John Hawkins has his annual list of the least favorite Republicans of a selection of center-right bloggers. I was polled for this but like an idiot started the list and then forgot to finish it.
Here are the people I would have chosen if I'd remembered to email the piece:
Pat Buchanan Ann Coulter (Tired of defending her; I still love her books) Lew Rockwell (More a libertarian than a Republican but still plenty annoying) Ron Paul (Ditto) Andrew Sullivan Chuck Hagel
I would have left John McCain off the list this year, although I included him last year.
Hmmmm, maybe those complaints of anti-Semitism in Passion of the Christ weren't all just over-sensitivity. Gibson reportedly uttered some anti-Jewish slurs during his DUI arrest over the weekend.
Gibson's reported criticism of Jews, contained in a leaked police report detailing his arrest early on Friday morning, included the phrase: "F*****g Jews. The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world."
And they probably poured those Fosters down his throat, eh, Mate?
But this causes me some concern:
Calling for a criminal investigation into the Oscar-winning actor and director's remarks, Abraham Foxman, the national director of the US Jewish Anti-Defamation League, said: "We believe there should be consequences to bigots and bigotry."
I agree there should be consequences, but those consequences for what is nothing more than offensive speech should be scorn and derision from people of good faith. If Gibson did and said what he's claimed to, then he's a buffoon.
After Gibson was pulled over, a bizarre melee ensued that apparently involved Gibson trying to escape, his alleged propositioning of an arresting officer with lurid, explicit suggestions and claims that, while handcuffed in the back of a police car, Gibson threatened a deputy, saying he "owns Malibu" and will spend all of his money to "get even" with the officer.
He also allegedly asked an arresting officer if he was Jewish.
Gibson was taken to a police station in Malibu, where he allegedly threatened an officer, smashed a payphone and attempted to urinate in a cell.
The odd thing about this is that Gibson apparently blew a .12, as compared to California's legal limit of .08, which does not strike me as all that drunk. Yet Gibson's escapades attest to somebody profoundly out of control.
Well, it appears that now we know when an election can be certified as official and done with; when the Democrat wins. Bradblog reports that Francine Busby is contesting her run-off loss for California's 50th District.
The election between Francine Busby and Brian Bilbray was marred, as reported in detail by The BRAD BLOG over the past two months, when the Diebold optical-scan and touch-screen voting machines used in the race were sent home with poll workers on so-called "sleepovers" for days and weeks prior to the election. That breach in security was in contravention of new state and federal security mitigation requirements enacted just months ago after dozens of severe vulnerabilities were recently confirmed in those specific voting systems.
According to the new state and federal security requirements, such breaches of security effectively decertify the systems for use in California. The election contest, to be filed on behalf of several CA-50 voters on Monday will charge the votes cast on those decertified machines are, in fact, illegal votes. The casting of illegal votes in one of several ground under which a contest may be filed in California state court.
I don't know what the real story is here; the story of "sleepovers" seems quite bizarre. And if you check the Bradblog story where this was revealed, it's sourced to on unnamed person in the "media office" of the San Diego County Registrar's office. Hmmm, exactly how big is the media office of a registrar?
But I do know one thing; contesting the election at this point is incredibly stupid politics. Busby is running again for the seat in November, so in all probability the next election will be decided by the time this lawsuit winds its way through the courts.
We have seen this become a principle with the Lefty bloggers; if the election was close (and they'll define close) it was stolen by the Republicans, and they'll point to the most ridiculous stuff (the suspicious rural Ohio Counties, for example) in order to prove it.
Best Team: Detroit. It's not even close; they're seven wins ahead of anybody in the majors. Yeah, I'm stunned that it's happened, but 104 games into the season it's silly to deny the obvious. This is a 100-win team and maybe a 110-win team. They're having the lightning-in a bottle season like 1984 and 1968, although with those teams it was more a case of hanging around among the good teams then suddenly putting it all together for a year.
Best Player: David Ortiz seems to have separated himself from the pack as a hitter, but he's of no value defensively. Among the rest, there's very little difference, with Manny Ramirez probably the best otherwise.
Best Pitcher: Johan Santana. He's done it consistently every year and he's doing it again this year. Like the position players there are a lot of guys right around Santana, so this could change by the end of the year.
National League:
Best Team: The Mets. They're as good as the Cardinals are at home, but they win consistently on the road whereas the Cards are .500 away from St. Louis.
Best Player: Pujols got all the attention early, but this is a dogfight. I'd pick Chase Utley based on production this year--hits like a slugger and fields second base.
Best Pitcher: Brandon Webb. He's doing everything right. He's got the best ERA in the league despite playing in an extreme hitter's park.
Oh, I don't mean the alpha-male wanna-be, that scripted, stiff, uninspired candidate for president in 2000. I mean the self-effacing movie star with man-of-steel conviction from An Inconvenient Truth, who is trying to shake this country by the shoulders over the dire consequences of global warming. From the ashes of his overhandled "be everything to everybody" campaign rose the real Al Gore, a confident, wonkish, accessible intellect who has a supremely important question for inhabitants of Earth : How long can you tread water?
This is the man, with his charts and facts and rising seas message, that the Democrats should enlist in 2008.
Our buddy Gaius has another missive from his son in Iraq, on the topic of Israel:
I wonder what would happen in the United States if, say, Mexico began launching artillery rockets into Texas, if the images of destruction and death were coming not from Haifa, but from San Antonio? Would the left wing and the media be crying for moderation and peace talks? Would the world condemn us for taking the fight to them? Some would say that Israel is a contested territory, that hundreds of thousands of Muslims were forcibly removed from their homes, and for that reason, the analogy does not hold up. To those people I say you are wrong, because a large portion of Texas was once under the Mexican flag.
A new poll by InsiderAdvantage shows Johnson leading McKinney 46 percent to 21 percent, with one-third of voters undecided. The survey recorded the responses of 480 likely voters and has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.
An analysis of primary election results showed McKinney's support eroding slightly in predominantly black south DeKalb County, her traditional base. Johnson won more votes than McKinney in predominantly white north DeKalb, Rockdale and Gwinnett, according to the analysis.
InsiderAdvantage CEO Matt Towery said his poll detected some interest among Republicans in the race, which would also work against McKinney. In last week's primary, many Republicans stuck to their own races, headlined by the confrontation between Christian Coalition leader-turned-lobbyist Ralph Reed and state Sen. Casey Cagle in the GOP race for lieutenant governor. A poll released by InsiderAdvantage four days before that race showed Reed and Cagle in a dead heat, but Cagle got 56 percent of the vote.
(Answers of course will be posted by commenters, so do the questions first)
1. True or False: Every current NFL Division has one or more teams that have never won the Super Bowl.
2. Which Division has had the fewest Super Bowl Champions?
3. Which Division has the most Super Bowl Champs?
4. What franchise has won more games and more NFL titles counting Super Bowls than any other?
5. Who started at quarterback in 10 consecutive professional football championship games including 6 consecutive NFL title games?
6. What NFL quarterback has won the most postseason games as a starter?
7. I was the starting quarterback for almost all of the season for two NFL teams that are acclaimed as among the greatest of all time, and won MVP awards in both years. And yet I am not in the NFL Hall of Fame. Who am I?
8. Name the three NFL coaches to win Super Bowls with two or more starting quarterbacks.
Who knew Hillary's boobs were that big? Kitty Myers has the story. Of course, she does have a third boob that's even bigger living in Chappaqua.
Kevin Aylward comes down square against blogging on the taxpayer's dime. I don't know; considering the blogger in question is working in John Conyer's office, I think she might be saving us all a lot of money by blogging. Besides, she's even bigger than Hillary up top!
