And we're worried about ISLAMIC fundamentalists?

More on the threat to our Constitution that's greater than any Islamic terrorist here.

(h/t: Sammy!)

Labels: fundamentalism, icepick meet forehead, wingnuttia

And I'm not talking about Republicans, either. I'm talking about Democratic sellouts like Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein, who today all but ensured that George W. Bush, a president that three-quarters of the country despises, will get his torture-endorsing Attorney General pick.

I just have one question:

Why?

Why on earth is ANYONE, particularly those supposedly on our side, willing to tolerate the besmirching of this country's reputation on a so-called "interrogation" method that dates back to the Inquisition? What the hell is it about George W. Bush that has them in thrall? Does he have pictures of them in a compromising position with a mule? Does he have evidence of financial scandal? Is this about blackmail? Or is it something else?

Dam Froomkin (h/t: Joe Sudbay) thinks he knows what Bush's winning formula is:

But it's not Bush's style to back down, especially when a key element of his radical and unprecedented expansion of executive power is at stake.

Instead, Bush has learned that the higher he ratchets up the rhetoric, especially if he can accuse his critics of being weak on terror, the more likely Congressional Democrats are to fold. He's simply counting on that happening again.

And like little sheep, traitors -- yes, traitors -- like Schumer and Feinstein go along with the transformation of this country from a beacon of hope and freedom for people all over the world, into a giant, ruthless, vicious predatory animal. That, my friends is treason. And with their votes today, Schumer and Feinstein put themselves in the same league with the madness of King George and his puppetmaster. And if there is ever any justice in this world, those two turncoats will answer for war crimes right alongside Bush and Cheney.

I'm not sure what we can do about hacks like these two. The obvious answer is to mount primary challenges and hope that Schumer and Feinstein don't follow in Joe Lieberman's path and create the "New York for Schumer" party and the "California for Feinstein" party. The problem with primary challenges is how difficult it is to unseat an entrenched incumbent. Even assuming that the challenger manages to amass enough money and/or foot soldiers to mount a credible challengers, voters tend to vote for the knave they know rather than the fool they don't. And in states like New Jersey, where an entire ballot is displayed, the party line is king. Run off the line and you're not even perceived as a Democrat. Unseating these fools requires a population that's more engaged and more knowledgeable than the one we have; a population that can believe its vote matters.

Last November, Americans went to the polls and elected Democrats to end this war and to put some brakes on an insane president hell-bent on bringing about the End of Days because he thinks he is God's Anointed Architect of Armageddon. And because of the weakness of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the cravenness of Senators like Hillary Clinton, the cowardice of Senators like Barack Obama, and the God-only-knows-what of cronyist hacks like Schumer and Feinstein, nothing has been accomplished on either front. We don't have children's health insurance. We don't have an end in sight for this war. The Senate has given tacit approval for an inevitable and ill-advised attack on Iran.

We knew the Republicans were crooked and evil. But now we know that the Democrats in Congress are just plain useless.

Labels: cowardice, Democrats, icepick meet forehead

Whoever made this, let's have more like this, please!



And this ain't too shabby either:

Labels: John Edwards

From Jerusalem Post:

The September 6 raid over Syria was carried out by the US Air Force, the Al-Jazeera Web site reported Friday. The Web site quoted Israeli and Arab sources as saying that two US jets armed with tactical nuclear weapons carried out an attack on a suspected nuclear site under construction.

The sources were quoted as saying that Israeli F-15 and F-16 jets provided cover for the US planes.

The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear weapon and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed.

At the beginning of October, Israel's military censor began to allow the local media to report on the raid without attributing their report to foreign sources. Nevertheless, details of the strike have remained clouded in mystery.

I'll say. Especially since this was just a few days after six nuclear-armed cruise missiles were "inadvertently loaded onto a B-52 bomber and mistakenly flown from North Dakota to Louisiana."

Labels: Armageddon, insanity, tinfoil

The health care gift card.

Labels: health care, icepick meet forehead

The MSM has finally realized that the nice-looking Southern guy is still in the race.

Time:

A pitch perfect debate performance, key union endorsements and a bold new television ad campaign: Could this be the moment that presidential candidate John Edwards finally gets some momentum?

Edwards' campaign has seen a surge of online support of late, often a barometer of how well any candidate is doing. They've raised $500,000 in the last two weeks over the Internet, $200,000 of it the day after the Philadelphia debate, at which Edwards was by most accounts the clear winner. Even more importantly, the campaign says 40% of recent donors were new to the campaign. The cash infusion comes on the heels of a series of important union endorsements for Edwards, who trails in overall fundraising behind both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama by more than $50 million. Edwards has won support from seven Iowa unions — a huge boon to the campaign because it effectively shuts out Obama from bringing in any outside organized labor support. Obama has no Iowa union endorsements; Hillary leads the field with eight.

[snip]

Edwards "has been drawing very clear contrasts and defining the choice that voters face in the campaign, but it's crystallized in the last few weeks," says Mark Kornblau, senior communications adviser to Edwards. "He's been doing so more forcefully than anybody on either side of the race. Still, delivering the message took a cumulative effect to where people are paying attention."

Funny how it took a subpar performance from Hillary Clinton before the MSM realized that no one has actually voted yet.

Labels: John Edwards

John Edwards has noted that Rudy Giuliani's views are so closely aligned with those of President 24% that he's "Bush on steroids." But as if continuing the Bush policy of endless war and evisceration of freedom at home weren't enough, Giuliani also has Bush's tendency to spout outright horseshit and expect no one to pick up on it.

Krugman:

“My chance of surviving prostate cancer — and thank God I was cured of it — in the United States? Eighty-two percent,” says Rudy Giuliani in a new radio ad attacking Democratic plans for universal health care. “My chances of surviving prostate cancer in England? Only 44 percent, under socialized medicine.”

It would be a stunning comparison if it were true. But it isn’t. And thereby hangs a tale — one of scare tactics, of the character of a man who would be president and, I’m sorry to say, about what’s wrong with political news coverage.

Let’s start with the facts: Mr. Giuliani’s claim is wrong on multiple levels — bogus numbers wrapped in an invalid comparison embedded in a smear.

Mr. Giuliani got his numbers from a recent article in City Journal, a publication of the conservative Manhattan Institute. The author gave no source for his numbers on five-year survival rates — the probability that someone diagnosed with prostate cancer would still be alive five years after the diagnosis. And they’re just wrong.

You see, the actual survival rate in Britain is 74.4 percent. That still looks a bit lower than the U.S. rate, but the difference turns out to be mainly a statistical illusion. The details are technical, but the bottom line is that a man’s chance of dying from prostate cancer is about the same in Britain as it is in America.

So Mr. Giuliani’s supposed killer statistic about the defects of “socialized medicine” is entirely false. In fact, there’s very little evidence that Americans get better health care than the British, which is amazing given the fact that Britain spends only 41 percent as much on health care per person as we do.

[spam]

here’s what I don’t understand: Why isn’t Mr. Giuliani’s behavior here considered not just a case of bad policy analysis but a character issue?

For better or (mostly) for worse, political reporting is dominated by the search for the supposedly revealing incident, in which the candidate says or does something that reveals his true character. And this incident surely seems to fit the bill.

Leave aside the fact that Mr. Giuliani is simply lying about what the Democrats are proposing; after all, Mitt Romney is doing the same thing.

But health care is the pre-eminent domestic issue for the 2008 election. Surely the American people deserve candidates who do their homework on the subject.

Yet what we actually have is the front-runner for the Republican nomination apparently basing his health-care views on something he read somewhere, which he believed without double-checking because it confirmed his prejudices.

By rights, then, Mr. Giuliani’s false claims about prostate cancer — which he has, by the way, continued to repeat, along with some fresh false claims about breast cancer — should be a major political scandal. As far as I can tell, however, they aren’t being treated that way.

[snip]

The fact is that the prostate affair is part of a pattern: Mr. Giuliani has a habit of saying things, on issues that range from health care to national security, that are demonstrably untrue. And the American people have a right to know that.

Americans also have the right to know that Rudy Giuliani's excellent health coverage was a government plan:

Among the blogging wonks scrutinizing the relevant health data is Ezra Klein, who asked a separate but penetrating question: "Wouldn't it be interesting to find out if the gold-standard care Giuliani got during his prostate cancer came while he was on government-provided health insurance?"

As Klein surmised, Giuliani was serving as mayor and participating in a city of New York health plan when his doctor informed him that his prostate biopsy had come up positive. The coverage he enjoyed -- which resembles the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan -- permits all city employees, from trash haulers and subway clerks up to the mayor himself, to select from a variety of insurance providers, and it is not much different from the reform proposals adopted by his nemesis Hillary Clinton.

