This News Flash: Water Is Still Wet

This editorial appeared this morning in the Bucks County Courier Times.

Experts agree: Nobody to blame for the flood

Good news and bad news came out of Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick's flood hearing this week. The good news is there's nobody to blame. Not the developers, not the up-river reservoir operators, not the folks who stood in the way of the dam, not even global warming.

No, the flood was caused by, get this, lots of rain.

The bad news is - there's nobody to blame.

This excerpt appeared in this news article by Courier Times reporter Pamela Batzel.

...Mary Shafer, the local author of “Devastation on the Delaware,” a book about the 1955 flood published in October, maintained that global warming and development are significant factors in the recent spate of high water that has overtaken riverside communities.

Development is having a “huge impact,” she said. The amount of surface covered by buildings, parking lots and other structures has “grown exponentially” since the 1950s, she said. Logically, it means more water is running into tributaries and then into the river, she said.

At the same time, some believe global warming is causing more intense hurricanes and changing weather patterns generally. The most recent flood was due to tropical moisture that came up on a jet stream “taking a strange pattern” for this time of year, Shafer said. It “has to do with the oceans being so warm,” which is a result of the Earth heating up.

Shafer acknowledged she is not a meteorologist but said that she’s well-studied and that, “privately, [experts] will admit a lot of the anecdotal evidence points to global warming.”

And that leaves anybody who has an interest in preventing future floods scratching their heads.

We don't mean to treat a serious situation un-seriously (sure you don't). The recent flood - the third one in less than two years - is causing a lot of expense and heartache for a lot of people. So, naturally, people want to point a finger. Beyond the therapeutic value of laying blame, it gives us something to fix or stop or change.

So, how do you stop rain?

The obvious answer is you don't. You either find ways to protect areas given to flooding, or you help people living or working in a flood area to move out. And despite the impression that Delaware River floods are a newly recurring phenomenon, fact is the river has a history of flood clusters.

As we reported Monday, the river overflowed its banks twice between March 1902 and October 1903, twice between 1913 and 1914, twice between 1940 and 1942, and twice between 1984 and 1986.

Here is more from Batzel’s article on the overflows the editorial just mentioned.

Take the two floods that hit the region in March 1902 and October 1903. The river crested in Trenton at 3.6 feet above flood stage on March 2. In the fall of the following year, it crested at 28.5 feet, or 8.5 feet above flood stage.

The region also suffered floods in doubles between 1913 and 1914, 1940 and 1942, and 1984 and 1986, although those floods were less severe. The worst of the six floods only exceeded flood stage by 1.2 feet in Trenton.

So let’s step back and take a look at this, OK? It sounds like the recent flooding (three times in 18 months) is comparable to the flooding in 1902 and 1903, but not to the flooding from 1913 to 1986 in terms of the number of feet that exceeded the flood stage. For the Courier Times to make it sound like all of the previous flooding is comparable to what we have recently experienced is highly disingenuous to say the least.

So let the finger-pointing come to an end. And let's focus attention on getting people out of their homes and businesses if they're inclined, or elevated if that's what they prefer.

Of course, the editorial could also address this great post from Above Average Jane which has gone unanswered by Mikey and his minions (and it will probably remain that way); namely, why was it necessary for Fitzpatrick to hold his hearings when, as a member of the Delaware River Basin Commission (along with Jim Gerlach), he should have been aware of the issues related to the flooding anyway?

(I mean, the editorial COULD ask that question, but they won’t of course because the paper doesn’t wish to be impertinent. After all, the Courier Times recently published a Guest Opinion by a writer who noted that Fitzpatrick voted against HR 810 in favor of stem cell research after saying he supported it when campaigning for his current House seat, but the paper went out of its way in the Guest Opinion to note that Fitzpatrick is apparently reconsidering stem cell development, but only not from a blastocyst, which, at this stage of development in this promising science, is little more than a theoretical concept concerning humans.)

So, as far as the Courier Times is concerned, we’re just supposed to trust Mother Nature and Saint Mikey, and the residents of Yardley borough are supposed to do little more than hope our Repug house representative actually decides to follow up on his proposed federally subsidized elevation plan (noted in Batzel’s article) and pray that they don’t get clobbered again.

Oh, and by the way, I guess this was just “an accident of nature” also that had no relation to global warming or climate change, huh (especially coming upon the heels of the recent flooding).

One more thing: to help Bucks County flooding victims, click here.

Still Beyond Our Reach

Dr. Dean gets it (from Dubya's latest debacle yesterday)...

Today George Bush chose political posturing over human life, denying hope to millions of Americans, their families and loved ones who are affected by debilitating diseases.

He used his first-ever veto to stop the discovery of new cures for diseases like juvenile diabetes, leukemia, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and many others. More than 70% of Americans from every walk of life -- whether in the faith community, the science lab, the hospital or at the bedside of a sick relative -- and majorities in both chambers of Congress disagree, but that didn't stop him.

The bill he vetoed wasn't a sweeping change -- it was a small, practical measure that would have made a big difference for medical research based on sound science. But the consequences are sweeping: the proposed law would have allowed research on excess embryos generated during processes like fertility treatments -- embryos that would otherwise simply be discarded.

Now is the time to speak out. Send a message to your representatives letting them know that you support cure discovery now:

http://www.democrats.org/curediscovery

If George Bush truly believed his rhetoric about stem cells, he would do something about the processes that create the excess embryos in the first place. But he won't. They will continue to go unused (his spokesman limply calls it a "tragedy"), and cures will continue to be beyond our reach.

Bush may not be willing to choose cure discovery over his right-wing base, but the vast majority of Americans support cure research.

Even after his veto, Democrats in Congress will continue to keep the pressure on to get more votes. If Republicans refuse to join the cause and override Bush's veto, it will have to be decided at the ballot box in November. Democrats will continue to fight to keep this hope for the discovery of new cures alive.

The Congress and the rest of the country are paying attention right now, and we have to seize this moment to build the coalition of support for cure discovery. Please add your name to the list of supporters and we'll send your message to your representatives:

http://www.democrats.org/curediscovery

As a medical doctor, I'm offended at the political meddling in potentially life-saving research. All of our families could be touched by hope found through stem cell research: from juvenile diabetes to Alzheimer's, it offers the opportunity for new cures. Yet this important research has been dwindling because of restrictions put in place by Bush five years ago.

That's half a decade we have lost. How much longer will those suffering and their families have to wait?

People can disagree in good faith on this issue, but Bush's extraordinary action doesn't meet that threshold -- it smacks of political calculation. The opportunity to save lives of people with debilitating diseases, and to reduce suffering for them and their families, requires that a president respect the will of the people and the Congress.

Join the cause supporting cure discovery:

http://www.democrats.org/curediscovery

History will judge this veto as a sad political calculation.

Just a few votes stand in the way. With your support we'll get them -- either now, or in the new Democratic Congress you elect in November.

When we do, we will restore hope through life-saving research and cure discovery.

Thank you.

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.

I wish there was more I could do about this, but in PA, Arlen Specter has gone on record as supporting the research, but as far as Mikey and Santorum are concerned...well, let's just say they're "two peas in a pod" and leave it at that.

And by the way, here is another aspect of this tragedy.

Standing Up

This came from one of my "field correpondents" (thanks), and it has to do with five designers who recently declined an invitation to attend the White House for a breakfast that honored them as winners of the National Design Award in communications design.

The text of their letter declining the invitation appears below.