Getting off that topic, we turn to the Senate, where John Hawkins has a list of his most competitive Senate races. I like his list, but my local sources tell me that Kyl's poll numbers don't look as good as he'd like them to. The fortunate thing is that everybody agrees that Pederson is turning out to be a disaster as a candidate. But it does cause me some concern; if an incumbent Republican with strong marks in a solid Republican state isn't doing well, then there could be trouble elsewhere. I'd certainly move Lieberman into the dogfight territory. But you can't miss the fact that in 5 of the top 7 races, it's a Republican incumbent.
Back to beautiful women, Neander News covers Foxbabe Megan Kendall. Well, no, actually he blogged about her.
Go check out Chicago Ray to see a gorgeous, intelligent blog. We covered Ray a lot back in the Kerry Haters days, and it's nice to see him back in the blogosphere.
But when she was asked about how she would vote in the Democratic primary next month, Ms. Korzennik, 46, who says she strongly supports Israel, sighed. “Given all that’s going on in Israel right now,” she said, “I am not going to let Lieberman go.”
Ms. Korzennik expresses the mixed sentiments a significant number of Jewish Democrats feel about Mr. Lieberman, who is facing the toughest race in his three-term Senate career, just six years after he was Al Gore’s running mate.
Ned Lamont has been careful to claim that there is no substantive difference between him and Lieberman on Israel; the question is whether that's really credible given Lamont's stated opposition to the Iraq War.
Some of Mr. Lieberman’s supporters say there is a strain of anti-Semitism in the antiwar left that could make Jewish voters uneasy about supporting Mr. Lamont.
“There’s a small but vocal pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel and perhaps anti-Semitic faction of the Democratic Party,’’ said Dan Gerstein, a former Lieberman aide and informal adviser to the campaign. “It is a small minority but it is getting bolder, and even worse. There is a growing tolerance of it in the progressive community.”
The only part I'd disagree with is the word "small". I suspect that it's large and growing. As a former Leftist myself (Ronald Reagan converted me), I can tell you that the Left tends to view conflicts in terms of oppressor and oppressed, and they have chosen the Israelis as the oppressors. Hence we hear quite often kooky stuff like that the Israelis are no better than the Nazis. Disgusting and historically wildly inaccurate, but compelling to a fair amount of people on the Left.
"We decided to buy property in Crawford to use until George's resignation or impeachment, which we all hope is soon for the sake of the world," Sheehan said in a newsletter set to be sent to supporters Thursday. "I can't think of a better way to use Casey's insurance money than for peace, and I am sure that Casey approves."
Her anti-war gathering in Crawford is scheduled for Aug. 16 through Sept. 2. But Bush is scheduled to be at his ranch mainly during the first two weeks of August.
No word on whether there's a Jamba Juice on every corner.
Brainster's buddy John Ruberry will be on the radio today with my other buddies, Andrea Shea-King and Mark Vance on Constitutional Public Radio. If you're not lucky enough to live on Florida's Space Coast, you can tune in over the internet here. They also have a chatroom where you can interact with the hosts and guest here.
The IP address used by “strummers” is the same one Leopold has used very often, the same one which appeared in Leopold’s emails to AnonymousArmy under his own name. As I said yesterday, Leopold threatened to sue me for extortion, defamation, and slander before and after my story broke. In order to make this credible, Leopold falsified portions of emails I sent to him and posted them at Think Progress in a thread I had commented in.
Note that since this article appeared, Seixon has received a death threat.
Background on all this nonsense is here. It also ties into Larisa Alexandrovna, one of the ten worst people in the blogosphere, and Topsecretk9, one of the better commenters in the blogosphere.
CAMP FALLUJAH, Iraq – Marines from Regimental Combat Team 5’s, 1st Battalion, 25th Marine Regiment, and soldiers from 2nd and 4th Brigade, 1st Iraqi Army Division, rescued three Iraqi hostages in an intelligence-driven operation July 23.
The three were personal assistants and bodyguards to Dr. Rafa Hayid Chiad Al-Isaw, an Iraqi government official in Baghdad.
“We are extremely pleased we were able to recover these three Iraqi citizens,” said Col. Larry D. Nicholson, commanding officer for RCT-5. “The safety of Iraqi citizens to move freely about their own country without fear is a priority for U.S and Iraqi forces and we will continue to assist the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police in ensuring their citizens have a future that is free of terrorism.”
The three were held captive by al-Qaeda insurgents in a spiderhole complex for 27 days. The hostages were beaten with electrical cords, bitten and threatened with their lives at gunpoint by their captors. They were treated by Coalition Forces medical personnel.
As we know, many of the major liberal blogs have been exercising restraint in posting about Israel, since they know almost anything posted will result in a heck of a lot of paranoid anti-semitism.
Fortunately, restraint is not a word that appears in the Huffington Post dictionary, and so we can get a look at the attitudes over there quite easily. James Heffernan plays the numbers game:
During the 13 days in which Hezbollah rockets have killed about 40 Israelis in northern Israel, Israeli airstrikes have displaced more than 700,000 Lebanese, destroyed much of the country's infrastructure, and killed about 380 Lebanese-most of them civilians, and about a third of them children. Last Sunday's targets included two ambulances racing an injured family to a hospital in Tyre--but not moving quite fast enough. They were directly hit by Israeli bombs that wounded six Red Cross volunteers and left the injured family still more shattered.
As the Israel-Lebanon war nears the end of its second week, it's become obvious that the U.S. isn't going to do anything to stop the conflict. No matter how vicious the Israeli attacks, no matter how many civilians are killed, the Bush party line will be, "Hezbollah started it, Israel has the right to defend itself." Yet, many political observers wonder at the wisdom of this policy.
It ain't going anywhere. Jane Hamsher yucks it up with some college boy about how they both got denied entrance to the Bill Clinton/Joe Lieberman event in Connecticut. Some profanity.
And if that is the case, it would not be hard to write a scenario in which the real loser from a Lieberman defeat to anti-war candidate Ned Lamont might be the Democratic Party itself
That would especially be the case if Lieberman's good friend Sen. John McCain of Arizona becomes the 2008 Republican presidential nominee and picks Joe as his running mate.
Interesting speculation, but it still seems to me unlikely that the Republicans will nominate John McCain. Not as unlikely as I thought a year ago, but still not the most plausible scenario. And if McCain were to win, what would he gain by picking Lieberman as his running mate? McCain has tremendous crossover appeal to moderate Democrats and centrists on his own; what he'd need is somebody to shore up his right flank.
Meanwhile, Democracy For America (and doesn't that name suck eggs?), run by the Vermonster's brother is pushing Lamont in a video today:
Jim Dean rewrites history here a bit:
The story of an insurgent, people-powered candidate moving to the top of the polls against the Democratic establishment is not new. My brother, Howard, was in a similar position three and a half years ago in the 2004 presidential primary. I don't need to remind you about what happened when the Beltway Democrats placed a giant target on his back and took aim. Let's make sure that history doesn't repeat itself with Ned Lamont.
Three and a half years ago, nobody outside of Vermont had heard of Howard Dean. Two and a half years ago, his campaign imploded when his orange hat brigade got too obnoxious for the Iowa farmers.
Chris notes that Patty Madrid is using some creative techniques to make herself appear younger and prettier. Be sure to click on the linked photo evidence.
Here's an excellent article on former Weather Underground member Bill Ayres. Ayres has burrowed into the system, becoming a teacher of teachers in an attempt to foment the long-awaited "Revolution".
Ayers makes clear that his political views haven’t changed much since those glory days. He cites a letter he recently wrote: “I’ve been told to grow up from the time I was ten until this morning. Bullsh*t. Anyone who salutes your ‘youthful idealism’ is a patronizing reactionary. Resist! Don’t grow up! I went to Camp Casey [Cindy Sheehan’s vigil at the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas] in August precisely because I’m an agnostic about how and where the rebellion will break out, but I know I want to be there and I know it will break out.”
He's a complete and thorough nutbar, but unfortunately in teaching circles he's fairly influential.