In the spring of 2000, when Giuliani learned that he had cancer and abruptly dropped out of the Senate race against Sen. Clinton, he was enrolled as a member of GHI, one of the two gigantic HMO groups that provide care for most city workers (the other is known as HIP). He underwent surgery and radiation at Mount Sinai Hospital, a prestigious institution that participates in the GHI plan, which means that his costs were largely underwritten by city taxpayers.

So does that qualify as "socialized medicine"?

Now why do I get the feeling that this fact won't be mentioned on the network news?

Labels: Rudy Giuliani, utter horseshit

The Bush Administration's mantra, and that of Rudy Giuliani's campaign, has been that "9/11 changed everything." But did it? And should we have let it? And if so, did the right things change?

It's hard to dispute that airline security and port security in this country were a joke, but six years later and they are STILL a joke, despite the boon to the packagers of 2-ounce travel bottles of shampoo. When a Jewish woman is pulled aside, interrogated for hours, and asked if she knows Osama bin Laden because she has icepacks and a paper on Islam in her luggage, and when a president continues to invoke Hitler appeasement long after his designated Hitler-equivalent has been toppled and executed; after a war that has gone on longer than it took to topple Hitler, you have to ask whether the right things have changed since 9/11 -- and in the right way.

Certainly the toppling of two of the tallest buildings in the United States live on national television and the loss of almost 3000 people was a cataclysmic, dramatic event. (I omit the Pentagon because that attack didn't occur live on television, had somewhat less destructive drama, and doesn't play on the American psyche in the way the towers do.) But it was hardly the first time this country has been touched by terrorism.

Jon Ponder at Pensito Review:

The Republican culture of fear was born out of the 9/11 attacks — which we are told “changed everything” because they were an “attack on America.” But when the World Trade Center was bombed in February 1993 by rightwing Islamic terrorists very like the ones who would take the towers down eight years years later, no one suggested that our response to this “attack on America” should be invading and occupying Iraq.


The Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta July 1996 was an “attack on America” — albeit by an American rightwing Christian fundamentalist terrorist. But no one suggested that we should eavesdrop on Americans and torture prisoners as a result.

The Oklahoma City bombing in April 1995, this time by another group of homegrown rightwing terrorists, was certainly an “attack on America” — in particular on a federal building and specifically targeting agents of the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. No one suggested shredding the Constitution as a result.

For most of the century after the Civil War, the Ku Klux Klan, a rightwing, white Anglo-Saxon Protestant terrorist group, attacked and killed Americans with guns, bombs and nooses. But during the first nine decades or so of this unrelenting reign of terror, hardly anyone seemed to mind very much, except of course for those who were the targets of the hatred and violence.

Around the globe, millions of people endure terror attacks without cowering under their beds. The Israelis have lived with terrorism since at least the 1970s — as have the Syrians, Lebanese, Saudis and others in the Middle East. The British stood stalwart against attacks by Irish separatists for generations. In just the past decade, terrorists have attacked in Colombia, Russia, China, Egypt, Mexico, Cuba, Kashmir, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Pakistan, Latvia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Chechnya, Spain, Finland and on and on.

Only in the Bush era has it become acceptable for Americans to cower in fear at the same threat that others in the world face with courage or at least equanimity. Among democracies, only does the United States government deliberately encourage and inflame cowardice among its citizens.

And that is the fundamental contradiction in the faux-macho that characterizes Republican politics these days. It's a bravado that aspires to project strength, but it relies on cowardice for its effectiveness. And it has worked smashingly on the minds of Americans. The same people who wave their flags on the Fourth of July will call talk radio shows and say "Well, I haven't done anything wrong, so I don't mind if the government listens to my phone calls." I wonder if, when these people were teenagers, they were exasperated if their parents snooped on what they were doing when they hadn't done anything wrong. The difference is that it's appropriate for a parent to be concerned with the safety and welfare of a child who may not yet have the maturity to understand the risks. It is not appropriate for a president to go snooping into the activities of Americans in the name of "safety."

In the article excerpted above, Jon goes on to point out that millions of people around the world live their lives without the promise of "safety." Life is inherently dangerous. We risk death every time we get into the car. We risk death from the roods we eat and the water we drink. Right now kids in New York and New Jersey seem to be risking death by using high school locker rooms. [Insert your own bioweapons planted in the Godless Liberal states conspiracy here.] Americans have more to fear from lax airline safety completely unrelated to security screening than they do from Brown Men™ on their flights. And ultimately, none of us gets out of this alive.

Reasonable steps to ensure national security are the government's responsibility. Public safety is a concern of the government. But when you have an Administration and a Republican Party that does not want to provide health coverage to children who need it, who forbids meat packers to test their products for mad cow disease, guts government oversight of workplace safety, and has a Consumer Product Safety Commission head who's attached at the wrists and ankles to both the Administration and industry, Americans should NOT look to these people for their "safety." A party that is so unconcerned with the risks posed to Americans every day has no moral high ground when it comes to their ability to keep them "safe" from terrorists.

Labels: 9/11, cowardice, fearmongering

Paul Waldman:

I have a fantasy that at one of these moments, a candidate will say, "You know what, Tim, I'm not going to answer that question. This is serious business. And you, sir, are a disgrace. You have in front of you a group of accomplished, talented leaders, one of whom will in all likelihood be the next president of the United States. You can ask them whatever you want. And you choose to engage in this ridiculous gotcha game, thinking up inane questions you hope will trick us into saying something controversial or stupid. Your fondest hope is that the answer to your question will destroy someone's campaign. You're not a journalist, you're the worst kind of hack, someone whose efforts not only don't contribute to a better informed electorate, they make everyone dumber. So no, I'm not going to stand here and try to come up with the most politically safe Bible verse to cite. Is that the best you can do?"

Mr. Edwards? I nominate you. Russert hates your guts anyway; what have you got to lose?

Labels: hack journalism, Tim Russert

A step beyond the "be very afraid" dialog, and somewhere deep inside the "loose lips sink ships" world of BushCo, is a special place reserved for those of us who might be confused enough to be led down the piss-sodden path of reverse psychology spewed by the man today. It must be backwards day and the kindergarten in the oval office is in session.
Lets see...apparently, according to the Commander-in-Chief today:

denial that "we are at war" is dangerous.

No shit, sherlock...except that I don't remember that we really declared war officially or legally, like, voted on it in Congress as something that was actually being done if there was no concrete proof of whatever...and I don't see how we have a leg to stand on as far as the "danger" that we have imposed on the entire world with this ill-conceived occupation and the continued damage its doing to remain there, vs. the damage that will occur all at once if we get out. It is such a fucking mess that its just rich to hear Bush speak about it at all. It must be a deeply padded bubble that he lives in for him to even have the balls to show his face anymore.

Over at Seeing the Forest, Dave Johnson has his snark on:

President Bush today called for gas rationing, a draft and tax increases to fight the greatest threat the country has ever faced.

To which I can only say: Ha hhahahahahahah heheh hahahaha heh hehe hehehehahaha.....
...Because, and bear with me here, Bush is comparing Bin Laden and his "terrorist allies" to Hitler and Lenin!...as if we can prevent the rise of the next Reich by scouring the highest mountains, (even in Afghanistan?) and plumbing the depths of the deepest seas to root out terror, wherever it is. Is there some sort of big organization out there that I don't know about? An entire country ready to take up arms and shout heil to the heavens? I just don't see that Bin Laden is all that organized on a higher level, as a state, or a country could be.

Of course, much of this terror is created by us and will continue to grow and multiply as long as we are aggressively attacking any country with oil (except Saudi Arabia.) And we are not big or strong enough to take over the entire world, or even just the places with ...um...oil, unless we have that draft that no one will stand for. (and isn't this when one needs to steal a quote or two from John Edwards about sacrifice and all that nonsense?)
We are supposed to fight the terra-ists and stand in straight lines, looking sideways at our neighbors, very afraid indeed, all the while creating what we are fighting in a big circle jerk until there is no America anymore and all that is left is...the next Reich.

No, its backwards day kiddies and the only truth coming out of the White House is seen in the mirror; Look at the shiny terror while WE become the next Reich...while WE take your rights and national identity away.

This country now is the exact definition of a fascist state. What more do we need?
When faced with that realization, at what point do we stop the nonsense before they come for us?

After all, Bush reminds us:

History teaches us that underestimating the words of evil, ambitious men is a terrible mistake,

And he is not kidding.

Be very afraid, indeed.