Dear Mrs. Bush:

As American designers, we strongly believe our government should support the design profession and applaud the White House sponsorship of the Cooper Hewitt National Design Museum. And as finalists and recipients of the National Design Award in Communication Design we are deeply honored to be selected for this recognition. However, we find ourselves compelled to respectfully decline your invitation to visit the White House on July 10th.

Graphic designers are intimately engaged in the construction of language, both visual and verbal. And while our work often dissects, rearranges, rethinks, questions and plays with language, it is our fundamental belief, and a central tenet of "good" design, that words and images must be used responsibly, especially when the matters articulated are of vital importance to the life of our nation.

We understand that politics often involves high rhetoric and the shading of language for political ends. However it is our belief that the current administration of George W. Bush has used the mass communication of words and images in ways that have seriously harmed the political discourse in America. We therefore feel it would be inconsistent with those values previously stated to accept an award celebrating language and communication, from a representative of an administration that has engaged in a prolonged assault on meaning.

While we have diverse political beliefs, we are united in our rejection of these policies. Through the wide-scale distortion of words (from "Healthy Forests" to "Mission Accomplished") and both the manipulation of media (the photo op) and its suppression (the hidden war casualties), the Bush administration has demonstrated disdain for the responsible use of mass media, language and the intelligence of the American people.

While it may be an insignificant gesture, we stand against these distortions and for the restoration of a civil political dialogue.

The letter was signed by Michael Rock, Susan Sellers, Georgie Stout, Paula Scher and Stefan Sagmeister.

Kudos to all five, and you have my respect, even more so because of some of the bilious comments that followed in the story I linked to above.

Fiscal Mismanagement, Weldon Style

From this PA7Watch story…

After attacking Joe Sestak for taking campaign contributions from Sandy Berger and Mary McCarthy, the Weldon camp accepted a $1,000 contribution from former state Senate Majority Leader F. Joseph Loeper, a "tax felon turned lobbyist who did jail time for obstructing an IRS probe."

The response of the Sestak campaign (as noted here)...

"'Curt can keep the $1,000 to cover his recent tab at the Borgata,' said Sestak spokesman Ryan Rudominer, referring to campaign expenditures flagged in January by former Democratic congressional candidate Bryan Lentz.

Weldon aides have said those expenditures - including $502 at the Borgata Hotel, Casino and Spa in Atlantic City, N.J.; $810 at an asphalt sealcoating company; $241 at Dick's Sporting Goods and several meals in Wildwood, N.J., the location of Weldon's old summer home - are legitimate uses of campaign funds."

And I love the part from Michael Puppio, Weldon’s campaign manager, saying that Sestak should return any money received from the “flag-draped coffins” ad; 1) Those ads are appropriate and should not have been pulled, and 2) Assuming that the amount of ad money that could have gone to Sestak could be calculated anyway, it would be a comparatively miniscule amount to anything raised by Weldon.

And to think that “Crazy Curt” once criticized Sestak for the $350 contribution from Mary McCarthy, the former CIA analyst who was dismissed but has denied leaking classified information (removing any possible hint of impropriety as far as I’m concerned, even though the Repugs are unusually desperate to tar any Dem in light of their involvement with Jack Abramoff and Tom DeLay up to their eyeballs).

Keep looking for those pesky WMDs, Curt. They’re bound to be out there somewhere.

View Before You Spew

Inspired by this item from CNN...

“This is your captain announcing that we will begin our instantaneous, 5,000-foot descent shortly on this direct US Airways flight from Las Vegas to Jamaica, NY that is scheduled to land in approximately two hours. First, I wish to call your attention to the overhead compartment containing your air sickness bags. Please note the advertisement on the front of the bags for “E-Z Intestine” antacid tablets that are guaranteed to calm your digestive tract when any nasty turbulence suddenly occurs. This new product from our good friends at Shyster International Pharmaceuticals guarantees fast relief, and it comes in four tasty flavors: burnt spinach, coffee grounds, stale lavatory cake, and egg crème. It is not intended for use by nursing mothers, Methodists, left-handed albinos, anyone who has lived in Cameroon for a period of longer than five months, or people with delicate constitutions. You can always trust Shyster to know when it’s time to involuntarily release bodily fluids. Now please close your overhead compartments. Our free fall will commence momentarily.”

And what does it say about flying on US Airways, by the way, that they would think this is an appropriate news story?

Orrin Says "Yo!"

Was I the only one who was a bit surprised to see Sen. Orrin Hatch coming to the rescue of songwriter Dallas Austin last week?

Austin was sentenced to four years in a Dubai jail for carrying a gram of cocaine, at which point the following individuals got together and started working on his behalf to get him out.

A conservative Republican senator/songwriter (Hatch), an '80s R&B singer who is inexplicably massive in the Middle East (Lionel Richie), a real-estate mogul, several ambassadors from around the globe and a Grammy-winning producer who is best known for moving musical mountains — not political ones (Quincy Jones).

Wow, that's some "posse."

And how con-VEE-nient was this, by the way?

In a lucky coincidence, one of Austin's lawyers, Joel Katz, also happens to represent Hatch, a singer/songwriter who has recorded a number of religious and patriotic albums with titles such as My God Is Love, Put Your Arms Around the World, America United and How His Glory Shines.

Well, it's nice to see that Hatch is trying to free drug users in other countries instead of trying to blow up people's computers for a change.

To be fair, though, I should mention that Hatch is absolutely right on the issue of stem cell research, and President Stupid Head is poised to exercise the first veto of his fraudulent presidency today - unbelievable - not on bloated budgets full of tax cuts for the rich, not in opposition to warrantless spying or torture, but to kill funding for this important scientific cause (and Jonathan Turley of USA Today absolutely nailed it in his great column on this yesterday).

Supporting Our Troops, For A Change

The Patrick Murphy campaign unveiled its New GI Bill of Rights recently (reported today in the Bucks County Courier Times, but as usual, I was unable to find a link to the story from their "web site") in an effort to demonstrate committed leadership to the men and women in uniform who defend our country. The comprehensive lists includes proposals for fair pay, sufficient equipment including armor, expansion of TRICARE benefits for National Guard and Reserve personnel (are you reading this, Mikey?), granting citizenship to veterans who serve who aren’t citizens already, and allowing veterans on disability to collect their retirement pay.

Some of these proposals strike me as merely common sense (which can never be taken for granted on the part of those running our government, I realize), but others will require some budgetary maneuvers that I would like to see, most notably the permanent reinstitution of the estate tax and removal of the $90,000 ceiling on contributions to Social Security. Still, though, this to me shows typically committed leadership from a candidate in touch with the issues facing us every day.

This link takes you to information on the G.I. Bill passed by FDR that is the precedent for some of the reforms that Patrick has proposed.

As I read this writeup, I encountered more sneaky disinformation from Bushco in their version of the story of the Bonus Marchers, World War I veterans who came to Washington during the Great Depression seeking adjusted compensation for their military service. This is what the Department of Veterans Affairs has to say about it.

During the Great Depression, some veterans found it difficult to make a living. Congress tried to intervene by passing the World War Adjusted Act of 1924, commonly known as the Bonus Act. The law provided a bonus based on the number of days served. But there was a catch: most veterans wouldn't see a dime for 20 years.

A group of veterans marched on Washington, D.C., in the summer of 1932 to demand full payment of their bonuses. When they didn't get it, most went home. But some decided to stick around until they got paid. They were later kicked out of town following a bitter standoff with U.S. troops. The incident marked one of the greatest periods of unrest our nation's capital had ever known.