And it’s not just from his government-funded outpost at the University of Illinois that Ayers is spreading the word about radical social justice teaching. He maintains a busy lecture schedule at other ed schools around the country, and he does teacher training and professional development for the Chicago public schools. All that still leaves him enough time to give nostalgic lectures on college campuses about his Weather Underground experiences.
The media are now running the story that a loss by Joe Lieberman will hurt other Democrats. Much as I want Lieberman to win (as a thumb in the eye to the likes of Kos and Hamsher), I don't see it other than the money thing:
Lieberman has traditionally given money to his fellow Connecticut Democrats. State Rep. Robert Godfrey, D-Danbury, a Lieberman supporter, said both Lieberman and U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., have contributed $800,000 to $1 million to the state party in election years. That money is then distributed to candidates running across the state.
And this part doesn't make much sense:
Godfrey said he also believes that if Lieberman wins the primary, it will encourage Democrats in the November election who might vote for Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell -- who continues to enjoy high approval ratings -- to return to the Democratic line on the ballot and vote for Lieberman and the other Democrats who follow.
"Those of us further down the ballot like him as the breakwater between Jodi Rell and all the other Democrats," said Godfrey, who is running for re-election.
Sounds like they think the voters will stick with the Republicans if Ned Lamont's the Democrats' choice.
Don't get me wrong; I do think a loss for Lieberman will be a loss for the Democrats, precisely because it will encourage the blogs. They make a big deal out of the fact that they are not going after some other Democrats who've angered them, like Diane Feinstein. What are the odds they will practice similar restraint in 2008? This has the potential to turn into a full-scale purge. As Zell Miller remarked, there are elements within the Democratic party that would rather be a majority in in a minority party than a minority in a majority party.
CBS Sportsline has a several times a day feature called the Trivia Tower, which is now offering prizes based on the number of participants. Pay no attention to the claimed $1,000 prize; that's if they get 100,000 people to play--maybe you'll make $50 to $100, but you've really gotta be good at sports trivia.
I won a $25 gift certificate today, finishing second. They do it like an NCAA tournament, where every round you're paired with somebody and the winner of that round goes on, the loser drops into a consolation round. Today was baseball trivia and I'm really good on that stuff and got lucky when I needed it so I made it to the finals. It takes about 4 minutes per round (five questions) so even if you make it to the finals it's about a half hour of your time.
Most of the games are general sports, but they do have regular games where the questions favor local fans. Tomorrow afternoon's game features the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Will we hear the obvious question: Who are the four Tampa Bay quarterbacks who have started and won a Super Bowl (obviously not necessarily while with the Bucs)?
I'll put the answer in the comments if nobody else gets it by tomorrow.
This prize has been contaminated over the years, with awards to Yasser Arafat, Rigoberta Menchu, Le Duc Tho, and others, but this is really ironic:
NOBEL peace laureate Betty Williams displayed a flash of her feisty Irish spirit yesterday, lashing out at US President George W.Bush during a speech to hundreds of schoolchildren.
Campaigning on the rights of young people at the Earth Dialogues forum, being held in Brisbane, Ms Williams spoke passionately about the deaths of innocent children during wartime, particularly in the Middle East, and lambasted Mr Bush.
"I have a very hard time with this word 'non-violence', because I don't believe that I am non-violent," said Ms Williams, 64.
"Right now, I would love to kill George Bush." Her young audience at the Brisbane City Hall clapped and cheered.
``Chicken hawk" isn't an argument. It is a slur -- a dishonest and incoherent slur. It is dishonest because those who invoke it don't really mean what they imply -- that only those with combat experience have the moral authority or the necessary understanding to advocate military force. After all, US foreign policy would be more hawkish, not less, if decisions about war and peace were left up to members of the armed forces. Soldiers tend to be politically conservative, hard-nosed about national security, and confident that American arms make the world safer and freer. On the question of Iraq -- stay-the-course or bring-the-troops-home? -- I would be willing to trust their judgment. Would Cindy Sheehan and Howard Dean?
Exactly. If we follow the logic here, only those who've served in the military can support sending our troops abroad. But if that's the case, then only those who've served in the military can be in Congress or the Presidency, because we all know that eventually our leaders may be forced to send us to war. Of course, that means that those who use the chickenhawk formulation cannot support Russ Feingold for President, since he never wore the uniform. Bill Clinton should never have been elected to the Oval Office, because he ran against two men who fought in World War II.
Is the fact of this group’s growing presence on the Internet a reason for studying it in a course on 9/11? Sure. Is the instructor who discusses the group’s arguments thereby endorsing them? Not at all. It is perfectly possible to teach a viewpoint without embracing it and urging it. But the moment a professor does embrace and urge it, academic study has ceased and been replaced by partisan advocacy. And that is a moment no college administration should allow to occur.
This goes along with something Ben Wallace and I have been writing in the comments here. Ben says:
Under Fish's rule, a faculty member in the South in the 1950s could not embrace and urge the idea that segregation is wrong and that students should act to remedy the situation. The only thing that would be available to a faculty member in that situation [w]ould be dispassionate analysis of the benefits and costs of segregation and a discussion of the different arguments behind segregation. Allowing advocacy and urging students to engage all ideas has demonstrated more effective than efforts to create speech codes, which is essentially what Fish has come up with.
This is a story we've been covering at Screw Loose Change. Kevin Barrett, who is scheduled to teach Introduction to Islam in the fall at the University of Wisconsin, is under fire purportedly because he believes that 9-11 was planned and orchestrated by the US government and specifically the Bush Administration, in order to lead us into war.
Now the ridiculous part of this is that the focus is on what Barrett has said, and not on what he's planning to teach.
Republican Rep. Steve Nass said the lawmakers' letter, which called Barrett's views "academically dishonest,'' sends a strong message to top UW leaders.
"When 61 legislators condemn a decision by UW-Madison and demand the dismissal of Kevin Barrett, the leadership of the UW System operates at its own peril if it continues to ignore views of the taxpayers,'' Nass said in a statement.
Firing Barrett is not a good idea. I agree that his 9-11 "theories" call into question whether he's really smart enough to be teaching college students, but the issue should be him teaching those theories, not what he has said elsewhere. The objectionable part of the Wisconsin decision is letting him teach this nonsense as a college-level course. That's the real mistake.
I have spent the last couple of months making a lot of posts at Screw Loose Change. I've looked into 9-11 six ways from Sunday. There is no doubt in my mind that the 9-11 conspiracy crap will last the rest of my life and that it will always be wrong. Almost none of the people who are spokesmen for the movement can talk for two minutes without lying repeatedly.
You, my “war-hero” friend, are a feckless yellow-bellied WIMP. 19 months ago, when you could have walked away...you did! You let the Bush crime family and their 9/11 perp friends the neocons steal the election you won in a landslide 53%-47%. If you had the slightest shred of guts or integrity, you could have had us all out in the streets taking back the country. Instead, you tucked your tail between your legs and fled like the coward you are. Unless, of course, the two candidates from Skull and Bones had the whole thing fixed in advance. Either way, it appears that masturbating in a coffin in front of your sick Yalie frat buddies doesn't do much for your intestinal fortitude. As far as I'm concerned, you're history. But hey, prove me wrong. Get onboard with 9/11 truth NOW or condemn yourself to historical irrelevance.
Somehow I doubt this story will make it to the New York Times.
A knife-wielding grocery store employee attacked eight co-workers Friday, seriously injuring five before a witness pulled a gun and stopped him, police said.
Note in particular that all it took was the presence of the gun to stop the attack:
"When he turned around and saw my pistol, he threw the knife away, put his hands up and got on the ground," Cope told The Associated Press. "He saw my gun and that was pretty much it."
Update: DOH! Okay, so it won't make it into a Paul Krugman, Bob Herbert or Maureen Dowd column.