This is what happens when you allow national security to become hostage to the greed of corporations.

Exhibit A: David H. Brooks, founder of unfortunately-named body armor manufacturer Point Blank Solutions. No, this isn't the nimrod who writes for the New York Times, alas. This guy is worse:

America's most ostentatious war profiteer is no longer a free man. In a long-anticipated move, FBI agents arrested bulletproof vest maker David H. Brooks in his Manhattan apartment at dawn on Thursday. In the tradition of Al Capone, Brooks was nabbed on allegations of financial shenanigans, despite strong suspicions that the defense contractor has much more serious crimes on his hands.

Brooks emerged as the poster boy for shameless war profiteering in November of 2005 when he blew some $10 million in profits from military contracts on a celebrity-studded party for his daughter. Leaked details of the bash drew national attention, including a description of Brooks' pink suede suit and photos of his daughter on stage with the rapper 50 Cent. A New York Times editorial compared Brooks to the ill-fated Marie Antoinette.

And indeed, while Brooks won't face a guillotine for his greed, he could spend up to 70 years in prison if convicted of all charges. The 71-page indictment (PDF) alleges that while Brooks was chief executive of DHB Industries, a leading provider of military body armor, he pocketed more than $185 million from insider trading, fraud and tax evasion. He is also charged with using millions of dollars in DHB funds for personal expenses.

A sampling of the charges authorities say Brooks concealed from shareholders and the IRS:

• $7,900 for a facelift for Brooks' wife
• more than $1 million for expenses related to his 100 trotting and breeding horses
• $101,190 for a belt buckle studded with diamonds, rubies and sapphires
• $101,500 for an armored vehicle for his family's use
• more than $1 million for numerous family vacations, including frequent stays at the Bellagio in Las Vegas and various Caribbean and European villas
• $31,802 to transport one of his daughters and her college friends to Halloween parties in Madison, Wisconsin, using a private jet
• hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonus checks drawn on a DHB bank account handed out by Brooks at a company Christmas party to non-DHB personnel, including his horse trainer
• and of course the predictable $10,000 here, $5,000 there for purchases at Luis Vuitton, Gucci, Gianni Versace, and Prada boutiques around the world

What makes Brooks' greed particularly obscene is that the bullet-proof vests that boosted his fortunes in the first place turned out to be not so bulletproof after all. In May 2005, the U.S. Marines recalled more than 5,000 DHB armored vests after they failed ballistics tests for stopping 9 mm bullets.

There's a special place in hell for guys who not only embezzle money but embezzle money made by providing faulty products to the U.S. military; products that put the lives of American soldiers at risk.

And speaking of putting the lives of American soldiers at risk, Exhibit B is our good friend Blackwater:

Federal agents are investigating allegations that the Blackwater USA security firm illegally exported dozens of firearms sound suppressors — commonly known as silencers — to Iraq and other countries for use by company operatives, sources close to the investigation tell NBC News.

Investigators from various federal agencies, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the State Department and the Commerce Department, are digging into the allegations that the company exported the silencers without getting necessary export approval, according to law enforcement sources, who spoke to NBC News on condition of anonymity. The sources said the investigation is part of a broader examination of potential firearms and export violations.

Coincidentally, the company’s main responsibility in Iraq is protecting officials of the State Department, the agency that regulates exports of arms. The firm had more than $500 million in federal contracts in 2006.

Every time I see numbers like this I think of Michelle Malkin stalking the Frost family of Bethesda, Maryland looking for evidence that their children don't deserve help with their health care. And I wonder what the fuck kind of country we live in where we're sniffing around the parents of two brain-damaged children and we don't give a rat's ass about the mind-boggling sums of our taxpayer cash being shoveled into the pockets of the most corrupt companies in the country.

Labels: Blackwater, corporatism, corruption, greed, privatization

It looks like Saint Rudy may have to face the music as to why the firefighters on 9/11 had the same old radios that hadn't worked during the 1993 attacks:

In the midst of his presidential candidacy, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani now faces a looming government investigation into his handling of the radios used by firefighters on 9/11.

The investigation, which will examine how the FDNY ended up using faulty equipment during the terrorist attacks and why Giuliani gave a no-bid contract to Motorola for that equipment, has been endorsed by New York City Councilman Eric Gioia, chair of the city's oversight and investigations committee.

"I will do everything in my power to get answers, to get the truth," said Gioia, a Democrat. "These families deserve answers and really the entire city and our country deserve answers."

Calls for an investigation were first proposed by filmmaker Robert Greenwald who has documented Giuliani's handling of 9/11 in a series of shorts for Brave New Films. In The Real Rudy: Radios, Greenwald documents how radios used by the FDNY on 9/11 were the same ones that malfunctioned during the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers. When - eight years later - Giuliani finally purchased new communications equipment for $14 million from Motorola, it was never field-tested. A week later, the equipment was recalled after a firefighter's mayday went un-heard. Giuliani reissued the old batch of radios. And on 9/11 when a police helicopter warned that the North Tower could collapse, more than 120 firefighters remained inside.

"To know that we had failing radios in 1993 and did virtually nothing until September 11 is shocking to say the least," said Gioia. "To watch this documentary and see the important questions that were asked and seemingly unanswered and ignored for so many years, it's disturbing."

More than 20,000 people signed a petition demanding an investigation into Giuliani's handling of the FDNY radios. In an interview posted on YouTube, Gioia confirmed that he will take the steps to initiate public hearings, including sending out letters to fellow council members and requesting pertinent documents. Greenwald praised the initial steps forward.

Since Ghouliani has decided to run an entire presidential campaign on the backs of the corpses of those who died that day, and has claimed that only he had been obsessed with terrorism during the Clinton years (despite his testimony before the 9/11 commission that he wasn't thinking about terrorism at all before then), it's only appropriate that questions about his leadership and about his actual record in considering terrorism be asked.

I'm under no illusions that this investigation will ever actually go forward. Those who question Republicans and dig too deeply have a habit of either disappearing or suddenly backing off. But we can hope, and while they might be able to touch Eric Gioia, Robert Greenwald has already put the truth out there.

Labels: 2008 election, 9/11, Rudy Giuliani

What you should be reading today:

Joan Walsh at Salon again has a video from Current portraying a demonstration of waterboarding. Go watch it, then contact these members of the Senate Judiciary committee and demand that they refuse to confirm Michael Mukasey as Attorney General until and unless he acknowledges that waterboarding is torture. Ask the Republicans to view this before they make a decision. And while you're at it, pass the link along to anyone you know who is considering voting for Rudy Giuliani, who seems to believe that if the president authorizes it, then it is not torture. Ask those people, if they were being waterboarded, what they would admit to in order to make it stop -- even if it weren't true. To pick up on the example that's always used, of someone who knows where the dirty bomb in New York City is, ask the Giuliani supporters what THEY would admit to if they were being waterboarded -- whether they did it or not.

Libby Spencer on how an ability to MAYBE squeak by with only a bare majority at best isn't enough to justify an inevitable Hillary candidacy.

Stephen at The Thinkery on how the Madness of Saint Rudy is nothing new -- he's been running this campaign for fifteen years.

Our favorite lapsed conservative, John Cole, has joined the Party of Godless Heathen Liberal Homosexual Feminazi Hip-Hop Sluts. So we're moving him to the main blogroll. Please join me in not just giving him a warm welcome, but throwing a party in his honor.

Any day they'll be selling trading cards with these guys on them. Another day, another sex scandal involving a closeted homophobic Republican. Pam has the whole sordid story. Please ask all children -- and your mother -- and your boss -- to leave the room, because this story is NOT work-safe. Dare we hope that this is an end to the moralizing by the scolds on the right? Naah. But in all seriousness, these guys are making about as good a case for coming out of the closet as it's possible to make. Gay men living as themselves instead of living a lie don't have to pay prostitutes. And by the way, if you're going to hire someone for sex and then refuse to pay up, what do you THINK is going to happen?

And while we're on the subject, is it time to pop a bag of the old Orville Redenbacher into the microwave? Cliff Schecter seems to think so. My guess? Check Judi Nathan's handbag to see if she has a chef's knife in there. Then see if Rudy is wearing a cup.

Riverbend is safe and reporting from Syria on the Iraqi diaspora there.

Jurassicpork has some excellent ranting about Tuesday night's Democratic debate over at his pad.

One of the things I liked about Mr. Brilliant when I met him was that his idea of a really hot woman was Linda Ellerbee. Well, Ms. Ellerbee hasn't lost a step, and now she's giving the wingnuts fits over a 20-minute news documentary on Nickelodeon about activist children. Kevin Hayden has the details.