It’s true that it was a bitter standoff, but it was actually more than that, as noted here. Army Chief of Staff Douglas MacArthur fired into the crowd, and one veteran was killed and 50 veterans and Washington D.C. police injured as marchers were attacked with rifles and tear gas. It actually is a pretty despicable episode of our history (and by the way, Republican presidents Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover both opposed the compensation to the Bonus Marchers, and though Roosevelt did also, he at least tried to put them to work instead in the Citizens Conservation Corps).

When In Doubt, Hate The Gays

So it sounds like the Delaware County Sikh community is solidly behind “Crazy Curt” Weldon because both Weldon and Sikh representatives are opposed to gay unions of any kind.

Well, it looks like the Repugs will have to try again next year to ban same sex marriage (and you KNOW that will happen), since their amendment failed again today.

However, I don’t suppose that would matter to the Sikhs who might actually want to weigh the positions of Weldon and Joe Sestak on other issues (and Joe raised more money than Weldon in the second quarter of this year, by the way...he brought in $700,000, and by contrast, the long-time incumbent and career 7th district Repug politician of “Able Danger” infamy took in $400,000 – kind of a shame that that matters, but it does, and it says something about Sestak’s momentum).

How To Cut And Run

Over the weekend, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee pulled an ad that showed flag-draped coffins returning from Iraq at the request of Reps Chet Edwards of Texas and John Spratt of South Carolina, who contacted Rahm Emanuel and asked him to remove the ad. In its place, the DCCC replaced the Internet ad with a radio ad that targeted Rep. John Hostetler, R-Ind., for opposing an increase in the minimum wage.

This is why Democrats lose elections (and of course Spratt’s Repug opponent Ralph Norman praised the move; of course he would, since the Democrats are putting the Howitzer back into storage, so to speak, and deciding to fight the Repugs with pop guns instead).

Yes, addressing the issue of an increase in the minimum wage is important, but that issue doesn’t have the visceral impact of the Iraq War (I don’t know what it’s going to take to get the Democrats to understand that Iraq is “the alpha and the omega” when it comes to political hot button issues in the upcoming election).

Also, The American Prospect (via Kos) had a good post yesterday concerning an unguarded moment on this issue from House Majority Leader John Boehner.

Apparently it is necessary for Edwards and Spratt to receive a history lesson on how a Democrat once waged a successful re-election by creating a haunting TV ad image during a time when this person, Lyndon Johnson by name, obviously gave not a damn about offending anyone for the purpose of winning the campaign.

The Repugs have learned this lesson all too well. Maybe one day the Dems will relearn it also.

Romney To The Rescue?

While we were on Martha's Vineyard last week, the other big story was the Boston tunnel collapse as part of the "Big Dig" federal highway construction project.

Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly (a Democrat who happens to have his eye on the governor's job, by the way) has quite rightly made it clear that he intends to go after everyone involved in the project who may have been negligent in a manner that could have contributed to the collapse that killed Milena Delvalle and injured her newlywed husband Angel Delvalle, both of Costa Rica.

Since partisan blame is inevitable unfortunately, it should be pointed out that John Kerry objected to the appointment of Richard Capka as head of the Federal Highway Administration overseeing the project prior to Matthew Amorello's ownership of the project (Amorello is currently the head of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority). And as noted from here, Jim Kerasiotes was appointed as head of the project prior to that time (more on him appears below).

I thought this paragraph from the Blue Mass Group link was interesting:

...Maybe it's unseemly to get partisan about this right now, but here goes. Since 1991 - which is when most of the Big Dig construction has occurred - Republicans have been running the show. Yes, there has been an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature in all that time. But the Governor appoints the Turnpike Authority board members and the Highway Commissioner, as well as the head of every other state agency. Legislators don't make appointments. Every decision made by the Turnpike Authority, the Public Works Commissioner, or whoever was running the Big Dig over the last 16 years, every state inspector who failed to do his or her job, every failure to supervise outside contractors, all of that stuff can be traced directly back to one of four people: Bill Weld, Paul Cellucci, Jane Swift, or Mitt Romney. The Republicans have been managing this project for 16 years, and they must be held accountable for that. If you needed a reminder, here's a Globe story about Jim Kerasiotes, brought in by Bill Weld to manage the Big Dig, who was eventually forced to resign in disgrace following revelations of cost overruns and management failures, after years of assuring everyone that the project was "on time and on budget," and intimidating anyone who dared question him into silence.

More appears on this story from Blue Mass Group here.

I'm not saying that the Democrats should be entirely let off the hook on this. After all, they have an oversight function in this too (to me, saying that they should be is like saying any Democrat who supported the Iraq War is innocent because the Democrats weren't the majority party of all branches of government at the time).

However, I think it's ridiculous for Romney to act like he's going to save the day (dutifully reported in that manner by the tabloid Boston Herald last week, which was perversely funny actually) when he has been as big a malefactor in this mess as anyone.

This should all be turned over to the NTSB, as one Blue Mass Group commenter noted, especially since the first thing Romney apparently did after he tried to wrest control of the project from Amorello was go on vacation in New Hampshire and make assistant Kerry Healey acting governor.

I can now see why Romney thinks he's qualified to make a run for president; a move like that is right out of Dubya's playbook.

Update 7/27: Yeah, Amorello is partly to blame, but so are others, including Romney, who's using him as a scapegoat.

Update 7/31: At least when W.C. Fields wanted to make a racist remark, he had the good sense to say “an Ethiopian in the fuel supply” instead, Mitt (can you just feel the air whizzing out of Romney’s presidential “trial balloon,” which is what this had turned into for him?).

Calling Out "Mikey Moneybags"

This great letter from Chris Bowers appeared last Saturday in the Bucks County Courier Times (still trying to clean out my "in" box)...

Regarding the July 9th (letter to the editor) that claimed I was a "fat cat" who Patrick Murphy needs to "renounce." This writer clearly knows very little about me. In 2005, I made about $38K, which was the first time that I exceeded $30K. I have personally contributed a grand total of $50 to Patrick Murphy's campaign for Congress.

Through my web site, mydd.com, along with three friends of mine (including Markos Moulistas, whom the letter writer also indicated Murphy needs to "renounce"), I have helped raise money for Patrick Murphy, a progressive, fighting Democrat for whom I hold the highest respect. Patrick's campaign has captured the imagination of many local grassroots activists. As one of those activists who has been inspired by Patrick, I have decided to raise money for his campaign of my own accord.

Overall, we have raised $9,500 for Patrick, from 480 donors. With our average donation coming in at just under $20, I fail to see how we qualify as "fat cats." This is about as grassroots as fundraising can get.

By contrast, Congressman Michael Fitzpatrick has raised more than $800,000 from PACs alone. A quick look at opensecrets.org reveals that most of these PACs are from large corporations and far-right ideological organizations, including money from indicted former Republican House leader Tom DeLay. Many of these PACs, including Tom DeLay's, have given $10,000 or more to Fitzpatrick's campaign: more money than we raised combined. While Patrick Murphy raises money from small donors, Michael Fitzpatrick is the candidate who is bought and paid for by fat cats, extremist ideologues, and corrupt politicians in Washington, D.C.

