 to whittle by for me however without doing some worthwhile reading. I'd like to set aside a portion of my measly salary to purchase two or three subscriptions to good periodicals.

I already get Newsweek. It arrives every Wednesday (which is a problem as its released on Sunday. Usually the news is old by then...but some of the lesser current events and indepth pieces are very good). Half the time I don't get to finish the magazine because my son snags it up as a resource for Extemporaneous debate.

I also subscribe to the monthly Sunset Magazine which I consider an invaluable gardening resource for those of us out west. Sunset's lesser value to me (but no less interesting) include recipes, architecture, information on wines, great western vacation spots and profiles of various western regions.

Lately I've been purchasing Vanity Fair at the exorbidant newstand price. The writing is very good and I've found myself reading it pretty much from cover to cover. VF is on the top of my periodical consideration list right now.

I'm also considering a subscription to Portland Monthly, mostly because I feel like I don't always keep up well with my home region and I'm guilting the hell out of myself about it. But every time I read it I feel like I'm getting the cotton candy version of the city...where's the beef?

Essentially what I'd like to have is at least one good periodical that covers international/national news, one that covers the western region of the US and one that deals with my locality: the Portland, Oregon region.

Suggestions?

Posted by Carla at 08:09 AM |

Biff rocks.

David Letterman, last night: "Biff Henderson's on top of this Bush/domestic spying and wiretapping business, right, Biff?"

Biff (stage manager) picks up phone and dials. "Hey, Bush? Mind your own f+@$in' business, dumbass." Hangs up. Walks off.

Biff is a Vietnam veteran. One can only wonder why he hates Amurka.

Posted by Jeff at 05:36 AM |

December 22, 2005

April Fools at Christmas?

Or maybe she just likes being a fool all year around....

"I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East, and sending liberals to Guantanamo."--Ann Coulter as quoted atEditor and Publisher

Conservatives like to complain that its the liberals who spew hatred. They need to purge that Coulter log from their own eye.

Pity the poor NSA agent who has to do surveillance on THAT. Ugh.

Posted by Carla at 01:08 PM |

Santa Palpatine

Yikes

Apparently this hat, known as a "camauro" has been part of Papal dress since the 12th Century. But as Shakes Sis notes, he looks like Senator Palpatine in a Santa hat. Scary.

I wonder if that hat costs as much as his Prada shoes?

I can't get passed the idea that a man sworn to poverty wears Prada.

Posted by Carla at 09:56 AM |

"What you can't do is teach Intelligent Design as a science"

The O gets one right:

But intelligent design isn't science, either. Science is based on observations that can be tested, repeated and proved. Religious creation theories are grounded in the divine, which is unknowable. Marrying the two is a matter of private faith, not public instruction.

Oregon, to its credit, hasn't gotten caught up in the latest debate. "Oregon has been pretty quiet," said Glenn Branch, deputy director of the National Center for Science Education, a group that defends evolution theory and monitors state policies.

But Branch added, "You can expect a fight when the scientific standards come up for review."

The Oregon Department of Education says it's already getting calls from both sides. It also hears from educators worried about violating the law.

In truth, current state policy is far less hostile to religion than educators or the public might think.

"You can talk about religion in social studies classes, or literature classes," Education Department spokesman Gene Evans said. "You can even talk about intelligent design in a science class, if you talk about it in terms of current events.

"What you can't do is teach intelligent design as a science."

I'd be sincerely surprised if there was a hard push in Oregon to have ID taught in science class. There are certain hard right winger quarters in pockets around the state. But among these socially conservative groups there are those who believe religion and the state must be remain apart.

Not to mention the pushback from the larger portion of the state that aren't hard right conservative would probably be immense.

When I was a school girl on the east side of Oregon I can recall our social studies class spending a large chunk of time studying the various world religions. Christianity was one of them. My religiously conservative parents embraced the opportunity for me to learn and study about these other faiths.

And as hard core conservative as they are, I don't think they'd support the teaching of intelligent design in a science class.

That might be a question to pose over the family get together at Christmas. Who knows? Maybe we could test another scientific theory: the velocity of mashed potatoes as they're flung across the room.

Posted by Carla at 08:26 AM |

She gets letters: Liberal enemy

It's good when the wingnuts can get things off their chest:

Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 19:34:31 EST [12/20/2005 07:34:31 PM EST] From: SliceHater@aol.com To: carla@preemptivekarma.com Subject: Liberal enemy

Carla, your wisdom and knowledge is only exceeded by your lack of cranial capacity as it relates to your biased liberal views concerning President Bush.YOU are blinded by your rage and hatred for the Right, and I assure you that your credibility is no stronger than the ignorant opinions of your ilk, i.e. Polosi, Kennedy, Shumer, etc. You liberals -and I must say I have a hard time saying liberal without inserting the F word before it - would never have survived in WW II without having most Americans kick the living crap out of you had you bad-mouthed this country and president then as you do now. Your party consists of many dye in the wool ex-hippies who long for the days when they had love fests and dreamed unrealistic dreams of peace through diversity and understanding instead of strength. Well, come on... take another drag off your bong, or weed, and rejoice in your ability to get things wrong again and again. Liberals are slowly taking my beloved country down the drain, but I will fight you and your liberal morons until my dying breath. The democrats have a new attack against the republican party every single day, staying up night after night in hopes of coming up with another winner. They (the left) and the willing mainstream liberal press are at odds with the truth and this country. I can hardly wait until the next election when you and your cronies
lose once again because, frankly, your kind just don't get it, do you? Have a nice day..........%$#*&()$#@%^LIBERAL.

Two things:

During World War II we had a liberal President who went to war against the people that attacked us and declared war against us.

Paragraphs are our friends.

(Happy Holidays, SliceHater.)

Posted by Carla at 07:49 AM |

December 21, 2005

Update:Woman convicted of filing false police report on rape is sentenced

Following up on this Monday post regarding the Oregon woman convicted of filing a false police report on a rape, Kevin Hayden at American Street clarifies a few of my muddled details:

To add clarity, the young woman will now be subject to a presentencing investigator who will inspect her life to determine whether she’s a serial criminal, whether she’s the issue of a fit and functional family, or whatever. The investigator’s report will include a recommended sentence based on his or her interpretation of her life.

This means that the community service/restitution sentence that I thought was stayed isn't the case...and that the presentencing investigation will take place instead. I believe that the defense attorney asked for a stay on this presentencing investigation pending outcome of the appeal and was denied.

This seems inane to me. This woman's sentence is under appeal as is the entire conviction. Why is she having to serve a sentence for conviction that by many accounts is shaky and is going to a higher court? What if the conviction is overturned after she's served the sentence? Will the City of Beaverton be forced to make restitution to her for her time and effort?

Posted by Carla at 12:48 PM |

Senate rejects ANWR--Gordon Smith fails Oregonians again

The Senate failed to break a filibuster of the Defense Appropriations Bill that included a provision to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge:

The Senate blocked an attempt to open an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling Wednesday, foiling an attempt by drilling backers to force the measure through Congress as part of a must-have defense spending bill.

It was a stinging defeat for Sen. Ted Stevens (news, bio, voting record), R-Alaska, one of the Senate's most powerful members, who had given senators a choice to support the Alaska drilling measure, or risk the political fallout of voting against money for American troops and for victims of Hurricane Katrina.

Democrats accused Stevens, the senior Republican in the Senate, of holding the defense bill hostage to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

"It took a lot of guts for a lot of people to stand up," Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said after the vote.

Republican leaders fell four votes short of getting the required 60 votes to avoid a threatened filibuster of the defense measure over the oil drilling issue. The vote prompted GOP leaders to huddle in private over their next move.

Two Republican Senators refused to vote for cloture: Mike DeWine of Ohio and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island. Noticeably missing from that short list: Oregon GOP Senator Gordon Smith.

Historically, Oregonians have come out strongly against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Smith should know better.

Posted by Carla at 11:30 AM |

Lose weight, or be reduced to dating Black men! Oh, the horror. . .

I spent the past few hours sputtering after Lorraine from Hoarded Ordinaries sent me this story about a New Hampshire doctor who's taken to berating his obese female patients (not male) by painting a picture he considers to be horrific: If you don't lose weight, no man will want you, except for a Black guy, and you know what they're like.

The woman who filed a complaint with the state board of medicine, alleging that Dr. Terry Bennett said she was so fat only a "black guy" might like her, just got the standard version of "Dr. Bennett's diatribe on obesity," Bennett said in an interview yesterday. He said the quote included in her complaint condensed his philosophy and took it out of context.

Bennett, who runs his own family practice in Rochester, said he delivers the same speech to all of his overweight female patients, warning them that not only their health, but their personal lives are at stake if they do not tackle their weight problem. The talk and the logic behind it, according to Bennett, go like this:

Overweight men are much more likely to die than overweight women, so an overweight woman married to an overweight man risks being an early widow. American men "don't like obese women,"Bennett said - except one group: African-American men. But because there's a general dearth of single middle-aged African-American men in New Hampshire, the woman is likely to end up on her own.

"Black men are the only males that don't have a strong anti-obesity preference," he said. "They mostly grow up in fatherless households where they are surrounded by big, loving women, and they talk about fat as sugar."

Bennet insists that the complaints take his comments out of context, and that his assertions are racially based, but factual. He also insists that anyone who doesn't like what he has to say is being racist, and determined to be offended.

"The notion that a black person would find you attractive while a white person of the same age and same gender would not, that's a fact," he said. "If you are going to pick that apart and charge that statement is racist, I subject that you are the racist."

Here. You all be the judge:

In the obesity complaint, Bennett is quoted as saying: "If your husband were to die tomorrow -who would want you? . . . Well, men might want you, but not the types that you want to want you -Might even be a black guy!"

Oh, no! The horror! It's a pity those falling-from-grace/cautionary tales in dimestores aren't still a big thing. Dr. Bennett has missed his calling--he sure would be good at writing them. She had it all, but started gaining weight. Then her husband left her and she was reduced to being with a Black man and living in a housing project!

Bennett insists he's not racist, because he was the physician for the bin Laden family in Saudi Arabia, which is much like the idiots I knew in Japan who went there and insisted that they weren't racist because they knew plenty of Japanese people. Except both nations have their own problems with racism, and to be White in either nation is not nearly the hardship as it is to be Black. Saudi Arabia is not known for its progressive treatment of minorities.

Bennett also insists that this is his typical lecture to "obese females" he sees in his practice. One wonders what he tells obsese men--or does it matter, since looks just aren't that important to women, according to the [pseudo] scientifically-based facts? He chalks it off to women being in "denial" and "looking to be offended," because heaven forbid anyone tell a high-and-mighty doctor that he's coming off as racist and misogynist. If you're not getting the message, the problem is with you, not the messenger, who's so not racist or misogynist at all. It's just you refusing to face facts and being way to eager to be offended. Not the defensive and whiny doctor, who'd rather snivel about how it's everyone else who's being racist, and he's is not racist because the Saudis think he's a swell fella.

But the Rev. Arthur Hilson, a leader in the African-American community in Portsmouth, said Bennett was perpetuating old cultural stereotypes of African Americans, such as the "mammy"image of the "heavyset woman with a bandana wrapped around her head." Moreover, Hilson said, he didn't understand what the place of race was in a question of a woman's weight and her health.

"Black women come in all sizes and shapes, just like white women and Asian women," he said. "If the issue is health and weight, what do black people or black men's preference have to do with health?"

Well, that's it in a nutshell. One would think that a doctor would encourage his obese patients--both women and men--to change their diet and excersize for the sake of their health. What exactly does he say to his obese male patients? Or do they get a free pass from this crap? I hardly see how predicting a future of spinsterhood, or a future of being with "only" Black men, is helping these women. And I don't see how "only" a Black guy wanting you is a bad, horrible thing. I just don't think I would have hit rock bottom if Taye Diggs, or Lenny Kravitz, or Gary Dourdon were to give me the time of day. 

Note to Dr. Bennett: I'm not obese, and I'm not Black, but I found your assertion to be offensive. The onus is on you to make sure you're heard. When you offend the patients you're trying to reach, the problem is yours, not theirs.

Posted by at 09:20 AM |

Watch out. Here comes the real scandal.

Washington Post:

Former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, facing trial on fraud charges Jan. 9 in Florida, is negotiating a possible deal with the Justice Department, in which he would agree to plead guilty and cooperate in the wide-ranging political corruption investigation focused on his dealings with members of Congress and executive branch officials, people familiar with the talks said last night.

Abramoff would provide testimony about numerous members of Congress and their staffs if he and the Justice Department reach an agreement, the sources said. Negotiations have been ongoing for several months, people knowledgeable about the discussions said, but pressure is mounting because of the pending trial.