The Most Influential Human Beings in the Second Millenium
A friend asked me to put together a list of the ten most influential people from 1000 AD to 2000 AD. They did not themselves have to live in the second millenium, just have influence. Here's my list:
1. Jesus Christ 2. Gallileo 3. Sir Isaac Newton 4. George Washington 5. Napoleon 6. Karl Marx 7. Adam Smith 8. Aristotle 9. Mohammed 10. John Locke
If other bloggers would like to take on this list, let me know and I'll link your post.
Update: Rick Moran took up the challenge. The first two on his list I'd have to agree I blew; Gutenberg was an omission on my part and Luther's influence on the last 300 years is enormous. I'm surprised he omits mention of Locke and Aristotle, two of the great philosophers. Madison just missed my cut-off, but he's clearly in the next ten easily.
Oh, the irony! An Islamic preacher of hate, who gleefully left England after praising the subway bombings is now begging the Brits to save him from Lebanon.
EXILED preacher of hate Omar Bakri has begged the Royal Navy to rescue him from war-torn Beirut.
The Muslim cleric who fled Britain last year, tried to board a ship full of women and children yesterday but was turned away.
He also wrote to the British embassy asking to be allowed back on “humanitarian grounds”.
In an email to officials, dole scrounger Bakri pleaded: “The current situation in Beirut left me without any choice but to appeal to you to grant me a visit visa to see my children for one month.”
Yes, they all despise the West, until only the West can save them. I have a strong suspicion that the British will decline this opportunity to turn the other cheek.
The left-wing blogosphere has apparently descended en masse on Connectict to push Ned Lamont over the top. Boy, does that conjure up some memories of Iowa and the Deanie Babies....
Will have to wait. The Left's angriest blogger responds to the news that Bill Clinton will be campaigning for Joe Lieberman:
Joe's internal polling must have told him this was coming because on the same day it's being announced that Bill Clinton will be here in Waterbury on Monday to campaign for him and try and stop the hemorrhaging. Big Dog may not have taken it personally when Lieberman stabbed us all in the back with his speech on the floor of the Senate during the impeachment hearings, but many of us did. Loyalty to machine politics runs deep.
As I have stated previously on this Senate floor, I have been deeply disappointed and angered by this President's conduct--that which is covered in the Articles, and the more personal misbehavior that is not--and like all of us here, I have struggled uncomfortably for more than a year with how to respond to it. President Clinton engaged in an extramarital sexual relationship with a young White House employee in the Oval Office, which, though consensual, was irresponsible and immoral, and thus raised serious questions about his judgment and his respect for the high office he holds. He then made false or misleading statements about that relationship to the American people, to a Federal district court judge in a civil deposition, and to a Federal grand jury; in so doing, he betrayed not only his family but the public's trust, and undermined his moral authority and public credibility.
Pretty hard to argue with that, although I suppose Hamsher could fall back on the old reliable "Everybody lies about sex," canard.
The poll shows Lamont ahead 51-47 percent among likely voters in the Aug. 8 Democratic primary. That compares to a 55-40 percent lead for Lieberman in a similar poll in June.
Former President Bill Clinton is slated to campaign on behalf of the three-term incumbent Monday in Waterbury, Lieberman's campaign spokeswoman said today.
It will be interesting to see; for most of the Lefty blogosphere, Bill Clinton is the only Democrat president they can remember. Work it out; Carter left office 25 years ago; presumably they don't remember much about the president unless they were at least 5 years old.
New York Times best selling author Glenn Greenwald appears to have written a book in an attempt to lecture American patriots on how to act politically when his primary and preferred residence isn't even within the United States - it's actually in Brazil. Perhaps How Would An Expatriate Act would have been a more fitting title.
Greenwald turns out to be gay (and let me say to his credit I did not know that from reading his blog), probably no longer a lawyer, and probably didn't work as long at a major law firm as he claims. And you know, the irony is that the resume doesn't really matter in the blogosphere. Oh, yeah, there are some credentialists, but for the most part if you can write and make a decent argument people will link/read/comment. It is only when you are claiming particular expertise in a sophisticated area that you need the credentials.
Ace discounts the possibility that Glenn uses sock puppets to comment on other blogs pointing out the brilliance of Greenwald and battling against the forces of darkness that is the right-wing blogosphere.
Mack arrived at the Perez family home at 611 28th St. Monday night just as an exhausted Mateo Perez was getting home from a 12-hour day of landscaping and cleaning buildings. Mack probably figured he could swipe Perez's wallet and get away without much of a fight, police said.
But he didn't count on having to brawl with the rest of the Perez clan: Candelaria, the 4-foot-9 housewife with a wicked right hook she honed as a girl on the streets of Guatemala; daughter Imelta, the mellow 13-year-old who never dreamed she would take a chair to a robber's head and tie him up; and son Juan, the 10-year-old Miami Heat fanatic who traded his basketball for a stick to whip an attacker.
Sources informed me the unidentified Middle Eastern male — now a fellow American — appeared on terrorist watch lists and is a member of the Hezbollah terrorist organization. Despite numerous calls from adjudicators in Newark, N.J., handling the alleged terrorist's naturalization case, the FBI and INS reportedly did not respond to requests to turn over the individual's "alien file." The A-file includes biographical and status information and investigative data. It is unclear why INS and the JTTF did not turn over the file, or why the New York office neglected to order the adjudications branch in Newark to put the naturalization process on hold.
Our favorite scold, Glenn Greenwald, made a big point of calling out the conservative blogosphere for not condemning a post that made a joke of killing liberal Supreme Court members; turns out he links approvingly to a blog that makes the same joke about conservatives in general. Patterico has the details.
Greenwald's initial point is valid; both sides of the blogosphere need to police their own. But of course, he only shows zeal about it when conservatives fail to do so. I would say that conservatives are better at condemning mistakes on our side than liberals are about their side.
Of course, to Greenwald, the joke about killing Supreme Court justices was simply a handy stick.
I was, to put it mildly, not a fan of Ken Burns' series on baseball, which was broadcast on PBS about a decade ago. Although the early episodes, which concerned baseball before the turn of the 20th century, were entertaining, once it got into the modern era I could see the glaring flaws.
But Burns did one thing right in that series; he put Buck O'Neill front and center to tell us about the Negro Leagues. A more wonderful spokesman would be hard to imagine--intelligent, warm, funny, gracious... there are no words that overstate the excellence of this man.
Today, Buck O'Neill, aged 94, played in a minor league all-star game tonight and was intentionally walked (twice--once for each team). Ordinarily I don't like these gimmicky tributes. But this time I'm going to make an exception, because I don't think we can honor Buck too much.
(This post will remain on top until tomorrow--scroll down for newer content)
I'll be on the Constitutional Public Radio with Andrea Shea-King and Mark Vance Tuesday afternoon at 4:05 Eastern time. CPR is broadcast on AM 1510 WWBC, Brevard County, Florida. For those not lucky enough to live on Florida's Space Coast, you can listen in over the internet.
We'll be discussing the movie, Loose Change, and the blog I am running with James B of the Chief Brief, Screw Loose Change. I have been on with Andrea and Mark before and they always keep it interesting and lively, so be sure to listen in!
There's also an online chat feature here so you can interact with us on the show. Just type in your name, city and state and submit query to get into the chat.
Thanks to Andrea and Mark again for having me on the show. It's always terrific to talk to such intelligent and well-informed people. The show will be rebroadcast tonight from 9-11 Eastern time. I think you'll agree the discussion was lively and intelligent, unlike, for example, Dylan Avery on Alex Jones.
I do apologize for not reading the chat while I was talking. I would have loved to respond to more questions, but I also had a great deal of material I wanted to get through. I was disappointed that none of the Loosers called in, although there certainly were plenty in the chatroom.