As a final note, it needs to be said that Fitzpatrick's attempt to protect children from online predators is terrible public policy. His bill will not protect a single child from danger, but it will restrict grassroots organizing online (the netroots). As with Ginny Schrader in 2004, grass roots activists online have been inspired by the candidate challenging Fitzpatrick, and now we are working as hard as we can to elect Patrick Murphy.

Since one of the biggest dangers to Michael Fitzpatrick's re-election chances come from the netroots, he is trying to pass a law to restrict the grassroots activity of his political opponents. That is politics at its worst, and quite frankly un-American.

To help Patrick Murphy, click here.

The Spawn Of The Iraq War

I absolutely hate posting about the Middle East, mainly because there are many other people more knowledgeable on this topic than I am and also because it is nothing anymore but a total slam dance, so to speak, with Syria and Iran pulling the strings in Lebanon as Hezbollah and Israel blast each other to pieces.

To come up to speed a bit on this, I read this fine column from Trudy Rubin in the Inquirer yesterday, who as far as I'm concerned is one of the few journalists out there who knows what's going on with all of this, primarily because she's actually traveled to these countries and reported from the locations that are currently engulfed in violence.

Since the leaders of the industrialized nations must step forward and find some way to mediate this mess, this means of course that Tony Blair had to spring into action right away and try to get Putin and Hu of China to help also while Dubya is basking in the imaginary glow of attention he received for making a joke about a pig (and profanity into an open microphone is such a sign of mature, adult leadership, isn't it?).

(Yes, I know a lot of this was last week's news. Please bear with me - I'm trying to catch up.)

So I guess that means we can toss the "roadmap to Middle East peace" huh?

And while warnings went out to President Stupid Head and the ruling cabal about the Iraq War generating regional violence (warning which were dutifully ignored by the Repugs, of course), I think we know have seen those warnings come to hideous fruition.

Yes, the G-8 leaders have to do what heads of state do best at times like this, and that is generate photo ops while issuing declarations that will in all likelihood be ignored by the combatants until they decide to stop blowing the crap out of each other and sit down and talk for a little while. And I think Rubin made an excellent point by stating that this is Iran's way of showing that they ultimately are the new power in that area of the world that must be reckoned with, though they are of course overplaying their hand (and if you read Rubin's column, maybe you'll have the same reaction I did about her matter-of-fact statement that the Iraq War helped consolidate Iran's power - it would have been nice if the architects of this horrible fiasco had cared about the result or had some clue before the first shot was fired, wouldn't it?).

One more thing: I have a question for American Jews and Israelis who supported Dubya and the Iraq War.

Why didn't you know this would happen?

Why didn't you know an American incursion into Iraq would enflame U.S.-Israel-Arab tensions more than before, to the benefit of borderline cases like AhMADinejad and other terrorists?

Did you honestly believe that trying to shove anything approximating Democracy down the throats of the Sunnis and Shiites would yield any other result but this?

Why didn't you realize that Saddam Hussein - mean, rotten, nasty guy that he was - was A BUFFER against OUR REAL ENEMY? Are you going to realize that Clinton played this right when he was president by sending over some F-16s for an air strike every now and then to keep Hussein in line, and that that was all that was needed?

So you got played by the evangelicals and the "moral values" crowd on all of this also, huh? You thought Dubya was going to build "a shining city on a hill" in Baghdad and democracy would flourish from there to Tel Aviv?

God, how pathetic.

And I wouldn't care if it weren't for the fact that our people in Iraq (and why the hell are they STILL THERE ANYWAY??!!) will endure more hardship and brutality as a result of the Israeli attacks on Shiites, who we need to help maintain anything that might one day approximate stability in Iraq (all of this has been pointed out by Rubin, I know).

If Dubya really wanted to do us a favor, he'd exchange places with the pig the next time that meal is served. A dead, cooked barnyard animal may possibly bring us approximately the same degree of "leadership" that we currently have on this and other urgent matters.

Update 7/19: Robert Scheer nails it again.

An Islander No More

Please allow me a minute or two to recover from my utter "blogger withdrawal" and begin once more by pointing out that I would trade the heat and humidity of Dukes County, Massachusetts for that of the Philadelphia, PA area, primarily Bucks County and Trenton, NJ, in a heartbeat.

After long hours on the road from Woods Hole, MA up Route 28 north (for a rematch with the dreaded Bourne Rotary, which I managed to navigate successfully) and over the Bourne Bridge, across to 195 West over the Falls River into Providence, over the forever-and-a-day passage down 95 South to 278 East over the Tappan Zee Bridge, down the Garden State Parkway and over to the New Jersey Turnpike and back into PA, I am here to announce that I HAVE RETURNED!

I've tried to keep aware of what has been going on a bit, which hasn't been easy since we had such a great time in Katama on Martha's Vineyard over the last week. I tried to scrounge the odd copy of The New York Times and The Boston Globe every now and then, and I've lined up some posting topics that I'll try to get to as soon as possible.

First, though, I should point out how truly special a place Martha's Vineyard is and why it should be treated with care. The island is approximately 20 miles wide, and it boasts a population of about 14,000 or so in off-season which expands to over 100,000 in the summer.

There are no traffic lights on the island anywhere, and there is a hellacious five-way intersection at Vineyard Haven near the upper tip of the island that residents navigate at their utter peril. During the course of two trips (last year and 1998), we managed to get through it without getting tagged by another vehicle (and the added complication of increased moped usage, with the cycles/bikes/whatever the hell they are exactly taking up space on the highway and causing massive backups, didn't help either; a rider was killed on one in Oak Bluffs not far from Vineyard Haven earlier this summer, and there is currently a movement on the island to ban them altogether).

The plant life that springs forward from the island is spectacular. I can remember hyacinths in full bloom eight years ago, and this time around, it looked like the hydrangeas had gone absolutely insane, along with wild roses and impatiens on every corner with any vegetation at all, especially in Edgartown (the "old money" part of the island with wonderful old homes and bed and breakfast lodgings). We spent about a day and a half there when the weather wasn't cooperating (it was mainly dry but overcast for three days - Monday and Friday provided the best sunny weather for the beach).

The highlight of the whole week was probably the catamaran trip from Menemsha (the old fishing part of the island where much of "Jaws" was filmed) to Cuttyhunk Island across Buzzard's Bay above Rhode Island aboard the "Arabella," owned by Hugh Taylor of The Outermost Inn and piloted ably by our captain Croft with fine assistance from first mate Meredith. Croft let the young one take the wheel, and he followed his directions in fine fashion. Hugh met us at the dock when we returned; I was going to BS with him about how much he looked like his brother James, but I could tell how busy a man he was, running the Inn with his wife in high season.

We stayed at the Winnetu, a great inn in Katama with a fine kids program, and they threw a clambake on Wednesday evening, providing a canopy for everyone since the rain that would stay with us for a day or so had settled in. The 1 1/2-pound lobster was delicious along with the other cookout goodies, and the staff made s'mores for the kids afterwards when the magic show was over.

Those are some quick highlights of the trip, and now that we've had this great break, I'll plan to get back to business shortly between restarting the mail and the newspapers and sorting through the heaping pile of laundry. I needed to seriously take myself out of the loop from all of the Bush insanity and refocus a bit (and the first phone message we discovered when we got back was an automated plea from Mikey Fitzpatrick to vote for him...geez, it's summer, dude; isn't it JUST A BIT EARLY to start groveling for votes, especially since you said you'd win anyway and it was just a question of by how much?), and luckily I was able to do that.

"Once more unto the breach, dear friends..."