Now that Halloween is over, and the orange-wrapped Kit-Kats are in the 50% off bin, we're now officially in the holiday season. Tata has been working on a project to send necessary items to deployed soldiers. Read how you can help here and here.

Tristero over at Digby's place has been all over Mike Huckabee's Willie Horton, Wayne Dumond. Short summary: Dumond is a prisoner who became a wingnut cause célèbre because a woman he raped turned out to be a distant cousin of Bill Clinton. As part of the Republican Clinton Derangement Syndrome, the wingnuts decided that he most have been railroaded and started lobbying for clemency, which Huckabee granted. Dumond went on to rape and kill one, and perhaps two, more women. The latest is here, but it's worth digging around Digby's site to find all of the coverage. This is a particularly nasty example of Republican "The Enemy of Bill Clinton is my Friend" policy, and Huckabee deserves to be hammered with it.

Labels: bloggers

Yes, I know José Reyes was a pain in the ass towards the end of the season. But the answer is not to trade him -- or David Wright -- to make room for a greedy 32-year-old with a history of not being able to hack it in New York:

Now Minaya, who is the team’s general manager, has another chance to sign Rodriguez, who, through Boras, informed the Yankees that he would opt out of the final three seasons of his contract. And there have been indications in recent weeks that the Mets may enter the Rodriguez sweepstakes.

This time around, he could make more than $30 million annually, and he will be in his late 30s, or perhaps even in his 40s, when his next contract expires. The Mets have never exceeded the luxury-tax threshold and could be forced to trade a marquee name to make room.

There is no question that signing Rodriguez would instantly make the Mets a better team. He would add at least 40 home runs and 125 runs batted in to the lineup and would be another marketable presence that could help sell tickets for the team’s new stadium, which is scheduled to open in 2009. He would also help the team promote SportsNet New York, which the Mets hope will become as big a force as the Yankees’ YES Network.

What is far trickier is where Rodriguez would fit in on the field.

The Mets locked up José Reyes and David Wright to long-term extensions in 2006, expecting them to blossom together into perennial All-Stars on the left side of the infield. The Mets would have to ask one of them to switch positions to accommodate Rodriguez.

The most likely candidate would be Wright, who in spring training volunteered to move anywhere if the Mets acquired Rodriguez. But where would he go? To first base, where Carlos Delgado is owed $16 million next season? With second base unsettled, they could shift Wright there, too, but even for the athletically gifted Wright, that seems like a stretch.

The Mets’ marketing campaign has featured the Wright-Reyes tandem, and the presence of Rodriguez would dramatically change how they would fit into the greater mosaic.

Sometimes the best acquisition is the one you don't make. Memo to Mets: Don't do it. Resist the temptation. Alex Rodriguez may be an offensive powerhouse, but you have quite enough of an attitude problem with Reyes these days. Don't make it worse.

Labels: New York Mets

I really shouldn't snark any more about "Charlie from Brooklyn" or "Nick from New Jersey" or "Frank from Lodi" (the latter two of whom I actually know slightly in real life) after I found myself calling the new WWRL morning show this morning to talk about last night's debate. But with Mr. Brilliant finally discovering the value of an MP3 player in playing old Morning Sedition shows while at work, and us turning our laptop and Bose Wave into the world's most expensive AM radio to listen to Rachel Maddow at dinnertime, I was just so GRATEFUL to have even a tolerable morning AM radio show to listen to.

For nearly two years, my mornings started with "It's six past the hour, and this....is Morning Sedition", followed by "Good morning geniuses, philosopher kings and queens, working class heroes, progressive utopians with no sense of humor, lurking conservatives...." And after listening to a couple of hours of Marc Maron's bebop funny, the smart interplay among Maron, Riley, the writers, and the board dudes, I was ready to face the horror that is life in the Bush years.

So when I left work today at five and rushed out to the car so I could hear the last hour of Maron's sub gig for Randi Rhodes, and my face broke out in a wide grin, I realized that things are at a sorry pass indeed when the world somehow seems so much more tolerable when this hopelessly neurotic, narcissistic, emotional wreck of a Jewish man is on the radio. And it isn't just me. Morning Sedition has been gone for nearly two years, and every time Maron subs for someone on Air America, there will be five callers, and it's not even gypsy or Seanie or Kristapea from the Seditionists blog, saying "I really miss you on the radio, man!" I wonder how he feels when he hears that; if he goes home after the show and sits on his deck, smoking a cigar and muttering dire things about what he'd like to do to Danny Goldberg. Hell, I sit there after the show muttering dire things about what I think should be done to Danny Goldberg.

It isn't that I'm not glad that Rennie Bishop finally realized that an idiot shill like Armstrong Williams had no place on progressive talk radio. And it isn't that I have a grudge against Mark Riley for not going to bat for Maron when Danny Goldberg was painting a huge target on his own network and then shooting it as if he were Dick Cheney and Air America were Harry Whittington's face. When you're on the shady side of 50 and have to earn a living, sometimes Fighting the Good Fight has to take second place to being able to buy shoes for your kid. It's kind of nice to have Riley back on the radio in the morning even if it does feel like a bone tossed at us old Seditionists; and if Richard Bey isn't Marc Maron, well, who else is? Could we really handle more than one of him? But after having been screwed over as badly in his radio career in the last few years as Maron has, it's promising that Bey has finally landed on his feet after four years in the AM Substitute Host Purgatory in which Marc Maron finds himself these days. Maybe it's an omen.

I still don't understand people who call radio shows on a regular basis, especially in the morning, when you have barely enough time to make your point and hope that the host doesn't mistake your unfortunate use of the word "pragmatism" to describe why Dennis Kucinich isn't really a viable candidate to mean that you are a Hillary supporter. I suppose there's a certain amount of pseudo-fame that comes with being a regular caller. "Nick" is actually a pretty bright guy, though he's sort of the Leonard Zelig of Bergen County Democratic politics in that he's EVERYWHERE. And "Charlie from Brooklyn" knows of what he speaks as well. I'm not sure it's any worse to call every Air America show than it is to spend enough time with AM radio on that one knows that "H.R. from Staten Island", the elderly conservative who for some reason used to call Sam Seder every week and seemed to be fond of him despite their disagreements, also calls Richard Neer on WFAN on Saturdays, identifying himself as "Howie from Staten Island" instead -- as if he's some kind of secret agent going by a number of aliases.

Melina wrote earlier this evening about what it was like when Air America started up and people like us realized that it wasn't just us out here, that there were other people who also saw what was going on; who didn't have those fucking ribbon magnets on our cars and didn't see George Bush as a tough guy because he "went after the terrorists." It was like being Donna Douglas in the old Twilight Zone episode Eye of the Beholder and being in that place with others like us so that we could finally feel normal.

The people who run progressive talk radio, and particularly those who run Air America (for while the cast changes, nothing else really does) really don't understand what a lifeline it is to have these shows out there in a sea of media where presidential candidates are asked about UFOs and who they want to win the World Series instead of about FISA and the Constitution; and where the Speaker of the House is asked if she prays for the troops to win in Iraq and Robert Novak still insists that everyone in Washington knew who Valerie Plame was and that she wasn't covert. They don't understand how we NEED to hear over the airwaves that we are Not Insane and to reach out and grasp the figurative hand that reaches out through the radio -- and now over the Intertubes -- to let us know we're not alone.

Labels: Air America

Its Halloween...Boo!...and I'm listening to Marc Maron filling in for Randi Rhodes. Its almost like the old days except that he wont be on again tomorrow.

Last night I watched another democratic debate on MSNBC, and this one was notable in its horrible format and questions...and also in the poor moderating by Brian Williams, who was stiff and counter-intuitive. The light moments were the lightening round, which was basically the candidates talking in fast forward like Alvin Chipmunk, and Biden's comment about Rudy's "noun, verb, and 9-11" structure for every comment he makes.

The word today is that Barak Obama crashed hard, and I saw something that I find annoying in ...well, anyone, much less my President...He is not right on point... he says ummm alot and looks around too much. I think that he has his moments of real shining presence, but I find him to be sort of soft when it comes to the need for some sort of combative message to the people.

We are in what might be described as a serious crisis in this country. We are in trouble, and I don't want to feel like the man who wants to be my President doesn't have a strong sense of urgency. And its true also that when I saw them all debate live at Yearly Kos 2, Obama sat, leaning forward, looking to the side at the moderator rather than at the audience, and seemed almost young and sort of lacking in the kind of polish and presence that enables someone to go confidently into negotiations with world leaders; someone who goes in and kicks ass. I think that he is a gifted orator, but I don't know that he can really command the dyed in the wool politicos that have to be dealt with in this job. By this debate I can see clearly that he is green and he does need seasoning. Obama is just not ready yet....(notice that I say yet.)