Is claiming that Diebold is switching votes from her to her opponent:
URGENT: Diebold Electronic Machines Malfunction, Vote for Other Candidate
FOR IMMEDITATE RELEASE Contact: Jocco Baccus 678-520-2088
(Decatur) After one hour of voting, the McKinney campaign has received numerous calls that the voting machines are malfunctioning. Voters casting votes for McKinney are reportedly having their votes switched by the machines for Hank Johnson. This is not a new problem with Diebold machines. Lawyers for the campaign have been alerted and said that if this situation is not corrected, Cynthia McKinney for Congress will be forced to take additional measures.
This is just setting the stage in case the unexpected happens and McNinney is defeated. In all probability she'll win today's primary easily and this will disappear down the memory hole.
Al Gore has met the Dalai Lama. He's broken bread with Boutros Boutros-Ghali, rubbed elbows with Lech Walesa, even locked arms with Nelson Mandela. But right now — on a breezy June evening in Los Angeles, at a special star-studded screening of An Inconvenient Truth — he's about to step up to a whole other level. Tonight, the former Vice President of the United States will shake hands with Denise Richards.
Gore: Uh, hi, Mrs Richards.
Richards: It's Miss. I'm in the process of divorcing my husband, Charlie Sheen.
Gore: Loved his work in Wall Street.
Richards: He became a maniac about 9-11! Kept insisting that the buildings were brought down in controlled demolition. Wouldn't stop talking about it.
Gore: That's nice. The most interesting theory I've heard--and mind you, it's only a theory, is that--um... wait a minute, that didn't work out so well for Howard. Did you know that I helped create the Information Superhighway, or the Internet as it's colloquially known?
Richards: The Internet? That's where my husband Charlie downloaded the underage gay porn!
Gore: Well, I look forward to meeting you again, Miss Richards!
Just a final thought - although I doubt it, is it totally beyond the pale that these two Israeli soliders were instructed to allow themselves to be kidnapped in order to foster the chain of events I have just described?
Not a conspiracy theory nutbar, mind you, but just asking questions, right?
I don't think I'll ever forget the ending of I, The Jury, where Mike Hammer's new girlfriend does a striptease to try to distract him from the fact that he's figured out that she's the murderer. Blam! He shoots her dead(she was about to grab a gun and shoot him, so it's self-defense). When she asked him "How c-could you?", he replies, "It was easy."
One of the veterans who dropped his suit against Sherwood and the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation said depositions in the case threatened to take an unfair toll on family and friends. Kenneth Campbell, a University of Delaware professor who has taught a course on the Vietnam War, still believes the film maligns him.
"They used my image and voice from an old film to go after Kerry. I thought they painted me as a fraud," Campbell said.
This is just disgusting. Stan Goff, who's got the nuttiest of the nutbar bios, claims that he's just anti-Zionist:
Let's just get something out of the way right up front, before I go any further. Zionism is not Judaism; being Jewish does not make anyone Zionist; and anti-Zionism is not equivalent to anti-Semitism.
No, of course not; it's just a coincidence that almost all anti-Zionists are also anti-Jew. And it's not long before we get into the weird claptrap:
As late as 1943, while the Jews of Europe were being exterminated in the millions, the U.S. Congress proposed to set up a commission to "study" the problem. Rabbi Stephen Wise, who was the principal American spokesperson for Zionism, came to Washington to testify against the rescue bill because it would divert attention from the colonization of Palestine. (Sheonman, Ralph, "The Hidden History of Zionism")
Zionists actively collaborated with Nazis. This is a verifiable historical fact. Not only did the Zionist Federation of Germany send a resolution of support to the Nazi Party in 1933, "the World Zionist Organization Congress in 1933 defeated a resolution calling for action against Hitler by a vote of 240 to 43." (ibid.)
The history of Zionist collaboration with fascism is barely touched upon here, because my intent is not to paraphrase the history but simply to make my point about the obscenity of Zionists now laying claim to the Nazi Holocaust as justification for the Palestinian Holocaust they are perpetrating to this very day, all the while claiming that the Palestinians and other Arabs are bent on reproducing Nazi Germany's crimes against them.
Somehow he manages to avoid mentioning the sign at Auschwitz, although you can tell he's tempted. But the equation of the real Holocaust with what the Palestinians are experiencing is rather telling.
If history is any guide, we're heading into a major political storm. And that means we could see a national tide in November that will sweep the Democrats back into the majority.
Virtually every public opinion measure points to a Category 4 or 5 hurricane gathering. Bush's job-approval rating is below 40 percent, and congressional job approval is more than 10 percentage points lower. Only a quarter of the electorate thinks the country is moving in the right direction, and voters are unhappy with the economy under Bush. Finally, Democrats hold a double-digit lead as the party the public trusts to do a better job of tackling the nation's problems and the party it would like to see controlling Congress.
Of course, a more relevant question is how voters think their individual congressman or woman is doing. Although this article is hardly convincing there are other signs that the GOP may be in trouble. For example, in the Minnesota race to succeed Mark Dayton, the Democrat has surged out to a big early lead:
DFL Senate candidate Amy Klobuchar has opened up a strong early lead over GOP rival Mark Kennedy in a Minnesota Poll that shows Klobuchar with 50 percent of likely voters' support, compared with 31 percent for Kennedy.
Much can change between now and November. But in what had widely been considered a close race, Klobuchar in midsummer has more support than Kennedy in nearly every demographic category: men, women, liberals, independents, lower- and upper-income Minnesotans, seniors, urban dwellers, suburbanites and outstaters.
Kennedy is most popular with younger Minnesotans -- he leads Klobuchar 63 to 16 percent among those under age 25 -- and with Republicans, but he is behind in nearly every other category the July 6-11 poll measured.
It is also borne out in other races that were not supposed to be competitive but which are surprisingly turning out to be so. For example, Arizona's Senator Jon Kyl should be sitting pretty right now, running for reelection in a red state with two terms under his belt, and a "Top Ten" rating from Time Magazine. Instead he's in a dogfight with a challenger who has almost no elective experience.
A lot can change between now and November. But we're going to have to make it change; the media are going to be negative every step of the way.
Updates: Captain Ed says not to believe the Strib's polls; they consistently understate Republican performance.
New York Giants: Eli Manning has not yet proven he's a quality NFL quarterback. He's shown the necessary progress that gives the team hope, but he's gotta start converting potential into touchdown passes. Tim Hasselbeck is officially the backup, but Rob Johnson is also on the roster, which is stupid.
Dallas Cowboys: Drew Bledsoe is moving rapidly up the career interception list; he's at 198. Incredibly durable; with the exception of 2001 and his rookie year, Bledsoe has started all but three regular season games. Tom Brady definitely caught a bit of luck there. Good ballplayer, but has always had problems with the INTs. Tony Romo is the official backup with Drew Henson now third string.
Washington Redskins: I've always liked Mark Brunell, he's a solid player. He's had incredible success in the playoffs on the road. No Hall of Famer barring some late career magic, but well above average at the QB position for many years. Backup is officially Todd Collins, who last started a game in 1997 for the Buffalo Bills. Patrick Ramsey's still around.
Philadelphia Eagles: Donovan McNabb is a terrific player; his 2-1 TD to interception ratio indicates brilliance as a passer. In the postseason he's won 7 games which isn't historic (yet), but it's definitely in rare territory. Among active players, only Brady and Favre (with 10 each) have won more postseason games as a starter. Backup is Jeff Garcia, still a fine player.
NFC North
Chicago: Rex Grossman has now started 7 NFL games. He appears to have the arm to play in the NFL; does he have the head? Kyle Orton got a lot of attention last year because the Bears won, but he sure does not appear to be a good player.
Minnesota: Daunte's gone, and Brad Johnson sent him packing--didn't it work the other way around years ago? Johnson's added a Super Bowl ring to his trophy room since he left. Official backup is Shaun Hill, who's the Cliff Stoudt of his generation; five years on an NFL roster, no passes thrown.
Detroit: Josh McKown is the starter. He's got a live arm, but, um, always had an acne problem. Jon Kitna can play and probably will.