Maybe This Is A Sign

This is unbelievable even for Ann Coulter; so now we have the "Flatulent Raccoon" theory of how life came to exist?

What's next, the "Indigestive Pundit Theory" of the our origins, which state that everything began when a right-wing hatemonger belched out out what was supposed to be actual scientific fact but was instead regurgitated talking points from The Heritage Foundation and The National Review?

And speaking of icky stuff coming out of our bodies...

In our modern world of "the good foul," drawing blood from your opponent is never apparently punished as significantly as the victim has suffered.

This allows bladder tumors like Ann Coulter to suppurate over the public, much to their eventual reward.

So much of our public discourse has come to accept this moral metastasis that conservatives now complain when liberals use less than pristine language to reply to this downpour of pus and urine.

Ben Burrows
Elkins Park

Eeeewwwwwww! (I've read great stuff from Ben Burrows, but I will say that if he's going to invoke revolting images, Coulter is probably the most worthy reason for it I can think of).

Well, I don't know about you, but bodily emissions from woodland animals (and humans) is where I draw the line. Besides, as I noted below, I'm getting ready to blow this popsicle stand for about seven days or so anyway (up to a beautiful blue state location where, in all probability, I won't have internet access, so I won't be able to share/inflict my wisdom on you).

You'll probably see me again on or about the 16th or 17th, so have fun, and in the words of Atrios, try not to accidentally shoot anyone in the face (this has sound).

Giving Us A Lube Job

So I'm getting the Doomsymobile ready for an upcoming road trip down at Mr. Goodshaft's, and the local area "happy talk" "news" show is on, when suddenly, I hear the baritone voice we have all been conditioned to dread for years:

"This is a special report from NBC News. Now, here is correspondent Brian Williams."

Oh great, I think to myself. North Korea has launched another missile. More troops have been killed in Iraq. Somebody famous has died, or Ken Lay has revived himself and fled the country.

No, corporate network mouthpiece Williams informs us, it's just to announce a press conference with Dubya from Chicago (and though I'm annoyed to know that President Stupid Head is going to take over and tap dance about nothing, I'm glad it's nothing worse than that).

And just to confirm that this is about nothing, Williams immediately goes to Tim Russert, who brings us this insider "scoop" that Bush has decided to take to the road and field questions to get away from the Beltway media establishment, or something like that (if so, then what exactly does that make you, I think to myself).

I couldn't tell you what Dubya talked about, because I honestly have tried to listen to him, but I can't stand it. He's proven himself time and again to be a total liar, and I'm not going to waste my time trying to disseminate the tiny particles of fact thoroughly immersed in his fiction.

And I have news for you; there were four other people in the waiting area who were also getting their vehicles serviced, and none of them were listening to him either, only talking among themselves and treating Dubya as nothing more than a distraction (and by the way, what I DID manage to hear was more rambling about "jobs American workers won't do" and "continuing to fight the war on terror," etc., but I heard maybe one question in the midst of about ten minutes of his ramblings).

There was a time when Americans actually listened when the president spoke. Maybe that will come again in my lifetime. We'll see.

Where The Rubber Meets The Road (7/6)

As published in last Sunday's Inquirer,here is how Philadelphia-area members of Congress were recorded on major roll-call votes last week.

House

Voting rights. The House rejected, 254-167, a proposal to strip the 1965 Voting Rights Act of a requirement that voting officials provide ballot information in multiple languages. The vote occurred during debate on the Justice Department's 2007 budget (HR 5672).

A yes vote was to adopt the amendment.

Voting yes: Joseph R. Pitts (R., Pa.) and Curt Weldon (R., Pa.).

Voting no: Robert E. Andrews (D., N.J.), Robert A. Brady (D., Pa.), Michael N. Castle (R., Del.), Charles W. Dent (R., Pa.), Chaka Fattah (D., Pa.), Michael G. Fitzpatrick (R., Pa.), Frank A. LoBiondo (R., N.J.), H. James Saxton (R., N.J.), Allyson Schwartz (D., Pa.) and Christopher H. Smith (R., N.J.)

Not voting: Jim Gerlach (R., Pa.) and Tim Holden (D., Pa.).

This amendment even came up in the first place because of an organization called ProEnglish led by someone named KC McAlpin. ProEnglish, according to this Kos link, is one of thirteen like-minded organizations founded by anti-immigrant advocate John Tanton. Tanton's multi-million dollar web of groups includes not only ProEnglish and another group called NumbersUSA, but also the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and the Federation for Immigration Reform (FAIR).

Anyway, a form letter was generated to House Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner in response to what should have been an automatic renewal of the act, but instead, the letter proposed removing the multiple languages provision in concert with the anti-immigrant activities of the Tanton organization. Further down in the comments to the Kos story is a list of the House reps who signed the McAlpin letter, and Weldon’s name is on that list (didn’t see Pitts).

Go get ‘em, Joe!.

Medical records. The House defeated, 230-189, a bid to deny funding in HR 5672 (above) for the FBI's issuance of National Security Letters to obtain medical records in terrorism investigations without subpoenas.

A yes vote was to subject the warrantless subpoenas of medical records to secret court review. (A yes vote backed the amendment.)

Voting yes: Andrews, Brady, Fattah and Schwartz.

Voting no: Castle, Dent, Fitzpatrick, LoBiondo, Pitts, Saxton, Smith and Weldon.

Not voting: Gerlach and Holden.

So basically, this was a vote to make the FBI comply with the law when obtaining medical records in terrorism investigations (could that be MORE OF A BROAD, CATCH-ALL CATEGORY?).

And it failed.

How nice.

Medical marijuana. The House defeated, 259-163, an amendment to HR 5672 (above) to bar federal legal action against patients in the 11 states that have legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes.

A yes vote supported the amendment.

Voting yes: Andrews, Brady and Fattah.

Voting no: Castle, Dent, Fitzpatrick, LoBiondo, Pitts, Saxton, Schwartz, Smith and Weldon.

Not voting: Gerlach and Holden.

Oops, sorry...I’m a little late on this because I was tokin’ on a “big fatty,” and I lost my concentration for a minute.

And why exactly are the Repugs the party of “states rights” again? Can someone run that by me one more time?

Pay way too much for gas, become embroiled in war without end, face the prospect of a missile attack on the West Coast, watch our good-paying jobs disappear offshore, deal with global warming and climate change, and keep trying to prosecute cancer patients who are just trying to alleviate their pain.

This whole goddamn country is turning into more and more of a horror movie every day.

Offshore drilling. The House passed, 232-187, and sent to the Senate a bill to end a policy that for a quarter century has banned oil and gas drilling in U.S. coastal waters except the western Gulf of Mexico. The legislation (HR 4761) would permit drilling to within 50 miles of shore unless a state extends the line to 100 miles.

A yes vote was to pass the bill.

Voting yes: Brady, Dent, Holden and Pitts.

Voting no: Andrews, Castle, Fattah, LoBiondo, Saxton, Schwartz, Smith and Weldon.

Not voting: Fitzpatrick and Gerlach.

Let’s just start ripping up all of our coastlines to feed our oil dependency, shall we? Let’s just DESPOIL EVERYTHING AND EXACERBATE THE PRODUCTION OF GREENHOUSE GASES THAT ARE SLOWLY KILLING US, OK??!!

Concerning the yes votes, I should mention that, some weeks ago, Joe Pitts voted against HR 5253 directing the Federal Trade Commission to investigate and prosecute price-gouging by sellers of gasoline and other fuels. He was the only one from this area who did, though, and the vote passed. Now, he’s voting to rip up our coastlines.