If Abramoff is able to reach the plea deal, this thing will blow Congress to smithereens. The breadth and depth appears to mostly have its place within the Republican Party..but the Dems will get nicked on this one too.

Posted by Carla at 08:59 AM |

This one goes to eleven.

Yep, the Mighty Wurlitzer is cranking up past the pain threshold already:

The top of the Drudge Report claims “CLINTON EXECUTIVE ORDER: SECRET SEARCH ON AMERICANS WITHOUT COURT ORDER…” It’s not true.

Think Progress has the breakdown. But I advise everyone to get their earplugs ready, because the next couple weeks will be all CLINTON! BLOWJOB! all the time.

Posted by Jeff at 06:28 AM |

December 20, 2005

"Let's get READY to RUMMMMMBBBLLLLLLE!"

"Now entering the ring: the newest member of the Axis of EEEEE-VILLLLL! VE-NE-ZU-ELA!"

Venezuela gives Exxon ultimatum

Venezuela has given the world's biggest oil company, ExxonMobil, until the end of this year to enter a joint venture with the state.

Failure to do so will almost certainly result in Exxon losing its oil field concessions in the country.

Posted by Jeff at 12:20 PM |

If we can't test eyeshadow on rabbits, the terrorists win

Washington Post

FBI counterterrorism investigators are monitoring domestic U.S. advocacy groups engaged in antiwar, environmental, civil rights and other causes, the American Civil Liberties Union charged yesterday as it released new FBI records that it said detail the extent of the activity.

The documents, disclosed as part of a lawsuit that challenges FBI treatment of groups that planned demonstrations at last year's political conventions, show the bureau has opened a preliminary terrorism investigation into People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the well-known animal rights group based in Norfolk.

The papers offer no proof of PETA's involvement in illegal activity. But more than 100 pages of heavily censored FBI files show the agency used secret informants and tracked the group's events for years, including an animal rights conference in Washington in July 2000, a community meeting at an Indiana college in spring 2003 and a planned August 2004 protest of a celebrity fur endorser.

National security rests on whether or not Pamela Anderson is wearing fur.

In the name of keeping America safe from the terrorists...W has to spy on Americans who participate in anti Iraq War and peace activism.

After all, if we have peace...Bush is out of a job.

Posted by Carla at 09:29 AM |

Snoopgate

Yeah, its got a name.

Apparently courtesy of Jonathan Alter..we have Snoopgate. Which makes me think of Snoopy as Joe Cool.

But Snoopgate isn't the sweet Peanuts character that its name envokes in my head. It's a full blown scandal:

No wonder Bush was so desperate that The New York Times not publish its story on the National Security Agency eavesdropping on American citizens without a warrant, in what lawyers outside the administration say is a clear violation of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I learned this week that on December 6, Bush summoned Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger and executive editor Bill Keller to the Oval Office in a futile attempt to talk them out of running the story. The Times will not comment on the meeting, but one can only imagine the president’s desperation.

The problem was not that the disclosures would compromise national security, as Bush claimed at his press conference. His comparison to the damaging pre-9/11 revelation of Osama bin Laden’s use of a satellite phone, which caused bin Laden to change tactics, is fallacious; any Americans with ties to Muslim extremists—in fact, all American Muslims, period—have long since suspected that the U.S. government might be listening in to their conversations. Bush claimed that “the fact that we are discussing this program is helping the enemy.” But there is simply no evidence, or even reasonable presumption, that this is so. And rather than the leaking being a “shameful act,” it was the work of a patriot inside the government who was trying to stop a presidential power grab.

No, Bush was desperate to keep the Times from running this important story—which the paper had already inexplicably held for a year—because he knew that it would reveal him as a law-breaker.

What a miserable jerk. He tries to use great tragedy to grab power and do whatever the hell he wants. And when he's caught he scurries like a cockroach into the dark.

Bush's crocodile tears about national security are so much bullshit. He's worried about covering his ass.

Posted by Carla at 08:29 AM |

What's hap'nin', brother?

Marvin Gaye's What's Goin' On. Takes me to another place. Now that's art. But I can't work with that in the background, it commands my attention, even through other noisy distractions and VICTORY interruptions.

What has been hap'nin'?

Tony, what's up 9/11 over at Dept. of Transportation? Homeless people took a wheelbarrow full of coal off a railroad car. They made a fire in a 55-gallon drum. Under an interstate overpass. They used ALL the coal. The flames were shooting up over the road, 30-40 feet in the air. A couple inches of concrete got TERRA burned off the bridge. The interstate got closed.

Dad had a mini-stroke last week. Today he goes for an MRI and carotid artery scan.

Alaskan Wilderness is about to get BLOWJOB drilled. Looks unstoppable now. Damn shame.

A friend of ours has a sister who just got out of the clinic. Depression; drugs; suicide attempt; etc. She's WAR ON TERRA moving in with a guy she met there. He has a history of domestic violence. Trouble brewing, ya think?

Transit strike in NYC SABOTAGE BROOKLYN BRIDGE 9/11.

CBS Evening News sent W a big sloppy wet kiss of Year in Review last TERRA week. "The President started the year strong, traveling to tout his Social 9/11 Security plan..." When they started CLINTON GOT A BLOWJOB! moaning and breathing heavily, I changed the channel. Some things aren't meant to be watched in primetime.

Oh, and by the way, W broke the law and lied to us all. And of course made more speeches about sacrifice and patience.

What's that? That whispering sound? "High crimes, misdemeanors -- impeach!"? Where's that coming from? MONICA LEWINSKY What? Louder, I can't hear you...! Is it an echo from 1998? 9/11 BLOWJOB Wait, I see where it's coming from -- that... giant Wurlitzer! CLINTON GOT A BLOWJOB And they're turning it up to 11! MORAL VALUES SWALLOW THE LEADER BLUE DRESS 9/11 WEARS BOXERS TO KEEP HIS ANKLES WARM VICTORY 9/11 CLINTON GOT A BLOWJOB ! CLINTON GOT A BLOWJOB !! CLINTON GOT A BLOWJOB !!!!! BLOWJOB !!!!! BLOWJOB !!!!! BLOWJOB !!!!! BLOWJOB !!!!!

As the Freewayblogger says, "We're all wearing the blue dress now."

Posted by Jeff at 06:53 AM |

The Ministry of Logic

What passes for logic on the right is akin to looking in a funhouse mirror--what you get is a vague shape of reality, twisted and bent. 

Not only has the right wing shrugged off the leak outing CIA operative Valerie Plame, who was out in the field, investigating some leads in George Bush's precious war on terror. They're shrugging off the fact that Bush ordered the unauthorized surveillance of private citizens' phone conversations.

Bush insists that we need to listen in to such exciting phone conversations as the Saga of Aunt Ida's Bunions because it will help keep us secure from Al-Qaeda, the very people we ignored in favor of invading Iraq.

My outrage turned to exasperation, however, when I read read this account of his defense, which turned into an offense against any dissenters. Apparently, outing a CIA operative is not a big deal. But leaking a gross violation of the civil liberties of private citizens is unconscionable.

Blistered by allegations he violated federal law by ordering wiretaps without court approval, President Bush shot back Monday that disclosure of the secret program was a "shameful act" and a blow to counter-terrorism efforts.

No, what was a shameful act was the fact that you're so boring and pathetic that you had to listen in on phone conversations of private citizens with no warrant.

He asserted that the Constitution and the resolution authorizing force against al-Qaida gave him the right to conduct such eavesdropping, and suggested that such efforts could have prevented the Sept. 11 attacks if they had been in place sooner.

Only in your mind, kiddo. Maybe if you stuck to hunting down al-Qaeda and refrained from invading and occupying a sovereign nation, we would have caught the spineless morons who were behind 9/11.

"The fact that we're discussing this program is helping the enemy. ... We're at war, and we must protect America's secrets," Bush said during a hour long news conference. He offered assurance to the public that "I am doing what you expect me to do, which is to safeguard civil liberties and at the same time protect the United States of America."

We violate your civil liberties to safeguard them. We protect war by censoring you. Next up: George Bush set up a Ministry of Love.  We may as well set up a Ministry of Logic, considering the woeful lack of it in the right's "arguments" these days.

You know, I'm getting bone tired of the yapping dogs who take what he says as gospel truth and questions nothing. How much more obvious does it have to be that this man and his lackeys are un-American? They don't give a whit about freedom, civil liberties, or preventing terrorism. If they did, they wouldn't be so eager to give our enemies recruitment fodder in Iraq.

And for once, can we just drop the "if you do this, the terrorists win" drek? I get pissy when people insult my intelligence, and it's pretty obvious this has nothing to do with terrorists. Peace activists are th targets of survelliance, and are considered to be a threat (Via Kevin Drum and Jeff here at Preemptive Karma).

A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Fla., a small group of activists met to plan a protest of military recruiting at local high schools. What they didn't know was that their meeting had come to the attention of the U.S. military.

A secret 400-page Defense Department document obtained by NBC News lists the Lake Worth meeting as a "threat" and one of more than 1,500 "suspicious incidents" across the country over a recent 10-month period.

Quick! Bar the door, hide the children and pets! The peaceniks are coming! Those Quakers are nothing but trouble.  They'll stop the military from scooping up cannon fodder from giving good American citizens the opportunity to serve their country.

But if you criticize the war, the terrorists win. So you're probably a terrorist and should expect to be stalked.

Posted by at 06:37 AM |

Woman convicted of filing false police report on rape is sentenced

[Update: The O has their story up on the sentencing. The O reporter says that the city attorney's office didn't seek a specific sentence. Since I was sitting in the back perhaps I heard wrong..but I could have sworn that they said something about community service and restitution.

One commentor here noted that the judge was blaming the young woman for the conviction. I don't think so. I think he's blaming the defense attorney.]

The wheels of justice move ever so slowly.

In the case of the Oregon woman convicted of filing a false police report in regard to an alleged rape, they crawl.

Given that the original incident happened in early 2004..its taken a long time to get here..and its far from over. An appeal of the conviction has been filed.

The young woman was sentenced today in Beaverton Municipal Court. I attended her sentencing.

Municipal Court is a strange animal. The majority of folks get less than a minute with the judge. Most don't have attorneys present and some are there to have counsel assigned. Some plead a case on a parole violation or a fine...still getting just a moment in front of the judge before they're sent over to the clerk to fill out paperwork. Perry Mason it ain't.

The young woman's case was different. The defense attorney and the young woman appeared along with the city attorney before the judge, who was Peter Ackerman. Ackerman is the same judge that heard the case against the young woman. I sat in the back (regretfully) and was unable to hear some of the proceedings.

The city attorney had sent sentencing recommendations to both the judge and the defense. From what I could hear, Ackerman is requiring a "presentencing investigation", in which the woman is interviewed. There was no explanation in court as to what this investigation means or how it applies to the sentencing. Despite the defense attorney's request, it appears this investigation will take place even though the case is on appeal.

Ackerman also sentenced the woman to community service and (I believe) monetary restitution to cover the court's costs. I couldn't hear this part entirely. The defense attorney requested that the judge stay the community service/restitution sentence pending appeal. The judge acquiesed.

Prior to sentencing, Ackerman also indicated his anger toward the media coverage of this case. He noted that he had received "threats". He also chided the defense attorney for not providing a defense "expert" on rape to talk about the young woman's reaction to her rape.

Ackerman seems to be hinging his decision based in large part on the woman's reactions after the rape.

I remain skeptical about this conviction.

I interviewed the police department public information officer about this case late last week. He too seemed frustrated with the media coverage, believing that the Oregonian story was unbalanced and didn't provide the judge's statements at the time of the conviction. He also couldn't answer my specific questions regarding the nature of the conflicting statements and how the judge reached "reasonable doubt", due to the appeal. He further expressed surprise that the judge's decision hadn't been released in writing.

I've been working hard to not make a rush judgement on this. An attorney friend of mine cautioned me early on: "A judge heard both sides of this and didn't believe her". But the more I find out, the more questions I have about how this decision was reached.

I'm still waiting to hear the appeal date. I plan to attend provided my schedule allows.

Posted by Carla at 12:29 AM |

December 19, 2005

Better Red than Liberty

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.--BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, Pennsylvania Assembly: Reply to the Governor, November 11, 1755

In last night's speech and today's press conference, President Bush decided to again use fear to push his agenda. He cited the attacks on 9/11 to justify his use of warrantless eavesdropping.

I've been looking over Article II today, and I have yet to find anywhere in which the President is given authority to spy on US citizens without a warrant.

The Republicans like to tell us that they believe in a "strict constructionist" Constitutional interpretation.

Constructionism is easily abandonded when it doesn't suit the agenda, it seems.

And those who support Bush have no problem using their fear as an excuse to abandon their principles of constructionism...or to violate the basic civil liberties of American citizens.