Green Bay: Favre's been a great player and yet a tremendous disappointment. One of my favorite little things to look at is 30-touchdown seasons. There are not a lot of players who've thrown 30 TDs in an NFL campaign; it is a signature mark of greatness. Bret Favre has thrown for 30 or more touchdowns in a season eight times in his career. His career looks more likely to end with a whimper than a bang at this point.
NFC South
Tampa Bay: Chris Simms seems to be developing into a fine young ballplayer. It may not happen, but he's shown every sign of being a solid quarterback with excellent potential. Tim Rattay's one of those unrecognized gems; kudos to Gruden for picking him up.
Carolina: Jake Delhomme has left no questions unanswered. He's as good a quarterback as there is in the NFC. Chris Weinke, the backup, has nothing but unanswered questions.
Atlanta: Michael Vick's speed and quickness are dazzling, but he just doesn't throw well enough to make it as an NFL starter. I'm not yet sold on Matt Schaub, but he did play extremely well against the Patriots.
New Orleans: Brees is a heckuva pickup if he's really healed. He's a great player if he does what he did in 2004 and 2005. Backup is Todd Bouman, who looks like he can play but is not going to press Brees for the job at age 34.
NFC West
Seattle: There's nothing not to like about Matt Hasselbeck, now that he's started winning playoff games. Seneca Wallace, the backup, is unproven.
St. Louis: Bulger's the starter; he's a pretty good player but not very durable. He's won a playoff game on the road, so his ability to win in the postseason is established. Frerotte's okay in the right situation, but it doesn't look like he's coming into that in St. Louis.
San Francisco: Too early to tell about Alex Smith; he played horribly last year but so did John Elway, Troy Aikman and Terry Bradshaw their rookie years. Ken Dorsey is the backup, which is a good sign the 49ers still don't know what they're doing. He does not have an NFL arm, not even close to one.
Arizona: Kurt Warner is the starter, and when he's healthy he's one of the best in the league. Unfortunately he hasn't been consistently healthy for awhile. Matt Leinart dropped into the Cardinals' lap in the draft, but he'll probably be manning the clipboard for most of this season.
Rating the starters, top to bottom, based on my assessment of their likely success this year (not their past glory):
1. Jake Delhomme 2. Matt Hasselbeck 3. Donovan McNabb (could easily be #1) 4. Brad Johnson 5. Drew Brees (if healthy he could rank higher) 6. Mark Brunell 7. Kurt Warner 8. Mark Bulger 9. Michael Vick 10. Chris Simms 11. Eli Manning 12. Drew Bledsoe 13. Brett Favre 14. Rex Grossman 15. Josh McKown 16. Alex Smith
Update: One of the young guys (Smith, Grossman, Manning, Simms) will take the big step forward this year and become the talk of the league. If I had to guess I'd say Simms.
The Ankle-Biters report that the Wilsons are grubbing for loose change to help fund the lawsuit. What, the lawyers aren't doing it on a contingency basis? I wonder why that could be? Maybe because they know Joe (Liar) Wilson and Valerie (Secret Agent) Plame aren't going to win?
More right-wing bloggers are attacking me. Today Michelle Malkin noted that my fast included vanilla ice cream. Hey, I said I was going to fast, not die! And it's still fasting because I haven't had anything solid to eat. It's not like I had Chunky Monkey.
Yes, I suppose I should have mentioned it in my prior posts. But Michelle Malkin going out to a Jamba Juice outlet and checking with the cashier as to whether it's cheating was really unfair. I checked with Diane Wilson, and she said it's fasting as long as they blend it up really good. It's called a juice fast. A banana unblended is not fasting; a banana blended is a completely different thing. And I did not have the "mango concoction", although it sounds delicious, and I'll have to try it the moment I get back to Bushitler's America.
Allahpundit discusses Marshall's first column at Time Magazine. Marshall writes:
[N]ot long after the champagne corks stopped popping at Bush campaign headquarters, terror alerts seemed to go out of style. The color codes became yesterday’s news. With the exception of one warning about mass-transit facilities in response to the London bombing on July 7, 2005, that was pretty much it until this summer. I live in lower Manhattan and my wife works in a building overlooking Ground Zero. So I want to know when something’s really up and not worry that I’m getting bamboozled to amp the President’s approval rating.
Can I prove any of this was politically motivated? Of course not. But that’s the magic of the terror-alert song and dance. There’s no way to know. All the key facts are veiled in secrecy, as they must be. So it’s impossible to know from the outside whether it’s on the level or not. But with another election looming, it seems we’re about to get a bunch of new chances to wonder.
What a freaking dolt! This "I question the timing" crap has been going on for years now. Obvious question: If these terror alerts are so good for Bush's poll numbers, why does he use them in July? Wouldn't it make a whole lot more sense to issue the warnings in late October? I know, I know, just wait and he will.
Allah makes a terrific point:
The truly amazing thing is that he bases his argument on the assumption that terror alerts/arrests necessarily benefit the right. Which, we can all agree, is a fair assumption, but which also underscores how hopelessly compromised the left is on national security. If, five years after 9/11, the mere possibility of terrorism is enough to send voters scurrying for the tender embrace of the GOP, then Marshall has bigger things to worry about than what color Chertoff’s thermometer is this month.
Hugh Hewitt was talking about this with Mark Steyn during my drive home today:
HH: So Mark Steyn, do you think the American political electorate is watching this, and understanding again what we talk about a lot. There's a serious party in the United States. It might not be always right. It isn't always right. It makes mistakes. But there's also a fundamentally feckless and silly party, and it's the Democratic Party, and it's the political left.
MS: Yeah, well, you know, a Canadian blogger, Kathy Shaidle, who I like tremendously, her website. She said you know, Alan Colmes has said he's agnostic on the matter of whether 9/11 was an inside job. Now let's take him at his word. If these people, high up in the Democratic Party, seriously thought the president of the United States had committed, deliberately killed thousands of Americans...you know, Kathy said if that happened in her country, in Canada, she wouldn't want to live in that country anymore. She'd get her passport, she'd get her stuff together, and she'd get out of there. And the fact that you can sort of say Bush killed thousands of Americans, and then sit out on your cafe in San Francisco, sipping your venti latte, as if that's just something normal...I mean, this is pathetic. There's a disease in the Democratic Party that they've got to cure, because it's not good for the political system.
As it happens, because of my 9-11 blogging over at Screw Loose Change, I happen to have the clip of Colmes talking about his agnosticism:
It comes right at the 3:00 mark. Colmes is echoing the guest, Bob Bowman, who lies at about 0:55 by saying "I'm agnostic about these conspiracy theories...", which is clearly not true.
A great example of the unseriousness of the Democrats is the attempted purge of Joe Lieberman. Here's a classic example of this in a column from CBS liberal columnist Dotty Lynch:
One of those who are so worried about the state of the Democrats is conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks. He wails that the campaign against Lieberman, "the most kind-hearted and well-intentioned of men," is a liberal inquisition designed to drive Scoop Jackson Democrats out of the party.
When conservatives start publicly worrying about the Democratic Party losing members, it may be a sign that the Democrats are actually onto something. (Earth to Brooks: the Scoop Democrats, with the possible exception of Jack Murtha, departed a long, long time ago.)
The reason many Connecticut voters are so upset with well-intentioned Joe Lieberman is because of his vaunted principles. They don't like them and are trying to let him and the nation know. Isn't that what primaries and elections are about? Voters get to chose candidates who will carry out policies they want.
Lieberman supported and still supports President Bush's policy on the war in Iraq, which many believe is immoral and misguided and he has an opponent, Ned Lamont, who is more in synch with the voters on this issue. Politics has become so technical and bloodless that it is hard for the pros to understand that voters can get quite passionate about issues, especially moral issues - like war and peace.