Is a Democrat running against this guy? If anyone knows who that may be, please let me know so I can do all I can to help this person.

Also, though I’ve beaten up on Mikey for a variety of reasons, he has done some good things on the environment. I don’t think he would have voted yes, but we’ll never know, will we?

Press condemnation. The House passed, 227-183, a nonbinding resolution (H Res 895) to condemn newspapers for publishing stories on a classified antiterrorism program that tracks global banking transactions.

A yes vote was to pass the resolution.

Voting yes: Castle, Dent, LoBiondo, Pitts, Saxton, Smith and Weldon.

Voting no: Andrews, Brady, Fattah, Holden and Schwartz.

Not voting: Fitzpatrick and Gerlach.

A totally farcical, party-line vote on this, especially given the fact that Dubya said he would do this anyway shortly after 9/11, and Fitzpatrick was smart to miss it and not look like he’s as big of a yahoo as his Repug brethren (though please understand that this is a tongue-in-cheek remark – it’s not my intent to give Fitzpatrick credit for this).

Senate

Flag amendment. In a 66-34 vote, the Senate failed to get the 67 votes needed to approve a House-passed constitutional amendment (SJ Res 12) allowing Congress to outlaw the desecration of the American flag.

A yes vote backed the amendment.

Voting yes: Robert Menendez (D., N.J.), Rick Santorum (R., Pa.) and Arlen Specter (R., Pa.).

Voting no: Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D., Del.), Thomas Carper (D., Del.) and Frank Lautenberg (D., N.J.).

I can see that Menendez would vote for this as a nod to his immigrant ancestry and the fact that he’s in a race with Baby Kean in New Jersey that will probably heat up big time in the fall, but it was still good that the vote failed…it only becomes an issue in an election year and is made into sport by jingoistic Repug politicians who use it as a means for political cover.

Flag law. The Senate defeated, 64-36, a substitute for SJ Res 12 (above) that sought to punish desecration of the American flag by statute instead of by amending the Constitution. The measure would have criminalized such acts as burning a flag with intent to incite violence, destroying a flag stolen from federal property, or burning a flag at a veteran's funeral.

A yes vote backed the substitute.

Voting yes: Biden, Carper, Lautenberg and Menendez.

Voting no: Santorum and Specter.

This makes eminently more sense, so that’s why the Repugs killed it.

Oman trade accord. The Senate passed, 60-34, and sent to the House a measure (S 3569) implementing a free-trade accord with Oman. The pact would remove or lower duties and tariffs now impeding U.S. trade with the Arab Gulf state.

A yes vote was to pass the bill.

Voting yes: Santorum and Specter.

Voting no: Biden, Carper, Lautenberg and Menendez.

I thought this was interesting. Part of the reason this would be opposed is because Oman officially boycotts trade with Israel, though according to the information from this link, this has not been enforced since 1994. Also, Democrats have expressed concerns about the alleged use of slave labor in Oman. Finally (again, from the linked text)...

Some concerns have been raised about whether the Oman FTA would allow companies from Oman and companies that conduct business activities in Oman to control U.S. ports. Specifically, the U.S. Schedule of Annex II (Investment and Services Non-Conforming Measures) to the Agreement includes landside aspects of port activities, operation and maintenance of docks, loading and unloading of vessels directly to or from land, marine cargo handling, operation and maintenance of piers, waterfront terminal operations, and other related activities. Under the terms of this Agreement, companies from Oman would be entitled to conduct these activities in the U.S. In light of the of the recent Dubai Ports World experience, concerns have been raised as to whether the Administration would invoke national security provisions or exceptions in the case of foreign acquisitions of strategic infrastructure and assets.

Well, the measure passed anyway, so we’ll see what happens next in the House (and, as the paper noted, Congress is in recess until July 10).

An Act Of Atonement

I wonder what George W. Bush will do today in honor of our troops who have fallen in his Iraq War?

I mean, I know he gave them some phony baloney pep talk as part of Operation Use Our Military People For Props In Unending Photo Ops, and talked about how great it was that al Zarqawi is dead.

But is that it?

Approximately 2,539 of our troops have been killed since May 2003 when combat operations supposedly ended…and that’s it?

Except for the valor of our military caught in this hellacious nightmare, NOTHING about this war has been honorable. Not the rationale, not the plan (we had one?), and certainly not the result.

Nothing.

And I never cared about the fact that Saddam Hussein was a mean, rotten guy who victimized his own people. It was never proven to me at any time that he could actually attack us (Israel is another story, but as far as I was concerned, that was their problem). And despite all of the saber rattling about Iraq in 2002, Iraq’s neighbors were absolutely silent, which I took as a sign that something dirty was afoot.

I realize it’s pointless to rehash all of this, because we are where we are and we can’t go back and change history. But I feel I have to mention this because of my utter disgust at watching President Stupid Head slather birthday cake all over his mug while our people continue to be killed for his illegal war.

We have all been forced to watch George W. Bush on the grand stage since November 2000, and we know him by now. He is a total intellectual lightweight who, among other things, is apparently incapable of empathy, remorse, or contrition.

So with this in mind, I have an idea.

I would like to see the establishment of a special college scholarship fund for the sons and daughters of our troops who have been killed in action called the July 6th Fund as a gesture by Dubya towards the bereaved families. You would think that the business friends of Bush and Cheney would support something like this, seeing as how they have benefited so magnificently because of all of the tax cuts and legislation that has been passed under the watch of the Repugs that has so thoroughly lined their pockets.

I mean, you would think so, right? But I suppose this “pay no price, bear no burden” bunch would resist because they would have a hard time seeing how they would benefit from it.

Still, I’m proposing this, and doing so in the name of the following service people:

- U.S. Army Sergeant David B. Parson, 1-37th Armored Battalion, 1st Armored Division
- U.S. Army Specialist Jeffrey M. Wershow, National Guard, 2-124th Infantry, 1st Armored Division
- U.S. Marine Private 1st Class Rodricka Antwan Youmans, 2nd Light Armored RECON Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force
- U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Scott Eugene Dougherty, 2nd Light Armored RECON Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force
- U.S. Marine Corporal Jeffrey D. Lawrence, 2nd Light Armored RECON Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force
- U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Justin T. Hunt, 2nd Light Armored RECON Battalion, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force

All of these men were killed on Bush's birthday (in 2003 and 2004).

I think this is a small goodwill gesture of sorts showing that our troops should be always in our prayers and thoughts, in particular as we celebrate joyous occasions in which they are unable to participate because they have bravely answered the call to serve and defend us (especially given the fact that it is summertime now, but the livin’ is in no way easy for them).

I’m pretty much just shouting this out into the Internet wilderness, I guess, but I think it’s better than keeping this to myself. Let’s see if anything comes of it.

And by the way, this post was prompted also by what I consider to be Bush's insulting attitude towards our casualties as shown in this story, in particular this excerpt:

When Stars and Stripes nabbed an exclusive interview with President Bush on July 4 -- aboard Air Force One -- it devoted most of the questions to ones submitted by service members.

One, put to the commander-in-chief by the newspaper's Jeff Schogol: Has he attended even one funeral for a fallen soldier from Iraq? No, he replied. “Because which funeral do you go to? In my judgment, I think if I go to one I should go to all. How do you honor one person but not another?” he said.

Since you have been so derelect in this duty as commander-in-chief, Dubya, you can begin to make amends by acting on the suggestion I posted above.