At least that's what the red writers tell us:

Byron York:

But there's more to the story than that. In 2002, when the president made his decision, there was widespread, bipartisan frustration with the slowness and inefficiency of the bureaucracy involved in seeking warrants from the special intelligence court, known as the FISA court. Even later, after the provisions of the Patriot Act had had time to take effect, there were still problems with the FISA court — problems examined by members of the September 11 Commission — and questions about whether the court can deal effectively with the fastest-changing cases in the war on terror.

People familiar with the process say the problem is not so much with the court itself as with the process required to bring a case before the court. "It takes days, sometimes weeks, to get the application for FISA together," says one source. "It's not so much that the court doesn't grant them quickly, it's that it takes a long time to get to the court. Even after the Patriot Act, it's still a very cumbersome process. It is not built for speed, it is not built to be efficient. It is built with an eye to keeping [investigators] in check." And even though the attorney general has the authority in some cases to undertake surveillance immediately, and then seek an emergency warrant, that process is just as cumbersome as the normal way of doing things.

FISA court allows for emergency eavesdropping without a warrant, as long as the paperwork is filed after the fact. The paperwork York is babbling about comes after the surveillance had taken place. Nothing inhibits these quick emergency eavesdrops. This is fear mongering.

And Orin Kerr tries to tell us that it's Constitutional to eavesdrop on Americans without a warrant. Using the 4th Amendment..Kerr stretches precedent to maximum capacity. I'm no lawyer and I don't play one on this blog...but it appears that Kerr is trying to use unsettled SCOTUS precedent on eavesdropping. Not even Bush tried that in his speech or his press conference. Kerr does what the rest of the rightwing hackosphere has done with FISA..elminating the provision that requires an after-the-fact filing of paperwork to obtain a warrant.

And then there's Ann Althouse, who trots out this old saw:

Members of Congress were briefed about the program in the past and did not see fit to take a position about it one way or the other. They were content to let the President act and but feel pressured to do something now that the program is no longer secret. Let's see what they do.

Not so much, Ann. Pelosi says she filed a classified grievance letter. Reid says that the vast majority of Senators (including most who serve on the Intelligence Committee) heard about the program via the NYT. Feingold had no idea and neither did former former Senator Graham, who chaired the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Reminds me of the blathering that the rightwing did about Congress having the same intelligence on Iraq that the President did. That turned out to be a lie too.

These people are trying to use fear to take away our liberty.

Posted by Carla at 02:51 PM |

Double-Talk from the President

I listened to Bush's news conference this morning. There were any number of things which struck me as logically fallacious. But, I want to focus on the domestic spying thing.

Bush asserted that he'd authorized the NSA spying program without any court approval "because it enables us to move faster and quicker. We've got to be fast on our feet." At one point he talked about how people change phones and phone numbers quickly now days as a reason why he couldn't wait for court approval of such domestic spying. Although it was pointed out by commentators after the news conference that any administration can go to the FISA court after the fact and seek approval that way... something that Bush apparently hasn't done.

Bush emphasized that only international calls were monitored without court order — those placed from within the United States and going overseas, or those placed from other countries to individuals living in this country.

He stressed that calls placed and received within the United States would be monitored as has long been the case, after an order is granted by a secret court under the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

So apparently we're supposed to believe a couple of truly incredible assertions:

1. That phones and phone numbers aren't changed so fast on calls within the United States to warrent spying without court approval.

2. That he has the legal authority to order spying upon American citizens without any court approval... provided they are calling or emailing outside the United States.

Update: Backsplash has a really good post on this.

Posted by Kevin at 09:04 AM |

December 18, 2005

Even Santa isn't safe from a good Swift Boating

Posted by Carla at 05:27 PM |

President-for-Life Sheelzebub gives award to religious protesters, Wal-Mart customers

President-for-Life Sheelzebub gave boxing gloves to both the consumers and the religious protesters involved in the latest conflict over Christmas.

The gloves, adorned with a picture of Jesus in a Santa hat, were to remind them to fight for their rights and their loot on Black Friday every year.

"It's about time those pinko comsymps who think that Christmas was supposed to be about giving to those less fortunate and helping those in need were drowned out by a loud catfight. Especially those namby-pamby Christians who keep yapping on and on about loving their neighbor and all that crap. Have you been to the mall lately? There's no room for love, okay? Sheesh."

Her Infernal Majesty picked out Dick Ottersad of the Church of the Divide for special praise. "You know, Dick, I've gotta say, I've never seen headquarter's message spread in such a wonderfully sly and ironic fashion before. Mammon is thrilled and would love to take you to dinner. "

Otterstad, who protested at Wal-Mart dressed in a Santa suit, had urged shoppers to remember the reason for the season.

"You were so right to do that!" her Infernal Majesty said. "I am so glad you reminded them--Santa Claus and mindless consumption are the reason for the season. It's about time we realize that."

The President-for-Life turned to the shoppers who passed him by and said, "And you people should be proud of yourselves. You took Mr. Ottersad's symbolic message to heart, remembered the reason for the season, and got yourself further into debt to help my CEO friends buy new private jets. You truly are good Americans."

Posted by at 03:29 PM |

The Republican Party: Suspending reality and law since at least 2001

Its got to suck to be Condoleeza Rice today.

Our Secretary of Shill is sitting in the hotseat on Meet the Press this morning..giving a disgraceful laundry list of excuses.

Most noteably, Rice was on today to defend King Bush's decision to allow the NSA to monitor domestic communication without a warrant. Rice tried to cite the FISA statute (see Talk Left for a series of posts on FISA and the FISA court), which pretty clearly wasn't followed. Bush never went to the FISA court for the necessary follow ups.

Rice is also ponying up the argument that they "briefed Congress"..which is also clearly not the case. Its clear that some members of the leadership were briefed to some degree. Its also clear that Democrats expressed concern over this program. But none of those being briefed were being asked for permission to implement..they were being told. None could go public as it would have been against the law.

The excuse that Congress shouldn't be outraged because some of them were told and had no real power to stop it...another meaningless notion.

Posted by Carla at 08:38 AM |

December 17, 2005

The fragility of human life...

...hits home with the untimely death of actor John Spencer.

Spencer died of a heart attack at age 58. He was taken from us much too soon.

These sorts of losses serve as a reminder that life can be short. Sometimes exceedingly so.

Posted by Carla at 11:47 AM |

December 16, 2005

Republicans fracturing under the weight of screwups and corruption

The Republican Party caucus is coming apart at the seams.

1. Some of the more heinous provisions of the Patriot Act go down in flames (despite the White House's hefty lobbying efforts) because the GOP leadership is too selfish and stupid to accept a Dem proposal for a short term extention.{Yay! Score on for the good guys]

2.Bush's decision to let the NSA wiretap American citizens without the benefit of a warrant may come back to bite him in the ass. Remember kids, Presidents breaking the law is an "impeachable offense"....or does it only count for bj's?

3. McCain goes toe to toe with Bush on torture..and Bush blinks. Not that McCain can win me over anymore...he lost that when he glad handed Bush in 2004. Besides, standing firm on torture is the least an American Senator can do.

4.The Defense Appropriations bill is in trouble because Ted Stevens attached an ANWR drilling rider. It would appear Stevens' move has caused a filibuster threat that includes Republicans, which the GOP leadership likely can't fight off.

5. W couldn't talk about "ongoing investigations" before he could.

Posted by Carla at 03:30 PM |

Secret wiretaps=impeachable offense?

If you still support the Bush Administration after reading this story, then your partisan political sickness may be terminal:

President Bush signed a secret order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens and foreign nationals in the United States, despite previous legal prohibitions against such domestic spying, sources with knowledge of the program said last night.

The super-secretive NSA, which has generally been barred from domestic spying except in narrow circumstances involving foreign nationals, has monitored the e-mail, telephone calls and other communications of hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people under the program, the New York Times disclosed last night.

The aim of the program was to rapidly monitor the phone calls and other communications of people in the United States believed to have contact with suspected associates of al Qaeda and other terrorist groups overseas, according to two former senior administration officials. Authorities, including a former NSA director, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, were worried that vital information could be lost in the time it took to secure a warrant from a special surveillance court, sources said.

There is no defense for actions such as these.

Wiretapping US citizens without a warrant?

This is against the law. There is absolutely no excuse for the President of the United States to violate the civil rights of US citizens..even to stop terrorism.

I can't imagine that this isn't an impeachable offense.

I recognize that there are a lot of scared Americans out there. Terrorism is a scary business.

But terrorism has been with us for centuries. And we've had US citizens die from terrorism on our soil prior to 9/11. When Eric Rudolph murdered abortion doctors and bombed the US Olympics in Atlanta..did we allow secret wiretaps of suspected abortion doctor killers and other suspected whacked out US citizens? When Tim McVeigh bombed the Federal Building in Oklahoma City...did we start those activities then? When Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold murdered their classmates at Columbine High School, did we start secret wiretaps of suspected angry high schoolers?

This is insanity. Any quarter of American society that supports allowing the POTUS to secretly wiretap Americans without having secured a warrant is either so blindly partisan or so blindly scared that they are beyond the reach of common sense.

Posted by Carla at 09:14 AM |

'I won't vote for Mr. Bush, but I'll take a bullet for him"

- Marine Second Lieutenant Ryan McGlothlin On Nov. 16, at age 26, he was killed in Iraq

"While young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrats' manic obsession to bring down our commander in chief (George W. Bush)" - Zell Miller

Talk is cheap, Mr. Miller.

Posted by Kevin at 09:14 AM |

Keystone Kops: Police Academy 10

READY READY READY TO -- ROCK AND ROLL! Iraqi security forces are locked and loaded, all right:

Official: Al-Zarqawi caught, released

Authorities didn't realize prisoner was terrorist mastermind

Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.

Hussain Kamal confirmed that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- the al Qaeda in Iraq leader who has a $25 million bounty on his head -- was in custody at some point last year, but he wouldn't provide further details.

A U.S. official couldn't confirm the report, but said he wouldn't dismiss it. "It is plausible," he said.

Let's see, he's got a prosthetic leg, and his face has been plastered all over everything for a couple years now. Nope, must be one of those unbefreakinlievable coincidences. Well, it is the season of miracles.

Posted by Jeff at 06:29 AM |

December 15, 2005

If the Kurds are skeptics, what should we be?

In a couple of interesting pieces carried on KurdishMedia.com we get an inside look past the PR machine in the White House.

We vote, then we throw you out points out what skeptics have been saying about Iraq, and a few things that I've not heard before.

A former prime minister, Iyad Allawi - widely known in Baghdad as "Saddam without a moustache" - saying on the record that human rights in President George W Bush's Iraq are worse than they were under Saddam.

The favorite Anglo-American election candidate supposedly capable of pulling it all off is once again Allawi - a truculent secular Shi'ite who was once a Ba'athist (he has kept the good connections) before he became anti-Saddam and a US intelligence asset. The White House may forget it, but Iraqis don't; Allawi gave the go-ahead for the American leveling of Fallujah and the American bombing of holy Najaf in 2004.

But perhaps most telling is the polling figures cited:

Recent polls have revealed that at least half of the Iraqi population is still not convinced of the merits of Western-style democracy, at least the White House-promoted version.

Half believe that the occupiers should have never set foot in Mesopotamia. Sixty percent think that they turned the country into an even bigger disaster than it was after the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, the first Gulf war in 1991 and 12 years of United Nations sanctions. And two thirds of the population wants the occupiers out. Half the people polled by the BBC said Iraq needed a strong leader (a "Saddam without a moustache"?) And only 28% said democracy was a priority.

The other piece is even more interesting because it's forward looking rather than assessing what has been.

What to expect in Iraq after the December 15 elections lays out in highly pessimistic terms what the future for Iraq looks like.

As Iraq prepares to elect its first permanent, post-Saddam Hussein government on December 15, 2005, the political class is preparing for the regionalization, and potential fracturing, of the state. Sectarian violence, a constitution that favors federalism over the functioning of the state, and pressures on the U.S. to begin withdrawing military forces are colluding together to ensure Iraq's fragmented future will not come without violent dispute.

The Kurdish north looks to be the most likely region to secede, mostly because of it's oil reserves and vastly less chaotic civilian situation.

Last year, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (K.D.P.), which controls a portion of the Kurdish region in the north, signed a deal with Norway's DNO ASA to drill for oil near Zakho. On uncertain legal ground, drilling for the project began on December 9, 2005. The central government reacted with surprise and indignation as it claimed the K.D.P. did not consult with Baghdad before signing the deal.

The Kurds claim that all new oil projects fall under the jurisdiction of the regional government in which the project will exist. Baghdad points to a clause in the constitution that says the regional governments must act in consultation with the central government when signing any new oil deals. The Kurdish region will not share any proceeds from the new project with the central government, as the constitution does not appear to require it to do so.