Meanwhile, Hillary has been touted by the press as the one, and we are basically being told to pack it in and head to the polls and pull her lever...but the same press that is telling us who to vote for and sizing up the big show as a Hillary vs. Rudy game, were tremendously quick to jump on her when they felt like she had made a big slip in saying that she believes that illegal immigrants should have access to drivers licenses. This is a hot button issue, and its one that is being skirted by most politicians; embraced by others....And Hillary made the mistake of stating a position!! Well, we can't have that, for Christ's sake!! I guess that its silly to note that all the candidates agreed with her except for Dodd. This is the crack in the veneer that they were looking for.








It dawned on me, much to my delight, that if Obama is looking young and green, and Hillary showed a hairline fracture, Edwards is only one mistake away from being the guy...and let me tell you, Edwards shined last night.

John Edwards is a man who has been through this ringer as the different apparitions that advisers and handlers will create at the big show. He has clearly straightened out, in his own mind, what his life is about and what his campaign is about. I think so anyway...Its impossible to ever truly trust any politician, but I've seen him up close, and I bought his line; hook, line, and sinker. I really think that he is the guy...and that if its not for President this time round, its to do some really important work on this country and whats wrong with it. Like Al Gore, he might actually be able to do more good while not being president.

What I love about this process, which is a much more open-format and full debate schedule than the Rovian Bushies would ever permit, is that the field is fantastic and varied. I'm not wishing that the field would narrow all that soon, mainly because I'm acutely aware that things are being said over and over that have needed to be said for years. And though its true that the corporate media has their own manipulated spin on what is being said, in their drive to make Hillary be the candidate, sound/YouTube bytes are being created that are bound to make their way out of that lock on information that is hanging heavily in the air on network TV, radio, and in the papers.I want everyone from the media powers-that-be to the bloggers to pick this stuff apart until its dust. I want the conversation about how horrible Bush has fucked us up to go on and on.

I keep remembering driving around here as the war began and as the first part of the attempted destruction of the constitution began, and the first horrible mistakes started to become apparent...and this is such a different atmosphere, even if we end up with the repugnant Hillary Clinton, (with her questionable ability to beat even Rudy Giuliani,) at least the things that needed to be said were, for the most part, said. All that is left is to try to understand why the House and Senate are not on board with what the country clearly wants....and where the corporate media thinks that they are getting off in distorting things so much. I love this stuff, even if it is gut-wrenching and heartbreaking most of the time.

Last weekend, I had a garage sale here at the Chicken Ranch , and due to my ever present Impeach Bush sign, I was treated to a day long running conversation about the extreme disappointment that people are feeling about the current majority rule and their lack of balls in getting us out of Iraq one way or another.

Why do I like John Edwards so much? He is very clear that if we are to continue on this road that we need to understand that we are going to have to sacrifice and take responsibility for the position that we are in. This isn't just Bush's mistake or something that politicians have to handle; we are all there in the thick of this thing and as time goes on it will effect us in much more palpable ways...so, don't look to the authority figures in this thing to get us out of it; they are every bit as helpless as we all are. This thing is going to take some real work to dig out of, and its not going to be easy.



By far, the most interesting person at the sale was the last guy, who was a local pump guy on his way to an emergency call. He wanted to get some toys for his grandchildren...and upon seeing my Impeach sign explained to me that he is a vet and that as far as he can see, that this is a fascist government.... then he went on to lay out every point that I had ever thought or had heard from the likes of Seder and Maron, the prophets out there, and my favorite blogs....not to mention what had been going around my head for all of these years. This is an older local guy who is not on the internets at all, and who is getting by listening to a local black liberal station which is supposedly available up here at 95.5 FM.

He reminded me of myself before AAR came out of nowhere and reminded me that there are sane voices out there somewhere...and he was so happy that he found someone who agreed with him. Sometimes it seems like we are out here rattling round in our own heads, and at some point critical mass has to ensure that there is some movement in the direction that we are mandating. They work for us, don't they? I mean, I guess that if Hillary gets into office, it will be the equivalent of more of the same lite, so you cant be too careful. But when are we gonna get so mad that we remove these people from power? What has to happen? How bad does it have to get before we demand that the networks even actually report on the demonstrations that we are marching in?

Garage sales are strange in that they cross personal barriers...who is buying what?...and who understands what? Many immigrants came by and they bought alot of my old sneakers at 50 cents a pop....I lowered the price for things like that, in that these are the people doing most of the heavy lifting around here. The Hispanics were the best hagglers, but I started to get a little tired of it all in that I was making the prices super low to begin with. I began to pull items back from even being on sale because I felt like...it was almost embarrassing to fight with an older Mexican woman about a jacket from Banana Republic or something, that was new, and that she wanted for a dollar...but that I could sell on eBay for $15...I was saying basically that I live uptown here in this beautiful place and that I have a computer to sell my fancy things, (actually my sister had given it to me as a present and I had never worn it,) and I was somehow torn between giving the stuff away and pulling it back...but I didn't want to haggle down to some silly price. Maybe I was losing my mind...maybe I had been in the garage too long. It was an odd sensation and it reminded me of why I usually just give stuff to the Salvation Army and let them sell it.

Maybe that I was just getting sick, which I was, but a whole day of discussing the extreme political distress that is going around out there, on top of going through all of my kid's baby stuff, my past, and seeing so many neighbors and people who came up from downtown to go through the "rich people's" stuff, frazzled me.

No doubt that I am frazzled and burned out anyway. I don't quite know what to do about it, because its not like I can shut off politics, or my kids, or my life...and even if I do, it all goes round in my head until I can research the ideas and spit them out here or there...I don't know what to do. But something that I find heartening in all of this is that this guy, John Edwards, is really speaking the truth; and its not just a truth about the current situation. Its a truth about life in general and how we move around on this planet, what we can expect from our interaction in this society, and what our responsibilities are in life...towards each other, our families, our friends, and the larger world. The disconnect has to stop here...we must find our way back from becoming so disconnected. If we don't, we cant hope for much besides a fast food, cardboard, empty world, with a couch and a TV remote....
So let the debates continue, and maybe, just maybe, some little bit of information will get out there and into the popular psyche enough to wise us up...lift us up...

C/P: RIPCoco

Labels: Barack Obama, Bill Maher, democratic debate, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards

Buried at MSNBC's site is this little tidbit claiming what many of us believed from the beginning-- that the latest so-called Al Qaeda video was doctored:

When al-Qaida’s media arm released its first Osama Bin Laden video in nearly three years, most of the media attention was focused on Bin Laden's beard. It appeared either dyed — or perhaps even pasted on. He was ridiculed and a variety of theories were offered to explain it.

But now, there is a running debate among video analysts about whether al-Qaida faked the video altogether —that rather than being new, the September 7 message may have been something recorded at the same time as his last video in October 2004 (and then released with new audio).

The point of departure for the debate is something not noted at the time: that of the 25 minutes of video tape, only three and a half minutes, were moving video. The rest was covered by a still image or a frozen still. Moreover, the still covered the only time references on the 25 minute of tape— references to political developments in Iraq, Britain and France. This lead to the suspicion that the video is not new, but disguised to appear as new.

A senior U.S. intelligence official says they believe the message is authentic, adding “it remains our view that the September 7 Bin Laden video is, in fact, new… interesting but not compelling.”

The leading proponent of the theory is a computer scientist and self-described hacker Dr. Neal Krawetz of Colorado. Krawetz, who makes his living a computer security consultant, tells NBC News in interviews and e-mails that the similarities between the October 29, 2004 tape and the September 7, 2007 tape are too great to be coincidental.

[snip]

Krawetz does not believe that al-Qaida used the exact same video it did in 2004. Instead, he suspects that al-Qaida had recorded much more video than it released in 2004. There may have even been two sittings. “The main thing I am getting at: I am not saying that they are the same recording,” he said. “I believe they recorded a speech, changed a little, and then recorded some more. (Under this same theory, they may have done it many times and AQ just has not released other videos yet).”

“I am saying the two videos were likely made either on the same day or within days of each other.”

[snip]

The CIA will not say what it thinks about the possibility, but a senior U.S. intelligence official tells NBC News the U.S. believes the tape is new. He would not discuss the reasons why intelligence analysts feel that way. Another even more senior intelligence official dismissed the possibility that that beard is fake, but would not discuss the reason for the darkened beard.