Update: I sent an Email to Steph Odell at Patrick Murphy's campaign about this just to get some feedback and try to generate some "buzz." I'll keep updating this if anything else happens.

Warm Up Another Spit In Gehenna

I posted over at Brandoland that I think Kenny Boy “offed” himself – the coroner attributed Lay’s death to a massive coronary, to which I say, “How con-VEEE-nient!” (OK, I'll be honest - I have no clue on that...just my instinct.)

However, the fact remains that the former Enron CEO has now shed his mortal coil, as it were, so I think this tribute (?) from Molly Ivins is fitting.

Update 7/6: I'm not proud of admitting this, but apparently, the New York Post and I are on the same page, so to speak.

Update 7/7: Even more interesting...

How To Stuff A Wild President

I mentioned in the earlier post on North Korea and the missiles that Dubya celebrated his 60th birthday recently (actually, the date is tomorrow – leave it to him to get that wrong too). Am I the only one who is deriving some sort of amusement over the fact that both Dubya and the bikini hit that milestone at about the same time?

I would say that both are noteworthy for providing cover and a measure of secrecy for appearances sake on behalf of assets that can only be revealed by those who are entitled to the highest level of access.

…

(smirk)

The Missiles Of July

While I read that North Korea has launched a seventh missile (following six launched hours earlier, as CNN noted), I was so heartened to read the following:

President George W. Bush met with (U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen) Hadley, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as the tests were going on, a senior administration official said.

But he went ahead with plans to watch Independence Day fireworks and hold a gathering at the White House for his 60th birthday, the official said.

“See the sparks from that Roman candle, Mr. President? Imagine them shooting way, way up high into the sky and across the ocean and landing far, far away and wreaking untold devastation and havoc on the west coast, OK? That pretty much describes the threat we could be facing from North Korea. Now make a wish and blow out the candles on your cake, OK?”

Also, these are the choices offered by the CNN “Quick Vote” question on this grave issue (the question being, “how do we handle this”?):

- Ignore Pyongyang
- Give aid/money to the North
- Sanctions/embargoes
- Military action

Call me silly, but gee, I’d like to see “negotiation” in there somewhere too, OK?

I would also like to call attention to the statement from the White House on this story:

"This provocative act violates a standing moratorium on missile tests to which the North had previously committed."

Please keep this quote in mind as you read the following excerpt from this article in The Nation dated 1/27/2003 (weeks after Dubya’s infamous State Of The Union speech):

According to most accounts, the North Koreans told (Assistant Secretary of State James) Kelly they were willing to end their effort to enrich uranium (In October 2002), abide by existing safeguards on plutonium-based weapons and accept new inspections in return for a US pledge not to launch a pre-emptive attack, sign a peace agreement and normalize relations. Bush refused, saying the North must stop its program first; when that didn't happen, he cut off shipments of fuel oil promised under the 1994 agreement (more on that below). Within weeks, Kim had restarted (the plutonium-based reactor at) Yongbyon and kicked out UN weapons inspectors, who have been monitoring the reactor since 1994. "If the United States legally assures us of security by concluding a nonaggression treaty, the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula will be settled," Pyongyang's ambassador to China reiterated January 3, 2003.

In a situation like this, you must negotiate with North Korea, especially when they’re offering a solution. Yes, they abrogated the 1994 framework; the original break from Bushco’s point of view took place when Kelly presented evidence of a uranium enrichment program to the North Koreans and they owed up to it, but unfortunately, this is how the game is played (of course, if the ruling cabal in Washington had any clue about this sort of thing, we probably wouldn’t be at this point right now).

(The 1994 “Agreed Framework” from the Clinton Administration, by the way, stipulated that North Korea would halt activity at Yongbyon in exchange for promises of a pair of light-water reactors and US diplomatic and economic relations).

Also, I noted here that, while Bushco trumpeted the success of slapping around North Korea in some phony currency scheme, the nuclear issue was allowed to fester.

It would have been nice, of course, if CNN had provided more background instead of devoting space to President Stupid Head’s birthday activities, but again, I know that’s “so pre-9/11” of me (I’m sure Kyra Phillips added the personal stuff about Dubya…she was one of NINE correspondents on the story, ALL OF WHOM failed to provide the context I added here).

Update: Gosh, I'm so comforted to know that Dubya won't back down to "the little pygmy," aren't you? And I KNOW this is a serious story now, because CNN has featured two photos on its web site of Condoleezza Rice glowering in her typically ominous fashion against a black background.

The Faith Of Our Forefathers

On the occasion of my 1,000th post (I can't believe it either; I hope at least some of them have been interesting), I'd like to muse a bit on what July 4th means to me and hopefully to you also.

Aside from the obligatory fireworks and outdoor summer stuff, it is a time for commemoration of our flag (which, by the way, is a symbol of such strength that it doesn't need to be propped up by an anti-desecration amendment to the Constitution) as well as contemplation of the ideals which support our democratic republic. Among those ideals are tolerance, forgiveness, and trying to build bridges to those who may hate you.

(One of my favorite films, by the way, is the version of "The Razor's Edge" with Bill Murray made in the mid '80s, which opens with wonderful images of a July 4th picnic that turn out to be elegiac given the irreparable changes that the four main characters undergo, Larry Darrell in particular, brought on in no small part by World War I.)

In this spirit - joyful summer exuberance tinged with melancholy reflection - I have to mention that Cindy Sheehan and Michael Berg have been on my mind a bit lately, and I have a message for them (assuming they ever read this post, which I admit is unlikely).

In much the same way that President Lincoln would reflect back on the Battle of Gettysburg in November, 1863 (the battle itself took place over three days 143 years ago, and on July 4th, Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia were in full retreat, having lost the battle partly as a result of the suicidal Pickett's Charge - the Confederates were also losing Vicksburg, MI at about the same time, tilting the Civil War irreparably in the favor of the Union Army), I would like to see Sheehan and Berg reflect on the terrible tragedies in their lives that have unwittingly thrust them into the spotlight and reach out to our service people to a greater degree than they ever have before.

And by the way, I'm not talking about appearing on any more "barking head" gab fests so Berg can be verbally assaulted by "Falafel" O'Reilly again or Sheehan can be called names by Faux News and its acolytes. I mean requesting time to speak at VFW meetings and gatherings of service people and stating their case, engaging and a give-and-take with veterans who may disagree with them as part of the process of (hopefully) reaching a mutual understanding.

I don't see evidence that they're doing this (perhaps I'm missing it online, but I don't think so - I'd like to be notified if I'm wrong about that). I see them supporting like-minded brethren in their opposition to the war, a right which certainly belongs to them that they've earned through terrible tragedy. However, in much the same way that Lincoln reached out to the South in the Gettysburg Address (paying tribute to those in both armies who spent the "last full measure" to achieve "a new birth of freedom"), I would like to see Sheehan and Berg reach out to those who oppose them by stressing that we are all Americans, regardless of the color of our state or the flavor of our politics.

I realize that Sheehan and Berg owe me absolutely nothing, but if they were to undertake the effort I just described, it would show a particular level of courage and leadership that would underscore the fact that they're trying to collectively enhance the intellectual strength of our nation through the free exchange of ideas as part of the dialogue which is so necessary if our country is to continue, and thus see many more July 4th celebrations recognizing the endurance of the freedom we cherish.