The sectarian violence bedeviling the Iraqi Arabs is getting worse. And not all of it is due to insurgents.

Iraq is more dangerous now for Iraqis than it was two years ago. According to Kanan Makiya in the New York Times, the Iraqi daily casualty rate was 26 in early 2004; by the fall of 2005, it had reached 64. Most of this increase can be contributed to sectarian violence as Sunni Arab insurgents attack the Shi'a population, and Shi'a militias respond in kind. Even the transitional government's forces appear to be contributing to the sectarian violence. For instance, an Interior Ministry-run prison was raided in November 2005, and 173 prisoners were discovered, most of whom had been tortured. The prisoners were primarily Sunni Arabs. The Interior Ministry is run by Bayan Jabr, a former Badr Corps commander.

But hey... let's debate whether an evergreen tree covered with tinsel and ornaments is a "holiday" tree or a "Christmas" tree.

Posted by Kevin at 01:08 PM |

I am the Grouchy Old Woman of Christmas

I realize I've been making light of the War! On! Christmas! wingnuts, but I do think in all seriousness they've been missing the point and then some.

Maybe it's because I read this essay in Newsweek yesterday and I saw my feelings about the holiday articulated in perfect prose. Read it--it's spot on and anyone yelping about store associates who say Happy Holidays and how Liberals are out to destroy Christmas should just take a few deep breaths, count to ten, and then ask themselves how consuming themselves into debt and stress is at all Christian or representative of the baby Jesus. Or the grown Jesus for that matter. Last time I checked, shopping was not on the list of Ten Commandments that some folks would like to post up at courthouses. Really.

All this shopping madness, coupled with the War! On! Christmas! hysteria really makes me dread this season. My sister and I agreed last year that we wouldn't exchange gifts for Christmas anymore, bless her soul. It's not as if she's got the time to shop for my pinko self; she and her husband have their hands full with the kids and the house and their jobs and life in general. (You know, I'm starting to wonder if all most parents really want for Christmas is a quiet afternoon and a nap. Sheesh, I'd like that.) I really don't want to be a source of additional stress. And I'm just not a fan of shopping malls, myself. I went Christmas shopping last Sunday, and while the day out was nice--my friend and I had a nice leisurely lunch, I heard all about her new, family-oriented, tatooed artist boyfriend, I was not particularly thrilled to be dodging wandering shoppers drunk on charging lots of plastic crap that would collect dust.

Actually, any gift-giving occaision gives me the hives, and the reason is actually quite simple--I've got more than enough crap. I'm trying to get rid of it. I'd love to go to a Yankee swap where I just give my old stuff away and get nothing in return. (That's actually called St. Vincent de Paul, and I've been making quite a few trips over there.) I don't need anything else. Truly. I don't. And I don't want to be the cause of anyone's holiday stress where they try to find the perfect gift for me. It's not like I live like a monk, I'm quite happy to buy myself a pair of earrings I like, or a necklace, or a book, or a sweater that catches my eye and that I'll wear. I just hate mandatory gift-giving. The very idea of it drives me crazy, and people don't take you seriously if you say that what you'd really like is a gift to Project Bread in your honor or you'd rather not have anything. Unless it's something they can wrap, it doesn't count.

When I was in college, my then-boyfriend got royally irritated with me when I told him what I wanted for my birthday. It was all quite simple--just cook me dinner. "No, seriously," he said, as if there was some little trinket that I really wanted but was being coy. As if. It is physically impossible for me to be coy, as any man I've been involved with (who's got half a clue) can tell you--I start twitching when I try it. I can't remember my college boyfriend got me--I just know that I didn't get the dinner cooked by him, which is what I wanted. I even told him why--it would be nice to just hang out, have a quiet night in, and eat something that he made me. If he wanted to make it special, he could light a candle. Boom. He's done, I'm happy, life is good.

So these days roll around, and I get tired. I have to think--quick! THINK! What do I want? What do I need? Think about it and tell folks and maybe I'll get it. And if I don't want or need anything, I'd better come up with something anyway. And I know that most people around me feel the same way--there are only so many sweaters anyone needs, and that's the big fallback item for some folks. Lately, I think people just don't know what they want or need because they don't actually want or need anything. I'm starting to think that we all want to get off this ridiculous merry-go-round, but it's not something anyone wants to mention because it can inspire resentment in some quarters. (Thankfully, my folks seem to get it and accept the fact that I'm The Grumpy Old Woman of Christmas.) Mentioning this to people outside of my family gets me a ration of grief, though. It's like I'm ruining Christmas by saying that please, don't buy me a gift (I never bought for people outside of my family and whomever I was going out with at the time, anyway). If there's one thing people hate worse than not getting a gift, it's getting their karma sucked away from comsymps like me.

Posted by at 09:02 AM |

Yes, comrade, there is a Santa Claus

Ahhh, that heart-warming Christmas season feeling, bringing back warm memories of yesteryear. Say, December 1969.

"He sees you when you're sleeping... he knows when you're awake... "

And other gifts that keep on giving, naturally. "Told you not to get me anything...! Oh. Well, I must admit I'm not a bit surprised..." Bah humbug to you too, Kevin Drum!

Devastating Diebold hack proven. "More EGGNOG, I SAID!"

So, give it to me straight, Doc, I can take it. Tell me the worst. Is any of this even making it into the mainstream media?

Google News headlines, yesterday:

But today there's this: Bush takes blame for Iraq war on bad intelligence

So, there's that. Oh, and this just in: irony, like democracy and Generalissimo Francisco Franco, is still dead.

Posted by Jeff at 08:11 AM |

Tidbits galore!

I'll be away today helping my brother move into his new condo during the day. And then by night I'll change into my groovy nonwork duds and head over to a meet and greet at Acme Bar and Grill on SE 8th and Main for Democrats Rob Brading and Arnie Roblan..both running for the Oregon House.

There are some juicy and delicious tidbits in the blogosphere that definitely need digesting, so check them out:

AmericaBlog gets Ford Motor Company to do the right thing.

Jeanne gives the big reason why holding detainees without due process is not just a huge violation of civil liberties..but probably creates more terrorists.

Oregon Senator Ron Wyden plans to filibuster the Patriot Act

John Holbo: Bush doesn't comment on ongoing investigations unless its an investigation that doesn't directly implicate him

Amanda outs Dawn and Steve's efforts to make sure rape victims have every opportunity to be turned into criminals.

Shakes Sis continues her uncanny ability to ask the questions on everyone's need to know list: Got any cool scars?

Josh Marshall reports on how the Bush Administration continues to do stupid shit to other nations. And the frothing rightwing nutters wonder why international leaders score points with their constituents by talking smack about W. Jeez.

"You know Dasher and Dancer and Prancer and Vixen..." just like in the Bible. See LabKat.

Posted by Carla at 07:12 AM |

December 14, 2005

The Mahablog challenge

The always excellent Mahablog has issued a challenge to her readers. I think its a challenge worthy of PKers as well:

You’re on, toots. The only oppression of Christians in this country of which I am aware has been at the hands of OTHER Christians. Here’s an example. But if you can find a SINGLE EXAMPLE of Christian Americans being oppressed by non-Christians, or of any government officials at federal, state, or local level locking churches or throwing Christians in jail because of their beliefs — not for something they did, like break a law — then please tell us. Tell us here. Provide links. That goes for anyone else breezing through this blog. Put up or shut up.

Outstanding.

There is a serious persecution complex among quite a few Christians in this country. But are there any real examples of Christians being jailed in this country because of their beliefs? Is there a single example of a Christian being persecuted here in the US (specifically meaning to be harassed by ill treatment or persistently harmed)due to their beliefs?

To echo Maha: put up or shut up.

Posted by Carla at 01:30 PM |

Six Degrees of Tom DeLay

How many licks does it take to get the Tom DeLay center of Duke Cunningham's bribery case?

One, maybe two, perhaps:

Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, a Democrat, subpoenaed on Monday records of California businessman Brent Wilkes and three Wilkes-controlled companies that made a political contribution to a Texas fundraising committee set up by DeLay.

Late Tuesday, Earle also subpoenaed records from a civil lawsuit involving DeLay from a decade ago in which an ex-business partner accused him of lying.

Wilkes was described in a federal indictment as one of four defense contractors who bribed Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif., who pleaded guilty and resigned in late November.

The subpoenas focused on a $15,000 contribution by a Wilkes subsidiary, Perfect Wave Technologies, to DeLay's Texans for a Republican Majority.

DeLay's legal junkyard dog Dick DeGuerin is complaining of a fishing expedition on the part of Earle. Unfortunately for Tricky Dick, his client is involved in all sorts of odious goings on. Whether it turns out to be illegal is a separate question. At the very least, the ethical part of this stinks to high heaven.

But House Republicans are addicted to DeLay's cash flow like a crack whore. They won't disavow their pimp until it becomes so politically deadly that it might cost them their seat.

Oregon's congressman Greg Walden is one such addict. Walden approved the weakening of ethics rules in the House to attempt to make it easier for DeLay to hold his Leader status.

Just another "trick" to keep the cash flow going.

Are the Oregonians of District 2 so blindingly red that they'll keep Walden in his seat despite his unethical behavior?

Perhaps its time for Howard Dean's to translate to a 36 county strategy for Oregon.

Posted by Carla at 11:46 AM |

If you don't celebrate Christmas, the terrorists have won!

The War on "Holidays" heats up...with another whacko Republican lawmaker intent on shoving the "true meaning" of Christmas down the throats of Americans whether they like it or not:

The huge tree festooned with lights in front of the Capitol should be called a Christmas tree rather than being labeled a holiday tree as it is now, the GOP-controlled Senate said in a resolution Tuesday.

Debate over the measure grew heated, with Sen. Alan Cropsey, R-DeWitt, criticizing "elites" for attacking people of faith and forcing the tree to have a politically correct designation.

"What holiday are we talking about when we put the tree up? We're talking about the Christmas holiday," Cropsey said. He also said terrorists are less likely to celebrate Christmas.

But do terrorists celebrate "holidays"? Enquiring minds want to know.

Hmm...I wonder if a nativity ever graced the homes of Tim McVeigh? Did the Baby Jesus ever rest his head in a manger where Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris lived?

Did Santa ever visit Eric Rudolph?

So much for terrorism being a religion specific enterprise.

Posted by Carla at 07:44 AM |

December 13, 2005

Another reason why Dems have trouble at the national level

They keep hiring this clown.

[Update: There seems to be confusion as to who I'm referring to. The piece on the front page of the link was written by Al From. The link is more direct now]

Posted by Carla at 08:03 AM |

Dead-enders in the War on Christmas

Sam Seder nails it down for us:

SEDER: Listen, as far as the war on Christmas goes, I feel like we should be waging a war on Christmas. I mean, I believe that Christmas, it's almost proven that Christmas has nuclear weapons, can be an imminent threat to this country, that they have operative ties with terrorists and I believe that we should sacrifice thousands of American lives in pursuit of this war on Christmas. And hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money.

PHILLIPS: Is it a war on Christmas, a war Christians, a war on over-political correctness or just a lot of people with way too much time on their hands?

SEDER: I would say probably, if I was to be serious about it, too much time on their hands, but I'd like to get back to the operational ties between Santa Claus and al Qaeda.

PHILLIPS: I don't think that exists. Bob? Help me out here.

SEDER: We have intelligence, we have intelligence.

PHILLIPS: You have intel. Where exactly does your intel come from?

SEDER: Well, we have tortured an elf and it's actually how we got the same information from Al Libbi. It's exactly the same way the Bush administration got this info about the operational ties between al Qaeda and Saddam.

Read the rest of the transcript. Happy Saturnalia, everybody!

Posted by Jeff at 05:35 AM |

December 12, 2005

This is sick

Jedmunds is right.  This is sick.

From Battlepanda:

The Cory Maye case is just about the ugliest nexus of race, civil rights violations, southern juries and our criminal justice system that I can think of.

Let's summarize: Cops mistakenly break down the door of a sleeping man, late at night, as part of drug raid. Turns out, the man wasn't named in the warrant, and wasn't a suspect. The man, frigthened for himself and his 18-month old daughter, fires at an intruder who jumps into his bedroom after the door's been kicked in. Turns out that the man, who is black, has killed the white son of the town's police chief. He's later convicted and sentenced to death by a white jury. The man has no criminal record, and police rather tellingly changed their story about drugs (rather, traces of drugs) in his possession at the time of the raid.

Cory Maye is now on death row in Mississippi.

You read that right.  He's on death row.  Apparently trying to protect his daughter from what he thought were maurading punks wasn't a good enough excuse.

He was convicted in 2004.  Here is the text of the AP newsstory covering the verdict (since it's not easily web accessible).

Columbia, Miss. January 25, 2004.

A Jefferson Davis County will pay with his life for the 2001 shooting death of a Prentiss police officer.