Despite the debate over the most recent Bin Laden video, there is no debate among private analysts or intelligence officials about the increasing use of digital editing, in some cases sophisticated editing in the videos released by al-Qaida.

Krawetz said there is no evidence of video editing on the scale seen in the videos of his deputy Ayman al Zawahiri.

Krawetz noted in one recent video, Zawahiri was featured in what appeared to be a library, complete with a desk, a banner, a bookshelf and even a toy cannon mounted on the bookshelf.


IntelCenter
Ayman al-Zawahiri’s September 29. 2006 video
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



All of it, Krawetz said, was created digitally using software like 3DStudio. Even the lettering on the banner was added separately. The software permits the creation of wire frame images that can be inserted over a green screen.

“They use multiple overlays,” said Krawetz. “I suspect they have a portable green screen or black fabric they use for the shoot, then edit the video with multiple overlays,” all of which can be seen in a forensic analysis of the video.

“You can tell the number of times it was layered and the order in which the layers were added,” Krawetz added. And a close examination can even determine whether the “green screen” has wrinkles in it. Krawetz said he has noticed the same wrinkle in several Zawahiri videos.

None of the software they use is particularly expensive, says Krawetz. The most basic software, from Adobe or Microsoft, can yield the required effects. (Evan Kohlmann, the NBC News counter terrorism analyst, says most of the software is probably pirated, that every major jihadi site has a download section filled with software from companies as big as Microsoft or Adobe.) Nor is the editing time-consuming, especially since digital editing is now so common in al-Qaida videos.

It's evident that most of these so-called Al Qaeda videos are edited. But what makes these guys so sure it's Al Qaeda doing the editing? Who really benefits from these videos?

Labels: al-Qaeda

The media have been treating the Democratic presidential race as a two-person game for practically the last six months. Granted, a fight to the [political] death between a serious woman candidate and a serious black candidate, particularly when played against a sea of Gray White Saber-Rattlers on the Republican side, makes a more compelling story than do the white guys in the Democratic race. But as Barack Obama's peculiar flavor of "Can't We All Just Get Along" politics has been shown to involve throwing Teh Gays under the bus and a refusal to take a strong stand against just about anything, we ought to start seeing some movement in the race.

The Hillary is Inevitable storyline has increasingly dominated the media with every poll that comes out showing her with a commanding lead -- despite the fact that no one seems to know anyone who's planning to vote for her. But after last night's debate, we're at least starting to see some acknowledgement that there are others in this race, particularly John Edwards, who has trounced the competition in the last two debates.

Today, from two of the most loathsome so-called "journalists" covering the political beat from the New York Times, Adam Nagourney and Elisabeth Bumiller, comes mention, however fleeting, of this reality:

But for all the attention Mr. Obama drew to himself coming into the debate, he was frequently overshadowed by former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, who — speaking more intensely — repeatedly challenged Mrs. Clinton’s credentials and credibility, and frequently seemed to make the case against Mrs. Clinton that Mr. Obama had promised to make.

If I were conspiracy-minded (Moi? conspiracy-minded? Quelle horreur!), I'd almost think that Obama, whom we know is capable of rousing a crowd, has been told to take a dive by some giant BushClinton conspiracy to run things in this country in perpetuity in return for keeping some peccadillo secret or for a plum job in a Clinton administration. But it's difficult to take Hillary's anti-Bush rhetoric seriously when she keeps voting for Bush's insane military adventures and later claiming she was voting for diplomacy. John Edwards is absolutely right: How many times does it take to learn a lesson?

I can't even express how much I wish Hillary were someone I could support. Given the kind of mess that the so-called "manly men" currently running the country have made of things, it would be wonderful to have a woman to enthusiastically support. But when I see Hillary's sense of entitlement, her continuation of the famed Clinton Triangulation that made her husband a very good moderate Republican president but not a progressive one, and the spectre of another four to eight years of Clinton Derangement Syndrome in the press and on talk radio, I just want to crawl into bed and pull the covers over my head.

John Edwards right now is the one candidate who has outlined a serious progressive agenda and is both able and willing to articulate what his agenda looks like. And yet he's been virtually ignored by a media that wrote him off over a haircut and a house. It's wonderful that Chris Dodd has in this race found a voice as the silver-haired lion of the Constitution, and indeed I've sent his campaign some money as well. Joe Biden has an unfortunate tendency to be a blowhard and make himself the story, but he did have the best line of the night about Rudy Giuliani (and whoever is the eventual nominee should memorize it) when he said of the self-appointed saint of 9/11: “There’s only three things he mentions in a sentence: a noun and a verb and 9/11.” Even Dennis Kucinich, whose continued talk of a Department of Peace often makes him sound like Congressman Moonbeam, makes a more compelling case for his nomination than does Hillary.

I would hope that this notion that we are just waiting to crown Hillary as the nominee before a single vote is even cast falls by the wayside as we head into the few months before the first primary. And I hope the people of the states of Iowa and New Hampshire realize that they have a voice and need not do the media's bidding in this coronation.

Labels: 2008 election

Hoffmania's supplying the chips 'n' dip this evening. So pop on over there.

Labels: 2008 election

All you Maronistas, Seditionists, and people who think progressive talk radio should be smart AND funny: Marc Maron is guest-hosting for Randi Rhodes tomorrow, October 31 from 3-6 PM. Check your local Air America affiliate for run time in your area.

Labels: Air America, Marc Maron

So does Grandpa Fred have Ronald Reagan beat by having Alzheimer's before even winning the election, or is he just this mind-bogglingly dumb?

Massachusetts' highest court ruled in 2003 that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. But high courts in several other states have refused to follow suit, including Maryland last month. Cases are pending in Connecticut and California.

Edward Paul, an employee of the Delta Dental Plans Association, asked the question Monday, but had trouble being understood.

"I'm proud to say that in January 2008 New Hampshire has passed a law facilitating civil unions here. ... What is your belief for federal civil unions to be passed?" Paul asked.

"Soviet Union?" Thompson responded.

"No, civil unions," Paul said.

"Oh. No, I would not be in support of that," Thompson said.

What's with Thompson's obsession with the Soviet Union, anyway?

Labels: Fred Thompson, idiocy

"This is the world we live in. It's not this happy, romantic-like world where we'll negotiate with this one, or we'll negotiate with that one and there will be no preconditions, and we'll invite (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad to the White House, we'll invite Osama (bin Laden) to the White House," Giuliani said.

"Hillary and Obama are kind of debating whether to invite them to the inauguration or the inaugural ball," he added.

Does this stuff really reasonate with wingnuts? Can anyone be THIS reptilian and stilll be human?

Labels: fearmongering, idiocy, insanity, Rudy Giuliani, wingnuttia

There comes a time in a young girl's life when she doesn't want to be "cute" anymore, she wants to be "hot" and "sexy" -- and rebels against the creeping Little-Bo-Peepism that parents want to keep their daughters in forever. It's one thing when that happens when you're 23, as it was with me (and granted, that gesture of independence took place later in me than it does for most, but let's not go into why that is right now).

But today, when tabloid journalism is everywhere and the media tell kids that the way to get attention is to show as much flesh as possible, it's perfectly predictable that 11-year-olds would start patterning themselves after Lindsay Lohan.

So I don't see why anyone is shocked....shocked...and appalled -- to find that Halloween costumers are creating costumes for these aspiring sex tape celebrities:

Gabby eyed the Sexy Super Girl but decided against it. A friend at her Catholic school had worn that costume for a Halloween parade and pulled the already short miniskirt way up to cover her tummy. "That didn't look very good." But Gabby did like the Aqua Fairy, a vampy get-up with a black ripped-up skirt, black fishnet tights and blue bustier that comes in medium, large and preteen. A medium fits a child of 8.

No.

How about the Funky Punk Pirate Pre-Teen, with an off-the-shoulder blouse and bare midriff?

No.

Gabby pointed to the Fairy-Licious Purrrfect Kitty Pre-Teen, which, according to the package, includes a "pink and black dress with lace front bodice and sassy jagged skirt with tail. . . . Wings require some assembly."

Cheryl Cirenza shook her head in exasperated disbelief. "This is all so inappropriate. It's really disturbing," she said, eyeing a wall of such girl and preteen costumes as Major Flirt in army green, the bellybutton-baring Devilicious and a sassy, miniskirted French Maid, pink feather duster included. She'd just turned down her 13-year-old daughter's request for a Sexy Cop outfit. "When I was their age, I was a bunch of grapes."