It is, of course, as if the WWII Republicans had decided to go after one of their own members in 1944 for not opposing FDR's war plans.
But where the historical precedent ends is that the anti-war movement of the late sixties and seventies was viewed by many as legitimate and courageous.
Chortle. Well, at least she got the past tense right.
The scarcity of 1960s-style protests against the war, says sociologist Todd Gitlin, is due to an "ambivalence about what to do, a lack of belief that protest would matter, and a lack of a counterculture that supports protest."
Excluding, of course, that same old counterculture from the 1960s.
Here's an example of the depth of thought to be found over at TPM Muckraker:
In advance of its August publication date, GQ has released a big piece on Ralph Reed today, with one gem in particular: a plan hatched by Reed and Jack Abramoff which sounds suspiciously like "mortgaging old black people," as a former Reed associate told the magazine.
In July of 2003, Abramoff and Reed considered launching something called the Black Churches Insurance Program.
We know how this scheme would have gone, because Abramoff pitched something similar to a cash-strapped Texas tribe, the Tigua. Basically, since the tribe couldn't pay Abramoff, he offered to arrange "a life-insurance policy for every Tigua 75 or older." When those elders died, the death bene?ts would have gone to Abramoff through one of his non-profits. The Tigua didn't take Abramoff up on the offer, but it was too good of an idea to let go.
So Abramoff apparently thought black churches were a good target. This would have been the same thing, according to GQ's Sean Flynn, except that it was African-Americans. Or as "a former associate of Reed's" told GQ, "Yeah... it sounds like Jack approached Reed about mortgaging old black people.”
The failed con took more than a year to play out, by which time the Tiguas were pretty much broke. So Abramoff came up with a way for his marks to continue paying him: the Tigua Elder Legacy Project. Abramoff would arrange, at no cost to the tribe, a life-insurance policy for every Tigua 75 or older. When those elders died, the death bene?ts would be paid to Eshkol Academy, a private school Abramoff had founded near Washington. Eshkol, in turn, would then pay Abramoff’s fee to continue lobbying on behalf of the surviving Tiguas. Morbid opportunism disguised as charity: Each dead Tigua would be cash in the lobbyist’s pocket.
Anybody know the obvious problem with this nuttiness? That's right, life insurance on people 75 years old is not cheap; in all probability, Abramoff would pay as much in premiums as he would make from death benefits. In other words, it's a stupid idea as a money generator.
Perhaps the most surprising part is his revelation that a huge key to Bush’s—and the GOP's—victory in 2004 was the hundreds of thousands of small Bible groups that served as impromptu political action groups. They generally share the same values, the same ideals—and the same politics. And that, Hynes discovered, is how the word spread and things happened all across the country for 2004. Not through massed marches, big celebrity concerts and billionaire bucks that the liberals employed—but word of mouth.
I will have my own review of In Defense of the Religious Right next week. Pat is one of the co-bloggers over at Ankle-Biting Pundits.
Update: Third Wave Dave reports that Pat was on the radio with Andrea Shea King and Mark Vance the other day.
Called Connecticut for Lieberman. The good news is that there are no CfL bloggers calling for Joe's head.
But some of the most outspokenly Zionist Democrats have suggested that the current political climate has made Mr. Lieberman, as a prominent Jewish hawk, vulnerable to blog-driven criticism.
“We do have a problem with progressives and those in the blogosphere, because the Palestinian position seems to be perfect for the Internet world of pithy back-and-forth and 30-second You Tube tapes, where the Zionist position is more at home in a seven-page New York Review of Books article,” said Representative Anthony Weiner, a pro-Israel hawk who opposes the war in Iraq.
I do think that liberals have come to sympathize with the Palestinians. This is because the frame with which liberals view the world is often in terms of oppressor/oppressed; a worldview that often leads to ridiculous claims that the Israelis are no better than the Nazis.
I'm not sure how many liberals are motivated by this aspect of Lieberman. As Moulitsas and Hamsher have pointed out, they are not attacking other Democrats who supported the war, including Diane Feinstein. They claim the central issue is Lieberman's willingness to attack his fellow Democrats for not showing that support.
“Senator Lieberman, sometimes he seems to go out of his way to undermine the Democrats and poke a stick in the eye of Democrats,” Mr. Lamont said Monday evening as he sipped an iced tea and dug into a plate of potato skins in Wallingford. “It’s President Bush, aided by Senator Lieberman, in many cases, that has taken this country way off its historical norm.”
Similarly, the aforementioned liberal bloggers say that the anti-Semitism charge is just a feint to draw attention away from the broad and increasingly well-disciplined opposition to Mr. Lieberman among the party’s grassroots.
Increasingly well-disciplined? I take it the writer has not been reading over at Firedoglake.
I didn't see it the first time through because it's very brief, but when Tom Delay's mug shot appears, look at the case number at the bottom. Red State is right; this is disgusting.
Sister Toldjah spanks Glenn Greenwald for his tepid condemnation of Deb Frisch (the blogstalker who threatened Jeff Goldstein's two-year-old son) and his simultaneous, "Why aren't the righty bloggers condemning this other post".
Greenwald's a bright guy, but I don't recollect him taking the lefty blogosphere to task over their sins, and Sister Toldjah does a good job of checking on that:
For someone who supposedly doesn’t tie himself to either party, Greenwald has this peculiar fascination with slamming all things conservative, while curiously staying either silent or utilizing the generalized ‘both sides have crazies’ condemnation routine towards the left. His assertion about the right having to "dig" to find reprehensible statements by the left is laughable - there are many more out there beyond the examples I posted which don’t require any digging beyond a simple Google search.
BTW, here's the post over at the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler that Greenwald wants us to condemn:
So keep that in mind. Should we ever make the mistake of capturing any of the perpetrators of the war crime against PFCs Menchaca and Tucker alive, we can forget about interrogating them in order to catch the rest, according to the Supreme Whores. Well, unless they’re willing to give up information if we ask “pretty please?”, since anything other than that has been deemed illegal by those blackrobed tyrants. Are we exaggerating? Try doing anything to those mutilating darlings of the Supremes in order to extract life-saving intel from them, and then wait for the Supreme Whores to decide that you were “humiliating” them in doing so.
Five ropes, five robes, five trees.
Some assembly required.
Clearly a joke, not terribly funny, arguably offensive. Certainly not something that I would applaud, but also not something I'd get on my high horse about.
Greenwald specializes in this moaning about the righty blogosphere and how hypocritical they are for not condemning what he wants them to condemn.
Provided we do not withdraw our troops before then, on Columbus Day we will conduct a roll call of your corps. If by that time any or all of you are still among us, we will know that you have furtively and cynically violated the terms of your solemn pledge, since no one has ever survived a genuine hunger strike for more than seventy days.
Well, that last bit made me a little nervous, because I'm supposed to hold out for about 61 days, which seems to be cutting it pretty close. But I can tell you that Diane Wilson and Dick Gregory are going to stick with the fast until the troops come home. Diane looks like she can last awhile, if you know what I mean, but Dick doesn't look like he has any meat on his bones. I'm worried he won't even make it to September.
Sean left for Hollywood yesterday; good riddance! I couldn't resist asking him if he had to be there for his next film. Of course he made me pay for it by reciting a list of the restaurants he'd be eating at in the next few days and the specialties of the house.
Syd Barrett, co-founder of Pink Floyd, dead at age 60. Barrett was the original songwriter for the group, but left when he took too much LSD. The band was fortunate that Roger Waters was able to take over the songwriting chores.
The most prominent disgruntlement came in a “diary” written and posted Saturday by Maryscott O’Connor, who describes herself as a “contented and fulfilled…denizen of the Daily Kos community,” and is now the proprietor of My Left Wing, “a spin-off of Daily Kos.”