Cory Maye, 23, showed no reaction when a Marion County jury of eight women and four men found him guilty of capital murder Friday for the death of Officer Ron Jones.

Jones was one of eight officers conducting a search warrant looking for illegal drugs at two apartments on Mary Street in Prentiss on Dec. 26, 2001. Shortly after Jones entered Maye's bedroom, he was shot in the chest, just below his bullet-resistant vest.

"It's been two years since he was killed and the hurt will never go away," said Jones' father, Ronald Jones, who was the Prentiss police chief at the time of his son's death. "But maybe now that we have the conviction this will bring us closure and we'll be able to move on."

Shortly before Marion County Circuit Court Judge Michael Eubanks sentenced Maye to death by lethal injection, he asked Maye if he wanted to address the court.

"No," Maye replied.

On Thursday, Maye testified he didn't know Jones was a police officer when he shot him. His defense attorney, Rhonda Cooper of Jackson, argued that Maye acted in self defense.

Because of the death sentence, Maye will get an automatic appeal to the Mississippi Supreme Court.

Battlepanda notes that the left and the right are united on outrage, which is all well and good, but a competition to see who can generate the most traffic about this case may actually do some more good.  So fellow pinkos, do your bit and cover this story. 

Posted by at 03:20 PM |

Whatever you do, don't mention "polygamy"!

Raising middle schoolers and teenagers is reported to be a difficult pain in the ass. Kids are trying to find their way and establish their independence. The reports of these difficulties are not unfounded, in my experience.

But as with all stages of development, each has their own moments of joy and hilarity. Take one of our dinner conversations last week.

Daughter (age 12): Mom, my friend wants me to go to a church thing with her on Wednesday night. It's at her house. She's Mormon and she has to do some lessons in order to be baptized. She's invited me to come over and participate. Can I go?

Me: Sure. As long as you have your homework done.

Son (age 14): You know they're going to try to recruit you.

D: Recruit me?

S: Yup. They want you to join up. I'll betcha they'll give you a Book of Mormon, too.

D: What's a Book of Mormon?

S: Its like a Bible. Only it has the Mormon version of their religious stuff in it.

(Me: cracking up quietly, just listening)

D: Mom..is that true? Do they have a Book of Mormon?

Me: As far as I know. Yes.

S: And whatever you do, don't mention "polygamy"!

D: Polygamy! What's that?

S: If you don't know I'm not going to tell you.

D: What is it? Tell me!

S: No. I don't want to tell you.

D: Mom! What's polygamy?

Me (to Son): You brought it up. You need to explain to your sister what it means, please.

S: Fine. It's when a husband has more than one wife or when a wife has more than one husband.

D: You're kidding! Are you sure that's true? They really do that?

S: The Mormon Church doesn't do it anymore. Its against the law and they'll kick you out of the church if you do it.

D: Why would anyone want more than one husband or wife?

S: How else are they going to populate the Earth and have lots of recruiters?

(Me: laughing out loud at this point)

Epilogue: Daughter came home from the church lessons with a Book of Mormon. She attempted to read it one night in bed and put it down after about 20 minutes exclaiming, "This is too confusing to read!"

No polygamy discussion was had, to my knowledge.

Posted by Carla at 01:42 PM |

I'll get you my pretty..and your little dog too!

A pattern has begun to emerge with Oregon House Speaker Karen Minnis. And its an ugly one.

Last week, TJ of Also Also noted this Portland Trib story where Minnis may have cost her own constitutents hundreds of thousands in fines to the federal government:

During the 2001 session of the Oregon Legislature, rural Republicans and agricultural interests, citing news reports of farmers getting fined for letting a relatively small amount of cow feces to reach rivers, started complaining that Portland was getting fined less for doing a lot worse. House Speaker Minnis sponsored a resolution that asked President Bush and Congress to fine Portland for its sewage overflows. The measure — House Joint Memorial 13 — passed the House in a fiercely partisan vote, over Democrats’ objections. According to documents obtained by Wyden, a Minnis aide faxed a copy of the draft resolution to the EPA on March 29, 2001. Because the measure was never approved by the state Senate, it had no more legal significance than a used tissue. Legally speaking, “it had no impact,” says lobbyist John DiLorenzo, who conducted research for backers of the resolution. “It was never adopted.” This distinction appears to have been lost on staff at the EPA and the U.S. Department of Justice. Even though it failed in the state Senate, Ciannat Howett, a senior enforcement attorney at Regional 10, sent an e-mail to her colleagues on March 26, 2001, that said the resolution “provides a window of strong support by the Oregon Legislature for EPA action against Portland for its CSO violations.” Howett’s e-mail also said, “We are sending out a (warning letter to Portland) tomorrow, and we plan to have a (prosecution) referral to DOJ within the next month.” Howett now is with an environmental group in Atlanta. Contacted by the Portland Tribune, Howett said she did not feel politically pressured. But Adams said the fax and e-mail show the EPA enforcement action started with Minnis’ “effort to curry favor with rural Republicans.”

Its noteworthy that Portland has been hard at work attempting to fix the CSO problems and is out front of many other cities in doing so. While Minnis' people claim that there was no political pressure on their part or by rural Oregon interests, EPA emails indicate otherwise. As do statements at the US House level by Eastern Oregon GOP Congressman Greg Walden.

The one-two Minnis/Walden partisan punch have threatened Portland's hard work. And they stand to cost the city and its taxpayers a great deal of money.

This morning, Rep. Greg MacPherson (D-Lake Oswego/SW Portland)writes of his frustration and dissapointment about a bill aimed at improving Oregon's ability to recycle tires. Tire dumping constitutes a significant enviornmental problem. MacPherson's bill would have reinstated a $1 fee that tire dealers collected on worn out tires removed from motor vehicles. That fee went to an account managed by the state for the use of cleaning up dumped tires.

What happened to MacPerson's bill? Republican House Speaker Karen Minnis (instead of the Environmental Committee) which was chaired by Alan Brown (R-Newport). Brown owns a tire dealership in Newport, Oregon. He also refused to bring MacPherson's bill for a hearing. A one man veto.

MacPherson's piece is a plea for a change in the Oregon House Rules to keep a committee chairperson from the one man veto of a bill. But the problems go much deeper. Minnis had to know that this bill would get dumped by Brown without a hearing.

Is there no moral compass among Oregon Republicans? Why is this partisan political wrangling taking precedence over good public policy?

Its time for the Oregon GOP to do a gut check. They've consistently lost the governorship, even to lackluster candidates like Ted Kulingoski. The only federal representation from their party are Gordon Smith and Greg Walden. They're hanging on to the Oregon House by the skin of their teeth.

The political extremist leadership of Oregon Republicans has placed a black eye over once great party of Mark Hatfield and Tom McCall. They've tried to hold on to power instead of doing what is right for Oregon and Oregonians.

Where are all the moderate Republicans? Why do extremists keep running this party into the ground?

Posted by Carla at 08:12 AM |

If any question why we died

If any question why we died,
Tell them, because our fathers lied.

-- Rudyard Kipling

From Jesus' General and Rue De Liberté.

Posted by Jeff at 08:01 AM |

Carnivals galore

I know I haven't been great about posting lately.  It's been a combination of Christmas craziness, work stuff, and other writing I've been doing that's not really blog appropriate. 

I will post something soon.

In the meantime, get some some good reading over at the fourth Carnival of the Feminists and the first Carnival of the Liberals.  They were both put up recently, and you should definitely go check them out if you haven't already.

Posted by at 07:05 AM |

December 10, 2005

RIP Eugene McCarthy

Love him or hate him, the man arguably changed the face of American politics more than any other person in the last half century. Principly by shifting the balance of national political power from the infamous "smoke filled" backrooms of the national party conventions to the state by state primary elections.

The Washington Post has an excellent piece on McCarthy and his death: Gentle Senator, Presidential Hopeful Empowered U.S. Antiwar Movement

A former college professor and novice in a Benedictine monastery, McCarthy had never marched in lockstep with the political chieftains of his day. He had a gentle demeanor, and it was often said that he had the heart and soul of a philosopher. He spoke with a cadence that sometimes made it seem as if he were quoting the Irish poet William Butler Yeats, and when he was at his best on the campaign hustings, he could stir the spirits and fire the imaginations of his audience.

The AP also has a very good piece (via Yahoo): 1968 Presidential Upstart McCarthy Dies

In an interview a month before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, McCarthy compared the Bush administration with the characters in the William Golding novel "Lord of the Flies," in which a group of boys stranded on an island turn to savagery.

"The bullies are running it," McCarthy said. "Bush is bullying everything."

Those wanting to dig deeper may want to read the Wikipedia entry on him: Eugene McCarthy

Posted by Kevin at 10:23 PM |

December 09, 2005

Voyage of the Damned

That's what I called the 50th Anniversary trip with my parents. 8 hour drive to the port; 8 hours back. Afterward, I told my son, "No more driving to Florida. From now on, we fly."

I've revised that position in light of this week's events:

Eyewitness: "I Never Heard the Word 'Bomb'"
A passenger on Flight 924 gives his account of the shooting and says Rigoberto Alpizar never claimed to have a bomb

Posted by Jeff at 11:57 AM |

Won't you take me to...Liberaltown!

Are you looking to pack up your troubles in your old kit bag..and move to the comfort of your state's most liberal city? Using some baseline demographics, epodunk has calculated the most liberal cities in each state. The demographics include:

*Individual contributions to PACs
We analyzed 1.8 million contributions to 2,300 political action committees that could be identified as Democratic/Liberal or Republican/Conservative. This data, for the 2003-2004 election cycle, was downloaded from the Federal Election Commission on Nov. 9.

*Election returns
Unofficial election results in the 2004 presidential race were reported at the county level for every county in the U.S., and at the local level for many New England communities.

*Gay households
This index was compiled from the U.S. Census by Gary Gates, a demographer at the Urban Institute and co-author of The Gay and Lesbian Atlas. Figures were included for the 1,360 U.S. communities in which 50 or more couples reported living in such relationships.

*Local government resolutions opposing combat in Iraq

*Local officials performing gay marriages

*Congressional District voting history
(Note: Because this factor was part of the screen for rankings, Washington, D.C., which does not have congressional representation, was excluded from our study. Washington residents who do not live in the White House showed strong liberal leanings in their votes for president and political contributions. The city also has a large number of gay households.)

*Population
Community population, as reported in the 2000 census.

Here in my beloved home state of Oregon? The coastal town of Lincoln City, surprisingly enough. I had no idea that Lincoln County leaned so heavily Democratic, either. If only it wasn't so damn cold and windy at the beach all the time....

H/T: Blue Oregon

[I know the title is a poor riff off of Funkytown..but it's Friday. Cut me a break.]

Posted by Carla at 09:24 AM |

Oregon science standards rate an "F"

Since the No Child Left Behind mandate was put into place, the State of Oregon's science standards appear to have slipped dramatically.

According to a report released by the Fordham Institute (warning PDF), Oregon's standards now rate an "F". In 2000 they rated a "B".

The criticism from Fordham is rather scathing:

There are very few standards overall; they are broadly general and tend to be repeated at higher grade levels with little or no change. The science process standards are perfunctory and their development in higher grades suggests little expectation of student growth.

Wasn't No Child Left Behind supposed to force increased standards?

The sooner we throw away the mess of NCLB and get back to real state accountability, the better.

All of the states' scores are included in the report. Check it out.

Posted by Carla at 08:41 AM |

December 08, 2005

Another one rolls over on DeLay

DeLay can't keep the rats from jumping ship.

From Pacific Magazine:

The Marianas Variety Online reports that Governor-elect Benigno R. Fitial says he will cooperate with federal authorities in the ongoing investigation of Rep. Tom Delay and former Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff, whom he once described as his “close friends.”

House leadership spokesman Charles P. Reyes Jr. said Speaker Fitial “will comply with all the legal requirements asked of him.”

Not that he probably has any choice. Fitial may not be exactly clean himself:

In a separate news article, the AP reported that the 2001 donations to Burns, a Montana Republican, included money directly from Abramoff and Northern Marianas garment magnate Willie Tan’s company, Tan Holdings Corp.

In that same article, Eloy Inos, a corporate executive of Tan Holdings, was mentioned as donating $5,000 to Burns’ political action committee. Inos now serves on Fitial’s transition committee.

Fitial, a former executive of Tan’s, became speaker of the 12th Legislature largely through the help of DeLay’s aides. But Reyes said if Fitial was given help it was “not surprising” since at that time he was still with the local GOP.

These guys are all stained with the filth of DeLay.