But that was back in the days when Halloween was still a homemade kind of holiday, when an old sheet with eyeholes was a perfectly acceptable ghost and clumsily carved pumpkins on the front porch were about as elaborate as the decorations got. Now, Halloween is big business. Americans are expected to spend upwards of $5 billion this year on candy, ghoulish decorations and costumes. And the hottest trend in costumes, retailers say, is sexy. And young.

Fishnet tights, once associated with smoky cabarets or strip joints, now come in girls' sizes and cost $3.99.

Joe Thaler, head of TransWorld Exhibits Inc., runs the annual Halloween Expo for big-box retailers. He said suggestive costumes for girls burst onto the scene about three years ago and the phenomenon is so big that he's had to create a separate fashion show. The costumes have since moved to the plus-size market for adult women and now come in teen and preteen versions. Even little girl costumes show more leg and tummy than they used to. "They're just good sellers," Thaler said.

So why are they good sellers? Because people are buying them. The article cited above, predictably, blames the phenomenon on baby boomers, for all that the baby boom ended in 1964, which means that the youngest boomers are now 43 and those born in the last few years of the boom hardly constitute enough parents of 'tweens to account for the boom in hooker costumes for little girls. And last time I looked, younger parents were neither more able, nor more willing, to say "No!" to their children than their boomer forbears.

I'm not saying that kids should be forbidden to have any allure until they're in their 20's, nor am I saying that a little bit of dress-up is always inappropriate. I went to my senior prom in a dress better suited to Little Bo Peep than to a seventeen-year-old in 1973. But I'm not sure that preteen kids can draw the line between the attention their costumes get on Halloween and the attention they get when they show up in class in halter tops and bare tummies. And I'm not sure that when you send your ten-year-old out on Halloween dressed as a French Maid, you should be surprised when she learns that her only currency in this world is her fuckability. Nor should you be surprised when she becomes predator bait on MySpace.

Labels: Halloween

Actual ad that ran in the Trenton Times on Saturday:



"Admitted homosexual"? You want better he should stay in the closet?

Print and clip this ad. And next time a Barack Obama supporter asks you why having a gay-basher emcee a fundraiser matters in the larger sphere of things, just whip this puppy out and show it as an example of what happens when you think that because your guy talks about "inclusion", it means you can let homophobes be the public face of your campaign.

(via Blue Jersey)

Labels: homophobia

Now the Administration is claiming it has the right to grant anyone it wants immunity from prosecution for crimes. The latest beneficiary? Blackwater:

State Department investigators offered Blackwater USA security guards immunity during an inquiry into last month’s deadly shooting of 17 Iraqis in Baghdad — a potentially serious investigative misstep that could complicate efforts to prosecute the company’s employees involved in the episode, government officials said Monday.

The State Department investigators from the agency’s investigative arm, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, offered the immunity grants even though they did not have the authority to do so, the officials said. Prosecutors at the Justice Department, who do have such authority, had no advance knowledge of the arrangement, they added.

Most of the guards who took part in the Sept. 16 shooting were offered what officials described as limited-use immunity, which means that they were promised that they would not be prosecuted for anything they said in their interviews with the authorities as long as their statements were true. The immunity offers were first reported Monday by The Associated Press.

The officials who spoke of the immunity deals have been briefed on the matter, but agreed to talk about the arrangement only on the condition of anonymity because they had not been authorized to discuss a continuing criminal investigation.

The precise legal status of the immunity offer is unclear. Those who have been offered immunity would seem likely to assert that their statements are legally protected, even as some government officials say that immunity was never officially sanctioned by the Justice Department.

Spokesmen for the State and Justice Departments would not comment on the matter. A State Department official said, “If there’s any truth to this story, then the decision was made without consultation with senior officials in Washington.”

A spokeswoman for Blackwater, Anne E. Tyrrell, said, “It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the investigation.”

Translation: We all knew about it, but we ain't talkin'.

Does anyone actually believe that these immunity deals were offered without approval by all concerned?

Labels: Blackwater

Remarks by Senator John Edwards
St. Anselm's College, Manchester, New Hampshire
October 29, 2007

Many of you know that I am the son of a mill worker -- that I rose from modest means and have been blessed in so many ways in life. Elizabeth and I have so much to be grateful for.

And all of you know about some of the challenges we have faced in my family. But there came a time, a few months ago, when Elizabeth and I had to decide, in the quiet of a hospital room, after many hours of tests and getting pretty bad news -- what we were going to do with our lives.

And we made our decision. That we were not going to go quietly into the night -- that we were going to stand and fight for what we believe in.

As Elizabeth and I have campaigned across America, I've come to a better understanding of what that decision really meant -- and why we made it.

Earlier this year, I spoke at Riverside Church in New York, where, forty years ago, Martin Luther King gave a historic speech. I talked about that speech then, and I want to talk about it today. Dr. King was tormented by the way he had kept silent for two years about the Vietnam War.

He was told that if he spoke out he would hurt the civil rights movement and all that he had worked for -- but he could not take it any more -- instead of decrying the silence of others -- he spoke the truth about himself.

"Over the past two years" he said, "I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silence and speak from the burning of my own heart."

I am not holier than thou. I am not perfect by any means. But there are events in life that you learn from, and which remind you what this is really all about. Maybe I have been freed from the system and the fear that holds back politicians because I have learned there are much more important things in life than winning elections at the cost of selling your soul.

Especially right now, when our country requires so much more of us, and needs to hear the truth from its leaders.

And, although I have spent my entire life taking on the big powerful interests and winning -- which is why I have never taken a dime from Washington lobbyists or political action committees -- I too have been guilty of my own silence -- but no more.

It's time to tell the truth. And the truth is the system in Washington is corrupt. It is rigged by the powerful special interests to benefit they very few at the expense of the many. And as a result, the American people have lost faith in our broken system in Washington, and believe it no longer works for ordinary Americans. They're right.

As I look across the political landscape of both parties today -- what I see are politicians too afraid to tell the truth -- good people caught in a bad system that overwhelms their good intentions and requires them to chase millions of dollars in campaign contributions in order to perpetuate their careers and continue their climb to higher office.

This presidential campaign is a perfect example of how our politics is awash with money. I have raised more money up to this point than any Democratic candidate raised last time in the presidential campaign -- $30 million. And, I did it without taking a dime from any Washington lobbyist or any special interest PAC.

I saw the chase for campaign money at any cost by the frontrunner in this race -- and I did not join it -- because the cost to our nation and our children is not worth the hollow victory of any candidate. Being called president while powerful interests really run things is not the same as being free to lead this nation as president of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. If protecting the current established structure in Washington is in your interest, then I am not your candidate. I ran for president four years ago -- yes, in part out of personal ambition -- but also with a deep desire to stand for working people like my father and mother -- who no matter how hard things were for our family, always worked even harder to make things better for us.

But the more Elizabeth and I campaigned this year, the more we talked to the American people, the more we met people just like my father, and hard working people like James Lowe. James is a decent and honest man who had to live for 50 years with no voice in the richest country in the world because he didn't have health care. The more people like him that I met, the more I realized something much bigger was stirring in the American people. And it has stirred in each of us for far too long.

Last month Ken Burns -- who made the great Civil War documentary -- launched his newest epic on World War II on PBS -- and what a story it tells.

At the cost of great suffering, blood and enormous sacrifice, within four years after Pearl Harbor it is incredible what this nation achieved. America built the arsenal of democracy worthy of our great history. We launched the greatest invasion armada in the history of warfare against Hitler's fortress Europe, and, with our allies, we freed a continent of suffering humanity.

At the same time on the other side of the globe we crossed 10,000 miles of ocean and liberated another hemisphere of humanity -- islands and nations freed from the grip of Japanese militarists. While at the same time succeeding in the greatest scientific endeavor ever undertaken -- the Manhattan project -- and topped it off with building the Pentagon, one of the largest buildings in the world in a little over a year.

It is incredible what America has accomplished. Because no matter what extraordinary challenges we have been faced with, we did exactly what America has always done in our history -- we rose to the challenge.

And, now, as I travel across America and listen to people, I hear real concern about what's going on. For the first time in our nation's history, people are worried that we're going to be the first generation of Americans not to pass on a better life to our children.

And it's not the fault of the American people. The American people have not changed. The American people are still the strong, courageous people they have always been. The problem is what our government has become. And, it is up to us to do something about it.

Because Washington may not see it, but we are facing a moral crisis as great as any that has ever challenged us. And, it is this test -- this moral test -- that I have come to understand is at the heart of this campaign.

Just look at what has happened in Iraq. What was the response of the American people to the challenge at hand? Our men and women in uniform have been heroes. They've done everything that's been asked of them and more. But what about our government? Four years after invading Iraq, we cannot even keep the lights on in Baghdad.