O’Connor, who was actually the subject of a 2,181-word front-page Washington Post article about the liberal blogosphere published in April, began her July 8 diary entitled “Something is Rotten in Blogmark”:
Sometimes I am embarrassed to call myself a member of DKos. This is one of those times. There is a sort of groupthink, Lord of the Flies kind of behaviour at DKos over certain issues that absolutely makes me nauseated.
O’Connor was referring to a diary by another Kossack, Richard Silverstein, published at DKos on June 26. It openly addressed some of the issues raised by The New Republic’s Jason Zengerle as well as the New York Times’ David Brooks.
Right now I'm not sure that I should be making commitments past the end of the month, but I did want to show up for Vermont's impeachment rallies. Of course, the moment I agreed I thought how wonderful it would be if Bush would call back all the troops the day I'm there and I could have a double stack of pancakes with Vermont Maple Syrup.
But I've gotta stop thinking about food, glorious food, hot sausage and mustard! While I'm in the mood, cold cabbage and custard!
Instead of the stage version of Oliver!, I feel like I'm on a particularly bad season of Survivor, where everybody else but me gets to eat. Sean has been particularly obnoxious about it, as I've said before. I never quite understood why Madonna dumped him, but now it becomes obvious. Does he have to smack his lips and rub his tummy while commenting on how that hit the spot?
But, you know, everybody is counting on little old me. Does it matter that I've been swallowing my toothpaste in the morning instead of spitting it out? I torture myself with these things even though this morning Dick was chewing gum. He claimed it was sugarless, but it sure smelled like Double Bubble grape to me.
I was thrilled to hear that the Reverend Al Sharpton has joined us. As you may recall, the Rev (as he asked me to call him) has been on a hunger strike before to close down some place in Puerto Rico and it worked, so obviously Mr Bush will have to shut down Iraq, because he can't let the Rev die. I just hope it happens quick because I really miss Applebee's pies and the Monster Tacos at Jack in the Box.
The portside blogs have been pushing this story for awhile, including some of the larger blogs like TPM, Josh Marshall's blog.
In a statement sent to E&P, Universal President and Editor Lee Salem said: "Last week a software program company official ran Ann Coulter's columns through a 'match-text' program, frequently used by teachers to detect original work. The New York Post cited two columns in which some text matched other published materials and also mentioned three snippets in her book, 'Godless: The Church of Liberalism.'
"In addition to looking at the columns mentioned in the New York Post story, we also reviewed a sampling of other columns that have been mentioned in the media. Like her book publisher, Crown, Universal Press Syndicate finds no merits to the allegations of plagiarism brought by the software company executive. There are only so many ways you can rewrite a fact and minimal matching text is not plagiarism.
Indeed, if you look at the supposed examples of plagiarism at TPM, it's not hard to see that they're pretty weak beer. Here's the first one, just to give you a flavor:
Example 1: "As New Hampshire attorney general in 1977, Souter opposed the repeal of an 1848 state law that made abortion a crime even though Roe v. Wade had made it irrelevant, predicting that if the law were repealed, New Hampshire 'would become the abortion mill of the United States.'"
Alleged Source: "In 1977, Souter as state attorney general spoke out against a proposed repeal of an 1848 state law that made abortion a crime -- even though the measure had been largely invalidated by the Supreme Court in Roe. vs. Wade… 'Quite apart from the fact that I don't think unlimited abortions ought to be allowed . . . I presume we would become the abortion mill of the United States[.]'" ("Liberals Leery as New Clues Surface on Souters Views," Los Angeles Times, Sept. 9, 1990) (Identified by John Barrie/New York Post)
As you can see, the elements that might convince one that the passages are copied amount to a) facts and b) quotes. But facts, as Lee Salem observed, can only be stated in so many ways, and quotes can only be stated in two ways: verbatim and paraphrased.
Our buddy Chris does some research on Patricia Madrid's position on global warming:
A more truthful description of what President Bush and Wilson stand for is "pro-American consumer policies". A recent report from the U.S. Energy Information Administration shows the regulations Madrid is suing for would add $90 billion to the cost it takes to generate electricity for the entire country. Guess who would be on the hook for this extra cost? You and me.
"We are excited about it," Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks basketball team, said yesterday. He described the show as "an opportunity to do news in what I like to call 'fearless mode,' what Dan calls 'with guts.' Go out there and find the stories we think will have impact."
Jeez, the media can't get enough of this guy right now. This article in New York magazine pretty much sums up the MSM position. There's the "leader of the lemmings" part, countered by the "he's really a moderate" part.
The sudden Democratic obeisance to the Netroots fills many in the party’s centrist cadres with despair bordering on panic—for they see the likes of Stoller and Moulitsas as “McGovernites with modems,” in the choice phrase of Marshall Wittman, a Republican apostate now ensconced at the Democratic Leadership Council. More than a few leading GOP lights agree, happily foreseeing the liberal bloggers’ leading the opposition down (okay, further down) the primrose path into lefty irrelevance. As Newt Gingrich put it bluntly in Newsweek, “I think the Republican Party has few allies more effective than the Daily Kos.”
But if, temperamentally, Kos comes across as a purity-enforcing commissar—self-appointed head of the Blogitburo—his substantive convictions make him rather harder to pigeonhole. “He’s a former soldier, pro–free trade, and anti–gun control,” notes Simon Rosenberg, president of the progressive New Democrat Network. “The resistance to him in Washington isn’t about issues—it’s generational. Markos represents a new generation taking control, asserting leadership, shaping the conversation. That’s why the old New Democrats are mad at the more partisan edge of the new New Democrats. They feel their power threatened.”
But this part is ridiculous:
On its face, this sort of strategizing is impressive enough—yet what makes it even more so is the contrast with the utter disarray on display over money in the Democratic Party’s upper echelons. A little more than a month ago, a meeting between party chair Howard Dean and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Rahm Emanuel broke out into a yelling match. The dispute centered on Dean’s insistence on a “50-state strategy,” with resources being invested broadly and with an eye beyond 2006, and Emanuel’s belief that cash should be funneled predominantly into races where Democrats stand the best chance of making gains. (Democrats must pick up fifteen seats in the House and six in the Senate to retake control of Congress.) The two men haven’t spoken since.
Basically Kos sides with Dean, and doesn't want to target money only to races where the Democrats have a chance of winning. His "strategizing" amounts to wasting the one asset that he has, which is his ability to raise money.
This is actually a pretty clearheaded column from Chait, which means that some Lefty should be starting the "Open Letter to Jonathan Chait" blog any moment now.
But if Lieberman's allies are irritating and often wrongheaded, alas, his enemies are worse. Lieberman recently declared, "I have loyalties that are greater than those to my party." Markos Moulitsas, the lefty blogger from Daily Kos who has appeared in a Lamont commercial and has made Lieberman's defeat a personal crusade, posted this quote on his website in the obvious belief that it's self-evidently absurd. But shouldn't we all have greater loyalties than the one to our party — say, to our country? Partisanship isn't nothing, but must it be everything?
Moulitsas and many of his allies insist that they just want Democrats to win. But in fact, they believe that any deviation from the party line — except for a few circumscribed instances, such as Democrats running for office in red states — is an unforgivable crime. They have consigned large chunks of the center-left to enemy status. It is an odd way to go about building a majority.
It's the only way to go about building a majority that isn't a carbon copy of the other party. Liberals have been turned into pariahs not just in the country, but among certain center-left (I would argue center-right) politicians who have allowed the party to be unnecessarily dragged to the right out of a failed experiment in third-way politics while the Republicans were playing brute partisan politics. The proof is in the pudding. We are in the minority and have been for quite some time now. And this polarized 50/50 nation always seems to just tilt enough to the right that we get screwed. "Centrists" like Lieberman are the dupes who make that possible.
Get it? Liberals are in the minority and have been for some time now, and the way to get back into the majority is to become more liberal, and get rid of these "center-left" folks like Joe Lieberman. The Democrats can only grow the party by shrinking it.