And so we look to another Tom, perhaps our most eminent founding father, for the karma in it all:

"Such is the moral construction of the world that no national crime passes unpunished in the long run... Were present oppressors to reflect on the same truth, they would spare to their own countries the penalties on their present wrongs which will be inflicted on them in future times. The seeds of hatred and revenge which they [sow] with a large hand will not fail to produce their fruits in time. Like their brother robbers on the highway, they suppose the escape of the moment a final escape and deem infamy and future risk countervailed by present gain." —Thomas Jefferson, American Founding Father and U.S. president (1743-1826), letter to Francois de Marbois, 1817

Posted by Carla at 03:49 PM |

Feminists are bigots...

While driving to work this morning I followed a minivan covered with bumper stickers, most of which were ostensibly "Christian". The one that initially caught my attention was:

Feminists are Bigots
Get a Life Sweet Babe

I have a passing acquaintance with the Bible, having attended parochial schools my entire life - including four years of manditory Bible class in high school. My first thought when I read the sticker was, "man, that's gotta piss off more than a few woman commuters," especially that cheeky second line. My next thought was to recall the second half of the last chapter of my personal favorite book of the Bible: Proverbs 31.

Everyone knows that the Bible was written from a patriarchal point of view. But, Proverbs 31 really flies in the face of the misogynistic way that many self-described conservative "Christians" interprete the Bible. It was actually my mother who I've always thought of as a moderate feminist that pointed this Biblical description out to me.

The description is of "a wife of noble character who... is worth far more than rubies." She's a business owner and property owner... in her own right. And she buys property with her own money.

16 She considers a field and buys it;
out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.

17 She sets about her work vigorously;
her arms are strong for her tasks.

18 She sees that her trading is profitable,
and her lamp does not go out at night.

She's kind, compassionate (dare I say, Liberal?) and highly respected by the society in which she lives. And her husband is highly respected because of her! All of which is the antithesis of the mousy, servile, and fawning caricature of a wife that misogynists portray as the "Godly ideal" for a woman.

I got a quick glance at the guy driving the minivan as he peeled off the 405 to I5 South while I peeled off to take I5 North. It wasn't quite dawn yet and I only got the quick glance. But, he looked a lot like the picture posted at this website which another of the bumper stickers contained the URL to.

Interestingly enough, he's running for President. About half way down the page is his platform. LOL what a piece of work. He has a few positions that I find actually pretty reasonable. But, as a whole his professed belief systems is full of inherently contradictory claims. Earlier on the page he rants against being judgemental and also advocates teaching critical thinking skills in public schools. Yet one of his political planks is that Bill and Hillary Clinton ought to be jailed on the basis of some rightwing movie.

Posted by Kevin at 09:57 AM |

December 07, 2005

Oregon "Filing false rape charge" case...still more questions than answers

[Update II: This story made the "losers" section of Willamette Week's Winners and Losers column.]

[Update I: I'm hearing scuttlebutt that there has been an email and letter writing campaign to Judge Peter A. Ackerman (bio can be found here) demanding a release in writing of his decision.]

Following up on this story about the 19 year old who says she was raped at 17 by a group of 3 eighteen year old men...

It seems like every time I talk to someone about this case..more questions pop up than answers.

After having spoke with an attorney friend of mine (who doesn't practice criminal law--I don't know anyone here personally who does), how did such a serious case stay in a court that normally handles neighborhood nuisance type cases? And why would a Class C misdemeanor hearing not warrant a transcript in a court of record? Why would the city not ask the Washington County District Attorney to file charges instead, so it could be heard in a court of record?

This is a criminal conviction. Therefore the burden of proof must be beyond a reasonable doubt. How do you arrive at that conclusion when according to the defense attorney and the judge the stories of the four parties involved are all inconsistent?

Why did it take two years for this to make its way to court? The alleged incident took place when the girl was 17 years old. What took so long for "false accusation" charges to make it to court?

Its been reported that the alleged rape victim's friends told her to go to the police. These same friends then later told police that the young woman didn't "act traumatized"? What caused them to flip?

What types of behaviors are consistent with most or all rape victims to indicate trauma?

Not having a press credential or the weight of a major publication behind me, its been a little difficult to get people to call me back. Given that I have a tendency to make myself a major pain in the ass, I'm reasonably sure that I'll eventually get to talk to all of the individuals at the city employee level that I'm seeking out. That appears to me to be the only way to get answers to these questions.

Stay tuned.

Posted by Carla at 02:47 PM |

You had to be a big shot, didn'tcha...?

All your friends were so knocked out

We're not big enough shots here to warrant our own liberal blogger postage stamps.

I'm wondering if our blogger Jeff could just make one up for us. He's some sort of graphics guru.

What say you, Jeff?

Posted by Carla at 07:56 AM |

A day that will live in infamy

A moment to pause and remember when the US went to war because it had to, not because it was misled into it by people that wanted to. And to remember one of our greatest Presidents...at a time when we're living through quite possibly the worst.

Franklin D. Roosevelt's Infamy Speech
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 8, 1941
Yesterday, December 7, 1941 - a date which will live in infamy - the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its Government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in Oahu, the Japanese Ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to the Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time the Japanese Government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian Islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. Very many American lives have been lost. In addition American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday the Japanese Government also launched an attack against Malaya. Last night Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong. Last night Japanese forces attacked Guam. Last night Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands. Last night the Japanese attacked Wake Island. This morning the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.

Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounded determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December seventh, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire."

Posted by Carla at 07:55 AM |

More Lost stuff

Read under the fold if you want the spoilers.

Whooo. . .two women, two killers.

I saw it coming as soon as Ana Lucia insisted she couldn't ID her assailant. Yah, right, I thought. You're going to stomp a mudhole in his ass. Boy did she ever. And I figured, as soon as I learned that she'd taken four hollow-point bullets, that she was pregnant. Hence, the concern over the kids. This was a wanted pregnancy. Did she go to Australia to run from the law?

And Kate. . .well, I was disappointed in the story. It's a pet peeve of mine, and maybe not one that you'd all expect, knowing what a feminist I am and knowing how violence against women is my hot-button issue. But come on. It's such a cheap cop out, a lazy literary device, to use someone like Wayne, a drunken wife-beater who looked at his step (no, wait, his bio) daughter a little too fondly. This is a request to all script and fiction writers everywhere: please drop this as a plot device--it's overused, lazy, and it trivializes the issue. Really. It's insulting.

I think that's why I didn't get as into that particular episode. I knew Kate killed someone, and I figured it was a family member--but that had more to do with the godawful predictability of scriptwriters out there.

Sheesh. Maybe when Sawyer said "I love her," it was really Wayne possessing him, since he seemed kinda possessed by him anyway. Wouldn't that have been a trip--when he looked at her and said she was beautiful in his drunken stupor, maybe it really was just a paternal thing and not the uber creepy passive come-on the directors led us to think. Still, I wasn't impressed.

Anyway, I see Jack and Ana Lucia together. He and Kate are better colleagues than lovers. But I also think he and Ana could have some potential to clash, because they're both angst-ridden alphas. But she's got more of an edge than Jack does--I think Ana's got the gumption to make the hard decisions and not lose much sleep over them.

Random stuff:

I like Echo. I adore him. That line about not mistaking coincidence with fate was spot-on. He's the reality check that Locke desperately needs.

I'm glad Sun and Jin are together and happy again. Yowza.

I'm still pissy that Shannon had to die. She and Sayid made a great couple.

Are we ever going to see Rose and Bernard's backstories? Sheesh. Rose has been on for two seasons now. What's her story?

That's all for now.

Posted by at 07:48 AM |

Katrina survivors rip lawmakers

The survivors of Hurricane Katrina ripped into lawmakers over the indifferent response to their plight once the hurricane hit.  They use the R word--racism.  This is an unforgiveable sin for whites, who tend to spontaneously combust when they hear it.

The voices heard Tuesday at a "Voices From Inside the Storm" hearing on Capitol Hill were often loud -- and angry.

New Orleans residents testifying before the Hurricane Katrina Select Committee condemned the federal, state and local response to the storm, with some saying it was motivated by racism against the city's blacks. They told skeptical Republican committee members that they continue to be mistreated when they try to return home.

"This is how we made it: We slept next to dead bodies, we slept on streets -- at least four times, next to human feces and urine," said Patricia Thompson, whose evacuation to Texas after the storm was the first time she lived outside the city.

She called police officers' treatment of evacuees "demoralizing and inhuman.

"We were cursed when we asked for help for our elderly," Thompson said. "We had guns aimed at us by the police who were supposed to be there to protect and serve. They made everybody sit on the ground with their hands in the air, even babies."

The lawmakers didn't believe them, since these Black people were only there for the event and didn't have ten White witnesses to corrborate their testimony.

Several Republican committee members sparred with witnesses, saying their testimony wasn't credible.

Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., questioned witnesses who said National Guard troops pointed guns at small children. "I just don't frankly believe it."

The witnesses retorted that the lawmaker wasn't in New Orleans when the storm hit.

"Who are you, Mr. Shays?" an angry Thompson asked.

Rep. Steve Buyer, R-Ind., defended the actions of Guardsmen and other security forces that brandished weapons as they tried to persuade people to leave New Orleans after the storm. "How do you move people who refuse to move?"

Where do you propose they go, and how do you propose they get there? If they could have left before the storm, they would have.  They didn't have cars and they weren't able to get out.  Should they have walked?  Oh, wait.  A lot of people did walk to safer ground.  A lot of people did try to get to the Superdome, but couldn't get in (and as it turns out, they were lucky).  There was nowhere for them to go.

When you read the article, note the indignation of the lawmakers when the Superdome and shelters like it were likened to concentration camps.  Granted, reasonable people can disagree over the comparison, but now is hardly the time to freak out over it.  We aren't talking about some nitwit who's yelping about how his rights are being infringed on because he "can't" say the n-word, and it's just like Nazi Germany.  We aren't talking about some snivelling troll who likens feminists to Nazis because he could get charged with rape if he slips his date a roofie and has sex with her.  It's ironic that the very group  who throws Nazi imagery around now squeals in indignation?  When they drop the use of feminazi and the spectre of Nazism and concentration camps over college professors they don't like, when they stop whining about PC fascists when someone calls them out on their behavior, they can speak about going over the top with some credibility.   

For now, just shut it and listen.  They were there and you weren't, gentlemen. 

Posted by at 07:42 AM |

December 06, 2005

Somebody had a big bowl of stupid for breakfast

Conservatism has become so tediously full of itself that even when trying to make legal points about the Constitution...they just yield nothing more than utterly stupid:

American conservatives have rightly complained against the power of judges under the American constitution. For the Supreme Court has been able to use its authority as constitutional arbiter to expropriate the law-making powers of the Legislature. The doctrine of the division of powers is like the doctrine of the Trinity: it enshrines a mystery, and nobody really knows how to keep the three powers separate but united. There is a constant danger that they will collapse into one, as they have done under the rule of liberal judges in the Supreme Court.

The American Constitution created an independent judiciary to interpret the laws for a specifically important purpose: to place checks and balances on the Congress and the Executive. The independent judiciary also guarantees the rights of individuals from trampling by the majority. There is no "rightly complaining" about that system. There is no better system.

The legislature doesn't get to make whatever laws it wants to. Our founders made it this way ON PURPOSE..to keep a check on the legislature. While it may frustrate conservatives to not be able to turn the government entirely over to corporations and toss individual rights (except guns..ya get to keep yer firearms) out the window, the courts don't allow it. Not yet anyway.

We know exactly how to keep the triumvirate separate but unified. There's no mystery about it. We've been doing it for 250 years.

The danger of collapse of these three institutions is a recent phenomenon. If Scruton is truely concerned then he should be working to keep conservative judges off the bench while conservatives are running the other two branches. That's the red flag for collapse.

Dr. Scruton (honorary doctorates..see his curriculum vitae)pushes that same elitist snob pap that conservatives lap up like mother's milk: the world isn't safe as long as we can't implement corporations over individuals. Scruton blissfully ignores the obvious conservative stranglehold on American government..as if somehow an imminent collapse will happen if there is a blush of liberalism.

Pompous, arrogant ass must be in season for the conservative social events this year.

Posted by Carla at 01:52 PM |

The Fog of the War on Christmas

The humor will be lost on a lot of people, but their confusion is funny to me, too; can't you just hear it? "Whoever created this is the friend of our enemy, which makes them our enemy's friend and so our friend is our ene -- wait... um... Boycott FORD! Put CHRIST back in CHRISTMAS!!!"

Posted by Jeff at 10:39 AM |

December 05, 2005

President-for-Life Sheelzebub Answers Your Holiday Questions ('cause you didn't listen the first time)

Sheesh. You'd think that the barking loons would have piped down and gotten on with their lives after last Christmas. Unfortunately, Jerry Falwell and Bill "Falafel" O'Reilly are really concerned with Christmas being under attack. So I'll rerun this, which I posted in December of last year, for your reading pleasure.