When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, the American people were at their best. They donated their time and their money in record numbers. There was an outpouring of support. I took 700 college kids down to help -- young people who gave up their spring break. But what about our government? Three years after hurricane Katrina thousands of our fellow Americans, our brothers and sisters, are still housed in trailers waiting to go home.

There's no better example of the bravery and goodness of the American people than the response to the attacks of 9/11: firefighters and first responders risking and too often giving their lives to save others, charging up the stairs while everyone else was coming down; record bloodbank donations; and the list goes on. But what about our government? Six years after 9/11, at Ground Zero there sits only a black hole that tortures our conscience and scars our hearts.

In every instance we see an American people who are good, decent, compassionate and undeterred. And, American people who are better than the government that is supposed to serve and represent them.

And what has happened to the American "can do" spirit? I will tell you what has happened: all of this is the result of the bitter poisoned fruit of corruption and the bankruptcy of our political leadership.

It is not an accident that the government of the United States cannot function on behalf of its people, because it is no longer our people's government -- and we the people know it.

This corruption did not begin yesterday -- and it did not even begin with George Bush -- it has been building for decades -- until it now threatens literally the life of our democracy.

While the American people personally rose to the occasion with an enormous outpouring of support and donations to both the victims of Katrina and 9/11 -- we all saw our government's neglect. And we saw greed and incompetence at work. Out of more than 700 contracts valued at $500,000 or greater, at least half were given without full competition or, according to news sources, with vague or open ended terms, and many of these contracts went to companies with deep political connections such as a subsidiary of Haliburton, Bechtel Corp., and AshBritt Inc.

And in Iraq -- while our nation's brave sons and daughters put their lives on the line for our country -- we now have mercenaries under their own law while their bosses sit at home raking in millions.

We have squandered millions on building Olympic size swimming pools and buildings that have never been used. We have weapons and ammunition unaccounted for that may now be being used against our own soldiers. We literally have billions wasted or misspent -- while our troops and their families continue to sacrifice. And the politically connected lobby for more. What's their great sacrifice -- higher profits.

It goes on every minute of every day.

Corporate executives at United Airlines and US Airways receive millions in compensation for taking their companies into bankruptcy, while their employees are forced to take cuts in pay.

Companies like Wal-Mart lobby against inspecting containers entering our nation's ports, even though expert after expert agrees that the likeliest way for a dirty bomb to enter the United States is through a container, because they believe their profits are more important than our safety. What has become of America when America's largest company lobbies against protecting America?

Trade deals cost of millions of jobs. What do we get in return? Millions of dangerous Chinese toys in our children's cribs laden with lead. This is the price we are made to pay when trade agreements are decided based on how much they pad the profits for multinational corporations instead of what is best for America's workers or the safety of America's consumers.

We have even gotten to the point where our children's safety is potentially at risk because nearly half of the apple juice consumed by our children comes from apples grown in China. And Americans are kept in the dark because the corporate lobbyists have pushed back country of origin labeling laws again and again.

This is not the America I believe in.

The hubris of greed knows no bounds. Days after the homeland security bill passed, staffers from the homeland security department resigned and became homeland security consultants trying to cash in. And, where was the outrage? There was none, because that's how it works in Washington now. It is not a Republican revolving door or a Democratic revolving door -- it is just the way it's done.

Someone called it a government reconnaissance mission to figure out how to get rich when you leave the government.

Recently, I was dismayed to see headlines in the Wall Street Journal stating that Senate Democrats were backing down to lobbyists for hedge funds who have opposed efforts to make millionaire and billionaire hedge fund managers pay the same tax rate as every hard-working American. Now, tax loopholes the wealthy hedge fund managers do not need or deserve are not going to be closed, all because Democrats -- our party -- wanted their campaign money.

And a few weeks ago, around the sixth anniversary of 9/11, a leading presidential candidate held a fundraiser that was billed as a Homeland Security themed event in Washington, D.C. targeted to homeland security lobbyists and contractors for $1,000 a plate. These lobbyists, for the price of a ticket, would get a special "treat" -- the opportunity to participate in small, hour long breakout sessions with key Democratic lawmakers, many of whom chair important sub committees of the homeland security committee. That presidential candidate was Senator Clinton.

Senator Clinton's road to the middle class takes a major detour right through the deep canyon of corporate lobbyists and the hidden bidding of K Street in Washington -- and history tells us that when that bus stops there it is the middle class that loses.

When I asked Hillary Clinton to join me in not taking money from Washington lobbyists -- she refused. Not only did she say that she would continue to take their money, she defended them.

Today Hillary Clinton has taken more money from Washington lobbyists than any candidate from either party -- more money than any Republican candidate.

She has taken more money from the defense industry than any other candidate from either party as well.

She took more money from Wall Street last quarter than Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and Barack Obama combined.

The long slow slide of our democracy into the corporate abyss continues unabated regardless of party, regardless of the best interests of America.

We have a duty -- a duty to end this.

I believe you cannot be for change and take money from the lobbyists who prevent change. You cannot take on the entrenched interests in Washington if you choose to defend the broken system. It will not work. And I believe that, if Americans have a choice, and candidate who takes their money -- Democrat or Republican -- will lose this election.

For us to continue down this path all we have to do is suspend all that we believe in. As Democrats, we continue down this path only if we believe the party of the people is no more.

As Americans, we continue down this path only if we fail to heed Lincoln's warning to us all.

"At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected," he asked, "if it ever reaches us it must spring up amongst us. It can not come from abroad. If destruction be our lot -- we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men we must live through all time or die by suicide."

America lives because 20 generations have honored the one moral commandment that makes us Americans.

To give our children a better future than we received.

I stand here today the son of Wallace and Bobbie Edwards. The father of Wade, Cate, Emma Claire and Jack -- and I know, as well as you, that we must not be the first generation that fails to live up to our moral challenge and keep the promise of America.

That would be an abomination.

There is a dream that is America. It is what makes us American. And I will not stand by while that dream is at risk.

I am not perfect -- far from it -- but I do understand that this is not a political issue -- it is the moral test of our generation.

Our nation's founders knew that this moment would come -- that at some point the power of greed and its influence over officials in our government might strain and threaten the very America they hoped would last as an ideal in the minds of all people, and as a beacon of hope for all time.

That is why they made the people sovereign. And this is why it is your responsibility to redeem the promise of America for our children and their future.

It will not be easy -- sacrifice will be required of us -- but it was never easy for our ancestors, and their sacrifices were far greater than any that will fall on our shoulders.

Yet, the responsibility is ours.

We, you and I, are the guardians of what America is and what it will be.

The choice is ours.

Down one path, we trade corporate Democrats for corporate Republicans; our cronies for their cronies; one political dynasty for another dynasty; and all we are left with is a Democratic version of the Republican corruption machine.

It is the easier path. It is the path of the status quo. But, it is a path that perpetuates a corrupt system that has not only failed to deliver the change the American people demand, but has divided America into two -- one America for the very greedy, and one America for everybody else.

And it is that divided America -- the direct result of this corrupt system -- which may very well lead to the suicide Lincoln warned us of -- the poison that continues to seep into our system while none notice.

Or we can choose a different path. The path that generations of Americans command us to take. And be the guardians that kept the faith.

I run for president for my father who worked in a mill his entire life and never got to go to college the way I did.

I run for president for all those who worked in that mill with my father.

I run for president for all those who lost their jobs when that mil was shut down.

I run for president for all the women who have come up to Elizabeth and me and told us the like Elizabeth they had breast cancer -- but unlike Elizabeth they did not have health care.

I run for president for twenty generations of Americans who made sure that their children had a better life than they did.

As Americans we are blessed -- for our ancestors are not dead, they occupy the corridors of our conscience. And, as long we keep the faith -- they live. And so too the America of idealism and hope that was their gift to us.

I carry the promise of America in my heart, where my parents placed it. Like them, like you, I believe in people, hard work, and the sacred obligation of each generation to the next.

This is our time now. It falls to us to redeem our democracy, reclaim our government and relight the promise of America for our children.

Let us blaze a new path together, grounded in the values from which America was forged, still reaching toward the greatness of our ideals. We can do it. We can cast aside the bankrupt ways of Washington and replace them with the timeless values of the American people. We can liberate our government from the shackles of corporate money that bind it to corporate will, and restore the voices of our people to its halls.

This is the cause of my life. This is the cause of our time. Join me. Together, we cannot fail.

We will keep faith with those who have gone before us, strong and proud in the knowledge that we too rose up to guard the promise of America in our day, and that, because we did, America's best days still lie ahead.