Dear Sheelzebub:

I don't remember you winning the election. Why are you calling yourself President-for-Life?
--A voter

This has nothing to do with Christmas! Guard! Shoot the idiot who let this question through and draw and quarter this traitor.

Dear Sheelzebub:

Shouldn't we spend all year helping the poor, fighting injustice, and living with integrity and honor? Shouldn't we worry about bigger things than forcing non-Christians to celebrate Christmas?

--Wondering

Guard! Shoot that traitor!

Dear Evildoing She-demon President:

Why do these false Christians try to push their pagan ways on us? It is immoral. They insist on celebrating Christmas, a false holiday, when it is an "extreme forgetfulness of Christ" that embraces paganism and debauchery. I think they should be burned at the stake. What do you plan to do about it?

--Phred

Dear Phred,

I'd like you and Ima, who wrote the letter below, to get in the ring and go a few rounds. I'd sell tickets to the event and clean up.

Dear Madame Presidente:

Why do these oppressive, mean, PC lefties denigrate Christmas and oppress conservatives? It's horrible, I tell you. Why, just the other day, I saw a sign that said "Happy Holidays." This is just like Abu Ghraib! I'd like to hang these people up by their toes and beat them like pinatas so they will respect Jesus, who's the reason for the season. They should all put up Christmas trees and pray for forgiveness. What do you think?

--Ima Wingnut

Dear Ima,

First, thanks so much for keeping alive that myth that Jesus is the reason for the season. No need to actually let the truth out. It would spoil everything--if people realized we were just supposed to have fun and eat and be nice to each other, I wouldn't be entertained with gratuitous violence and social train wrecks. Besides, people getting distracted with nationalizing creches and saying Merry Christmas gives me a chance to loot the US Treasury undetected--er, I mean, reassures me that you all love the spirit of Christmas so much.

Just remember--the answer to "What Would Jesus Do?" should be: He'd shop.

Your infernal majesty:

Is it true that you are going to destroy any monuments having to do with our great nation's founders and the Puritans?

--Perplexed

Dear Perp,

Hell, yeah! These nitwits outlawed Christmas. Congress was even in session on December 25, 1789. Can you imagine? They didn't even have a party. No tree. No drunken, embarrassing moments at office parties for the viewing pleasure of their coworkers. No presents--so no shopping. It's a wonder this country ever survived! And they didn't even keep with the Jesus aspects of the holiday. I mean, really, we are marking the guy's birthday, you'd think they'd have at least had a keg party or something. But no, they had to get all anal rententive and point out that he wasn't even born in December. As if that matters. They were bad, un-Christian Americans who didn't realize why they founded this great nation. They are probably burning in hell right now. OK, so I don't know for sure, I mean, I don't have the current roster in front of me, but I'd bet money they are. Not my fault that I simply hate paperwork.

Your infernal majesty:

What's this I hear about you expanding Christmas to a month?

--Perplexed, again

Dear Perp redux,

Yes, it's true. One lousy day just isn't going to cut it. Not when we could stick to the old traditions of feasting, drinking, and general partying. That's my kind of holiday. People used to celebrate Christmas much like they used to celebrate Saturnalia. A big, drunken party is what I'm all about. Preferably with karaoke.

Posted by at 06:32 PM |

Record straightening on the 17 year old girl rape story

Our quiet little corner of Oregon has touched off a blogosphere firestorm.

The story of the 17 year old Oregon girl accused of filing false rape charges against 3 young men has spawned at least one misconception, which I'll clear up here.

Several bloggers and commentors have made mention of Oregon's statute which deems
individuals under the age of 18 incapable of sexual consent (ORS 163.315). However, the alleged rapists were within three years of the alleged victim's age, so under Oregon law it's not considered statutory rape:

163.345 Age as a defense in certain cases. (1) In any prosecution under ORS 163.355, 163.365, 163.385, 163.395, 163.415, 163.425, 163.427 or 163.435 in which the victim’s lack of consent was due solely to incapacity to consent by reason of being less than a specified age, it is a defense that the actor was less than three years older than the victim at the time of the alleged offense.

I just had a lengthy conversation with the Jeff Napoli, the defense attorney in this case, who agreed with me that this would not qualify as statuory rape under Oregon law.

According to Napoli, if this were a case of statutory rape the Washington County District Attorney's office absolutely would have filed charges.

This story has a lot of twists and turns..much of which I'm still researching and investigating. I'll have more to report as the week progresses. In reporting sensitive stories like this that truely touch a nerve, its vital that we get them correct. There are multiple sources and it will take a few days (at least) for me to get to them all.

Napoli is filing an appeal in the next few days. Due to the arcane system in the City of Beaverton, there is no court transcript or audio recording of the court proceedings. Beaverton is not a "court of record". Therefore the girl is entitled to an appeal and the case will be tried over again from square one, in Washington County court.

Posted by Carla at 11:59 AM |

A blogosphere take down

James Wolcott of Vanity Fair may be one of the best writers in America today.

And damn...I'd hate to get on his bad side. Ouch

Posted by Carla at 09:23 AM |

Media Matters gets some spit and polish

check it out

Posted by Carla at 09:00 AM |

December 04, 2005

Santa Claus is coming to town

You better watch out
You better not cry
Better not pout
I'm telling you why
Santa Claus is coming to town...
with Krumpus.

On a related note... I wholeheartedly agree with Alexandra at TomPaine.com's Uncommon Sense:
Missing The Forest For The Christmas Tree. Those who seek to de-Christianify the Christmas season by renaming the "Christmas Tree" as the "Holiday Tree" are actually working directly contrary to their own apparent goals by offering up a sort of Strawman argument instead of confronting the real issue.

The real debate should be whether Christmas trees should be present in public at all, not whether they should be called Christmas trees or holiday trees. Dancing around the issue by playing with the name of the tree is plain disrespectful to Americans of other religions, or those who don’t believe in any religion at all.

You’d think the Constitution’s defenders would seize on this opportunity to trumpet the rights of religious minorities. But their most prominent spokesperson sees it differently. Speaking out in favor of the “holiday tree” label, Barry Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, told USA Today that “using the term ‘Christmas tree’ excludes people of other faiths and backgrounds.” No, Barry, pretending that a Christmas tree can somehow be divorced from its religious connotation simply by giving it a generic name excludes people of other faiths and backgrounds. To offer up the most widely recognized symbol of Christmas as a generic symbol of the season and somehow think people of other faiths (or no faith) won’t still see it as a Christian icon is disingenuous. It undermines the religious plurality on which this nation is based.

Alexandra is right. Our's is a society that cherishes it's religious plurality. Does any rational person actually believe that calling Hanukkah menorahs "holiday lamps" would change the fact that they are universally and instantly recognizable as Hanakkah menorahs? No, of course not. Is Christianity, or atheism for that matter, somehow threatened by calling menorahs "menorahs"? No! Of course not! Likewise Judiasm, Christianity, Buddhism, Atheism, et al are in now way threatened by calling the evergreen trees associated with Christmas: Christmas trees. That's what they are!

The real question, as Alexandra points out, is whether or not we should be officially sanctioning Christmas displays in the public square, not what those displays ought to be called. By reframing the issue along the lines of a Strawman naming debate, self-described champions of Church/State separation are playing directly into the hand of religious zealots.

The well-meaning but misguided efforts by public officials to call evergreen trees strewn with ornaments a “holiday tree” are tantamount to declaring Christmas the nation’s official winter religious celebration—which is what Christian conservatives want. We all know the evergreen tree is associated with Christmas, regardless of how often it is pointed out the tree has its origins in pagan traditions.

Hear, hear!

Posted by Kevin at 10:23 AM |

Casablanca

Last night I watched the film Casablanca for the very first time.

Yes, I know I'm rather late to the party. Most people my age (cringe) who love films have probably seen Casablanca twenty times or more. Honestly I'd just never managed to get around to it until now. My recent subscription to Netflix has made it easy for me to remember to rent titles I've been meaning to see.

Impressions:

The storyline of this film is quite timely to many of today's events. While its about WW2 events, the notions of standing up for what is right even in the face of great danger and personal risk is the ultimate in heroism.

This film was costumed, lit and shot in a way that took such advantage of Ingrid Bergman's physical characteristics. Every time she comes on screen you can't take your eyes off of her. Bogart is the superior actor in the film. But due to the etheral beauty of Bergman, her character jumps off the screen every time.

Bogart is quite brilliant. During the flashback scenes of Paris, Rick's joy and love literally transform his appearance. His face is soft. His spine is straight and tall. The moment he reads her note at the train station as he and Sam flee Paris, Rick's body and face change. He becomes hunched. The lines on his face are more prominent. The shadows on his face (this may be due to the way the film is lit as well) seem much more a part of the character.

I was dissapointed that we didn't get to see more of Captain Renault, the French Prefect. He practically steals the film out from under Bogart and Bergman in several scenes. His own transformation as he witnesses Rick's sacrifice is a mixture of admiration and envy...his cynicism literally melting in front of our faces.

This one definitely merits a spot in my top 5 fav films.

Posted by Carla at 09:12 AM |

December 02, 2005

How Idaho's Senator is screwing Northwest salmon

Washington Post:

In a surgical strike from Capitol Hill, Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho) has eliminated a little-known agency that counts endangered fish in the Columbia River.

The Fish Passage Center, with just 12 employees and a budget of $1.3 million, has been killed because it did not count fish in a way that suited Craig.

"Data cloaked in advocacy create confusion," Craig said on the Senate floor this month, after successfully inserting language in an energy and water appropriations bill that bans all future funding for the Fish Passage Center. "False science leads people to false choices."

Here in Portland, Michele DeHart, a fish biologist who is the longtime manager of the center, said she is not mad at Craig.

"What's the point?" asked DeHart, 55, who for nearly 20 years has run the agency that keeps score on the survival of endangered salmon as they negotiate federal dams in the Columbia and Snake rivers.

"I have never met the man," she said. "Never talked to him. No one from his office ever contacted us. I guess I am flabbergasted. We are biologists and computer scientists, and what we do is just math. Math can't hurt you."

But the mathematics of protecting salmon swimming in the nation's largest hydroelectric system can hurt your pocketbook -- particularly in the Northwest, where dams supply power to four out of five homes, more than anywhere in the country.

Salmon math has clearly riled up Craig, who in his last election campaign in 2002 received more money from electric utilities than from any other industry and who has been named "legislator of the year" by the National Hydropower Association.

No doubt Craig has been raking it in from the energy industry. The following is a list of the type of corporate donations Craig received during the 2002 election cycle:

Larry Craig (R)*
Electric Utilities $166,736
Forestry & Forest Products $138,817
Retired $125,520
Crop Production & Basic Processing $113,205
Oil & Gas $111,950
Mining $102,093
Lawyers/Law Firms $81,878
Health Professionals $75,600
Insurance $71,350
Securities & Investment $65,062
Leadership PACs $62,839
Lobbyists $60,609
Food Processing & Sales $59,615
Real Estate $54,450
Misc Finance $52,400
Agricultural Services/Products $50,100
Livestock $46,490
Republican/Conservative $40,372
Business Services $38,699
Automotive $38,250

Larry Craig knows where his wheels are greased. Water going over the dams to allow fish to get through is less electricity generated for energy companies.

Craig's defunding of the Fish Passage Center has as much to do with the GOP war on science as anything else. The science behind what the Center does was making Craig's utility pimps unhappy. The answer? Get rid of good science:

On the Senate floor this month, he justified elimination of the Fish Passage Center on the grounds that "many questions have arisen regarding the reliability of the technical data" it publishes. Craig quoted from the report of an independent scientific advisory board that in 2003 reviewed work done by the Fish Passage Center.

But one of the report's authors, Charles C. Coutant, a fishery ecologist who retired this year from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, said Craig neglected to mention that the board found the work of the center to be "of high technical quality."

"Craig was very selective in reflecting just the critical part of a quotation from the report," said Coutant, who has worked on Columbia River salmon issues for 16 years. "It did give a misleading impression about our board's view of the Fish Passage Center."

Craig also said on the Senate floor that "other institutions" in the Northwest now do "most" of the data collection work done by center. He said getting rid of the center would reduce redundancy and increase the efficiency of regional fish programs.

But according to another recent independent scientific assessment of the work of the center, there was little duplication of data collection between the center and other organizations; it recommended that the center continue to receive funding to meet a substantial need in the Northwest for information on salmon survival.

Fish and game agencies in Oregon, Washington and Idaho, Indian tribes with fishing rights on the river and the governors of Oregon and Washington have all said that eliminating the Fish Passage Center is a bad idea that would reduce the quality of information on endangered salmon.

Craig used a source citation to eliminate the Center which actually recommended the Center stay open..because its does a good job with the science.

Well hell..maybe if Craig had been told that the salmon were on the campaign donation list and the voter roles..the science would have mattered.

(hat tip: Washington Monthly)

Posted by Carla at 11:48 AM |

The "bring ethics back to Washington" crowd to be investigated again

Another GOP ethics probe.....

Lead Gov't Tobacco Lawyer Quits

The lead trial lawyer in the government's landmark lawsuit against the tobacco industry, including three North Carolina-based companies, has quit the case and left the Justice Department. The move comes at a particularly sensitive time when the companies and the department could still negotiate a settlement.

Sharon Eubanks, who had aggressively pursued the racketeering case against the tobacco industry, was withdrawing effective Thursday, the government said in a one-sentence filing in U.S. District Court.

Eubanks said her supervisors' failure to support her work on the tobacco case influenced her decision to retire after 22 years with the department.

Her withdrawal follows a stunning reversal in June in which the Justice Department disregarded the recommendations of its own witness, Dr. Michael Fiore, and reduced the amount it was demanding from the tobacco industry for smoking cessation programs to $10 billion. Fiore had proposed $130 billion.

After strong criticism from Democrats, the department is investigating whether political appointees inappropriately pressured the trial team to slash the proposed penalty against the companies.

"The political appointees to whom I report made this an easy decision," Eubanks told The Washington Post. She said her work on the tobacco case has been professionally rewarding but her politically appointed bosses "have been somewhat less than supportive of the team's efforts," the newspaper reported on Thursday.

Big tobacco has been a major influence in Republican politics and policy for decades. They haven't written all those big checks to GOP politicos all these years without expecting something in return. The Republicans aren't exactly sympathetic to reigning in corporate largesse and corruption with any company. Once again however, they demonstrate that ethics just aren't that big of a deal to them.

Especially when it concerns companies that have feathered their nests for so many years.

Posted by Carla at 07:36 AM |

Kingman, Barstow, San Bernadino...

Get your kicks!

Found via Mousemusings, try this little US geography test.

(I missed 4, shamefully)

Posted by Carla at 07:18 AM |

December 01, 2005

Lars Larson finally goes batshit crazy

I've had a sneaking suspicion for quite some time that radio host and conservative dingbat Lars Larson was one Crayola short of a full box.

Maybe it's an effort to boost his sagging ratings. Maybe his admiration for Fox News freakshow Bill O'Reilly has finally caused him to lose what little scruples remained. Whatever the case, Lars has decided to rent space in Portland's Pioneer Courthouse Square in order to erect a cross.

Why..might you ask?

Larson has his knickers in a bunch over the use of the phrase "holiday tree" to describe the various trees placed in the home to celebrate Christmas.

Lars has jumped on the "War on Christmas" bandwagon and has now become a happy goosestepper in the O'Reilly campaign to make sure no issues of substance or seriousness come under discussion.

Lars gave an interview which aired last evening on our local FOX affiliate. His conclusion? People are missing the "true meaning of Christmas". He's hopeful that his symbol of the murder of Christ will remind people of his birth, which according to Lars can't be remembered using the phrase, "Happy Holidays".

The exclusion of other faiths and beliefs while propping up one Christian sects tale of Christ's birth (not all Christian sects believe Christmas is a celebration of the birth of Christ) might make for a nice ratings bump. Gotta boost those ad revenues to keep KXL afloat.

Christmas in fact has its roots in paganism. Maybe we should call these trees Saturnalia Trees to honor the true meaning of the celebration..which is the Winter Solstice. I suppose asking Lars to actually think about the origin of Christmas and its true meaning is just too much to ask. That would require brain voltage that he has yet to demonstrate.

With all of the divisions in this country right now, conservatives feel the need to make it worse. I guess talking about the War in Iraq, the mess left over from Katrina, their SCOTUS candidate being an anti-choice zealot and the fact that inflation is on the rise just ain't working to keep the base whipped up.

Posted by Carla at 03:07 PM |

Sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction

Apparently the Pope is considering deleting Limbo - the place that babies allegedly go when they die before being baptized.

So how does that work... exactly? I mean, if there are hundreds of thousands of babies in Limbo right now, which is what the Catholic Church's formal theology says, do they cease to exist tomorrow if the Pope were to follow suggestions tonight and delete Limbo? Or perhaps there are no babies there because "Limbo" does not exist?

Seems to me that this is a lose/lose scenario for Catholics. Either they stick with the "Limbo" theology or they essentially admit to having taught a myth as fact for hundreds of years. And I thought this sort of thing fell under so-called Papal infallability...

Maybe what the Pope ought to do is to bypass the entire issue by formally adopting the aspect of Mormon theology that allows the living to be baptized for the dead. Then the whole issue of Limbo becomes moot.

Posted by Kevin at 12:36 PM |

Can Bush get through a whole speech without lying his ass off?

Apparently not.

TIME Magazine reporter Michael Ware, who is embedded with the U.S. troops in Iraq who participated in the Tal Afar battle, appeared on Anderson Cooper yesterday. He said Bush’s description was completely untrue:

I was in that battle from the very beginning to the very end. I was with Iraqi units right there on the front line as they were battling with al Qaeda. They were not leading. They were being led by the U.S. green beret special forces with them.

How many times are these guys going to try to Jessica Lynch these stories before they realize they're gonna get caught?

You can stream the video here thanks to ThinkProgress.

Posted by Carla at 11:58 AM |

Door to door. Hall to hall. He's gonna eat em all. Rapture.

Blondie

Hello. My name is Carla. I'm a recovering Rapture rightist.

Which is why when I started reading this month's Vanity Fair piece entitled American Rapture, I felt transported back to the days of my youth. A sample:

The sight LaHaye's followers hope to see here in the near future, however, is anything but bucolic. Their vision is fueled by the book of Revelation, the dark and foreboding messianic prophecy that foresees a gruesome and bloody confrontation between Christ and the armies of the Antichrist at Armageddon.

Revelation 19, which describes Christ going into battle. "It thrills my heart every time that I read these words," he says, then begins to read: "'And I saw heaven standing open.… And there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire.'"

Frazier pauses to explain the text. "This doesn't sound like compassionate Jesus," he says. "This doesn't sound like the suffering servant of Isaiah 53. This is the Warrior King. He judges and makes war."

As a girl growing up in a small Eastern Oregon town, we lived in a conservative community. The church my family attended was considered strict even by those standards. No drinking. No dancing. No nonChristian music. No Christian music that included rock beats (seriously). It was like the movie "Footloose" on steroids.

People weren't brought to God by God's love. People were forced on their knees through abject fear. Accept Christ as your Savior or when He returns for his flock to take them, you'll be left behind.

"Left behind" was a phrase used to scare churchgoers into submission. If you're "left behind", you'll have no choice but to join the armies of the Antichrist. The Antichrist and his armies will meet great defeat at the Battle of Armageddon. The blood of these armies will fill the valleys of Jerusalem:

This is the moment the Rapturists eagerly await. The magnitude of death and destruction will make the Holocaust seem trivial. The battle finally begins.

Those who remain on earth are the unsaved, the left behind—many of them dissolute followers of the Antichrist, who is massing his army against Christ. Accompanying Christ into battle are the armies of heaven, riding white horses and dressed in fine linen.

"This is all of us," Frazier says.

Frazier points out that Christ does not need high-tech weaponry for this conflict. "'Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword,' not a bunch of missiles and rockets," he says.

Once Christ joins the battle, both the Antichrist and the False Prophet are quickly captured and cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. Huge numbers of the Antichrist's supporters are slain.

Meanwhile, an angel exhorts Christ, "Thrust in thy sickle, and reap." And so, Christ, sickle in hand, gathers "the vine of the earth."

Then, according to Revelation, "the earth was reaped." These four simple words signify the end of the world as we know it.

Grapes that are "fully ripe"—billions of people who have reached maturity but still reject the grace of God—are now cast "into the great winepress of the wrath of God." Here we have the origin of the phrase "the grapes of wrath." In an extraordinarily merciless and brutal act of justice, Christ crushes the so-called grapes of wrath, killing them. Then, Revelation says, blood flows out "of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs."

These guys aren't kidding around. They have a deeply held conviction that someday, the Christ is going to come back and seek revenge on all the humans who didn't accept Him in the way that the Rapturists claim they have to. They seek it out. They want it.

The God of love and compassion and grace and mercy isn't what they're hungry for. They lust for the God of revenge and war.

Its the ultimate you're either with us or against us scenario.

For those people looking for a primer into hardcore Evangelical, Bob Jones/James Dobson/Jerry Falwell/Tim LaHaye style beliefs..this VF piece is a must read. It's an indepth article into what drives the hatred of Catholics and Arabs by this Christian sect. It also draws the line between the White House and the offices of these men whose heavy contributions and voter block support are driving policy.

How many of you will sleep better tonight knowing your President is tied tightly with group of guys who believe that the only way Christ can return is to raze the Temple Mount (regarded as one of the most contested religious places in the Holy Land for Jews, Islamists and Christians) in order to rebuild it to prepare for the return of Christ? And these same guys are helping to shape our Middle East policy?

This VF article is NOT an exaggeration. Many in my family adhere to this sect of Christianity right now. They're looking for a way to hustle Armageddon along so that they can go be with their Lord. I've heard these stories over and over from the pulpit and in Sunday School class.

Whether or not this belief set is "Bible based" or accurate isn't especially relevant to the believers. They're a doomsday cult..bent on finding a way to make doomsday happen.

And they have the ear of the President of the United States.

Posted by Carla at 11:41 AM |

It's an issue of power, not assimilation

In the wake of the riots in France, there have been an awful lot of folks who have made a concerted effort to miss the point.

We saw this in The New York Times story contrasting the Brixton riots in the UK back in 1981 with the recent French riots. The debate, it seems, is if "multiculturalism" is really a good idea or if it leaves people "ghettoized." What often gets ignored in these discussions--almost always led and dominated by Whites in power--is why we've got ghettos in every awful sense of the word. Not just ethnic neighborhoods, which aren't a bad thing, but mainly Black people (and people of color in general) shunted to crumbling neighborhoods and crappy schools with no real job prospects and no real opportunity. Why is it that it just happens to be a much larger proportion of Black and brown people who are poor? Who are targeted, harassed, and assaulted by the cops? Let's not forget--the French riots started after the deaths of two teens who were hiding from the cops. They'd done nothing, but there is such a history of mistreatment at the hands of the cops that these kids had good reason to fear them.

Look, it's all good and well to bleat about assimilating and demanding that people be "French," or "British," or "American," or whatever. But it misses the point. No one gets their tighty-whities in a twist when someone identifies as Irish-American; I've yet to hear anyone going off on how we're just Americans now, so why bother with all that St. Patrick's Day nonsense, which simply separates us? Oh, but of course--we were able to assimilate and become part of the American success story. Except we assimilated because we were White, and stories about kids who were embarrassed by their parents from the old country notwithstanding, most of the traditions we pracitice are seen as quaint or cool. Or at the very worst, neutral. Even St. Patrick's Day, a holiday I despise, sees parades and politicians and green beer everywhere. (Yeah, they don't quite do it that way in Ireland, but who said one needs to be accurate to show ethnic pride? Irish number one! Blah, blah, blah.)

Sure, we can point to other white ethnic groups and go on about how they had a hard time at first, but they worked, and they strove, and dammit they made it! Except they did that successfully thanks to the color of their skin, which was not black. Not brown. We use skin color as a great way to separate people. It's hardly a coincidence that one of the poorest areas of the country, Mott's Haven NYC, is mainly Black and Latino. Yet we wring our hands and blather on about the evils of PC and multiculturalism and affirmative action and ignore the fact that poverty, crime, and violence are the natural byproducts of lives devoid of hope. And they're devoid of hope because they go to schools with backed up toilets and asbestos falling from the walls, they have one textbook for every two students and the textbooks are over twenty years old, because the buildings have structural issues but they don't have the money to address them, because the kids are crowded into classrooms, and some classes are held in hallways. Because in some neighborhoods you've got toxic dumping and medical incinerators and every damn thing that inspires NIMBY urges, and they are thrown to the Black neighborhoods since they're just Black people and they're poor and who cares what they think their lives are crap anyway. They should be grateful for the jobs the plants and the industry provide, even though most of them aren't actually employed by these places, just quite literally dumped on. Because the toxic air and the mold in the firetrap homes aggravates asthma but you can't do much about it if you don't have health insurance besides go to the ER and wait for a day or two. Because it's in these neighborhoods where you find brownfields and firetraps for homes and ugliness and despair.

But no! Let's just bleat on about how people should try and be "American" or "British" or "French," whatever the hell that means. That will get everyone jobs and decent housing and good educations and opportunity.

So I read all this crap about multiculturalism and how everyone should just assimilate and the hand-wringing over the poor, uncomfortable Whites in Europe and I realize: well, here's one thing that North America and Europe have in common.

Posted by at 06:58 AM |