The “Last” Word In Mock Sympathy

I just shook my head when I read Jonathan Last’s column in The Inquirer yesterday; it defined the meaning of the phrase “concern troll” to me (I’ll say more on that later – hence the reason why I included the picture with this post).

One Last Thing - Helpful advice for wayward liberals
By Jonathan Last

The Vegas odds on Democrats doing well in the next two elections are fairly sunny. (At most of the casinos I've consulted, Hillary Clinton is about a 3-1 favorite to win the White House in 2008.) But as an ideological matter, liberalism, the intellectual backbone of the Democratic Party, is in a good deal of trouble.

God forbid that Last would produce anything resembling a basis for that claim, though if he were to mention the friction between the netroots and the beltway DLC establishment that has done nothing but lose elections, he’d be correct to a point. However, Last didn’t bother to say that; I just did.

And of course, let’s spread the popular fiction that Hillary Clinton is the pre-ordained, presumptive presidential nominee of the Democratic Party in 2008. This is a trap for at least one reason; if HLC were dumb enough to say “Oh, all right, you found me out. My re-election is only a formality. I REALLY want to be president.” – and somehow, I seriously doubt that she would ever do that – that would give the Repugs a reason to say, “A-HA! See there, voters of New York State! All you are to her is a stepping stone!,” thus giving a boost to Clinton’s opposition, who I guess at this moment is either John Spencer or K.T. McFarland (based on this Wikipedia article, the Repugs will have a primary in September to decide the nominee).

Today there are two books on radically different topics by radically different authors - the National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru and the New Republic's Peter Beinart - that, taken together, could help liberal intellectuals (and the Democratic Party) figure their way out of the blind alleys that most hobble it: "life issues" and foreign affairs.

“Life issues” being code for “moral values” which is code for “hating the gays,” OK? Let’s be honest and up front about this.

Also, let’s explode the myth once and for all that Repugs actually want to “help” liberals, which is the definition of a concern troll. They want to “help” liberals by “helping” them TO BECOME CONSERVATIVES (in the same way that our dear friend Joe Klein resurrected Michael Kinsley’s comment recently that conservatives want to embrace you while liberals make you take a litmus test – I could explode that a few different ways, but that’s the subject of a whole other post.)

The first is Ponnuru's The Party of Death. It's the rare conservative book constructed not as a balm to make Republicans feel good about themselves, and not as a hammer to bludgeon liberals, but as an argument that seeks to convert.

Last is honest enough to validate what I just said – I’ll give him that much.

Ponnuru's subject is the broad range of life issues, from abortion to stem-cell research to infanticide and euthanasia.

I’m not going to waste one second of my life reading a book written by someone from The National Review. Besides, Ponnuru had an opportunity to plug this on an episode of “Real Time With Bill Maher” earlier this year, and he said virtually nothing.

Liberals may or may not be open to persuasion on these topics individually, but Ponnuru's grand argument is entirely persuasive: The intellectual foundation of life issues connects them and leads in unsavory directions.

So, as far as Last is concerned, I guess we’re supposed to hate the gays also, I guess. And I’m open to a bit of persuasion and an intelligent argument, not freeper boilerplate.

The political problem with being for abortion isn't being for abortion, per se. It's that this support easily slides toward assisted suicide and then euthanasia.

No it doesn’t. That’s one of the biggest freeper lies out there, and it doesn’t have a shred of truth (I know this is also the position of the Catholic Church, and with due deference, I must say that they're wrong on this also).

There are extremely difficult, real-world-based reasons why a woman would have an abortion, hopefully with a support network so she isn’t totally alone in the ordeal. And based on our experiences with other couples, it is because something has gone horrifically, catastrophically wrong with the pregnancy. However, I will acknowledge that my experience in this may be peculiar to someone else’s, but I have a feeling it isn’t.

You could also argue about the inconsistency of conservatives who oppose abortion but favor the death penalty (I very reluctantly support the right to both).

If left unattended, an unquestioning devotion to abortion rights can lead toward a utilitarianism so cold and merciless that it would make FDR, JFK and Bill Clinton jump back with fright.

Someone’s going to have to explain that sentence to me. I’m lost.

For Democrats and liberals, The Party of Death is a call to wake up and see where the logic of abortion-at-all-costs is taking them. If the Democratic Party is to regain vitality, it needn't become antiabortion - although many of us would like it to - but, as both a moral and political imperative, it must erect bulwarks against going the way of liberal theorists Ronald Dworkin and Peter Singer.

I don’t have the time to sit down and familiarize myself with the work of these two authors, so I have no comment on them. But “regain vitality”? Gee, I would say that Dr. Dean and a vast network of Democratic, grass-roots volunteers is making the party pretty “vital” right now; it has been in the recent past, it is so now, and it will be that way even more in the future with all of us working together (freepers excepted, of course).

The second book is Beinart's excellent foreign-policy corrective, The Good Fight. For a combination of reasons having to do with Vietnam, multiculturalism, and a distaste for George W. Bush, many Democrats and liberals have allowed themselves to become mired in a belief system based on the distrust of American power.

This is a clever way for conservatives to take the fact that Bushco has horrifically mismanaged the illegal Iraq War and personalize this as an issue of “liberals hating Bush, and therefore, hating our military also.” This is typical clownish freeper obfuscation - it's not that we distrust American military power per se; we just don't trust this administration with it because they abuse it.

And by the way, Peter Beinart has recently been embraced by some on the left because he has apaprently come to the realization that the Iraq War was wrong and is issuing some mea culpas over it. I have two words for Beinart on this, and I’ll give you a hint: they’re not “happy birthday.” Beinart should tell his fellow freepers to stop demonizing anyone who opposes them as he once did and maybe I'd take him seriously.

"From Henry Wallace in the late 1940s to Michael Moore after September 11, some liberals have preferred inaction to the tragic reality that America must shed its moral innocence to act meaningfully in the world," Beinart writes. If "we demand that American power be perfect, it cannot be good."

What a loap of crap! At what point has Michael Moore ever “argued inaction”? What does that mean? Is that Beinart’s way of saying that Moore has said we should not have done anything after 9/11? Any proof on that? And we must “shed our moral innocence”?

This country has never been “innocent.” However, there was a time when the leaders of this country labored strenuously (with this country’s military, which has been steadfast throughout) to do the right thing, acknowledging its place as the leader of the free world. But I suppose Beinart’s cowardly phrase “sheding its moral innocence” means that Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are OK since they happened under Our Great Father Of War George Dubya Bush.

Beinart understands that this impulse, so prevalent on the left, causes liberals to see enemies only on the right. Instead, he argues, antitotalitarianism (which in its current guise means the struggle against Islamist terrorism) should sit at the heart of the liberal project. "If today's liberals cannot rouse as much passion for fighting a movement that flings acid at unveiled women as they do for taking back the Senate in 2006," he says, "they have strayed far from liberalism's best traditions."

As you can see, Beinart is still pushing emotional buttons for effect, and probably always will be. I could find plenty of incidents of young conservatives not rousing passion for Dubya’s Iraq War (see “Operation Yellow Elephant”), assuming that that’s also true of young liberals, which I don’t believe of course. Besides, has it occurred to Beinart that there are many returning Iraq veterans who are running for Congress AS DEMOCRATS? How can that be if the Democratic cause cannot rouse passion to fight radical Islam, as Beinart alleges? And if someone can figure out what “the liberal project” is, I’d appreciate it if I could be enlightened on that.

For a model, Beinart looks to the dawn of the Cold War, to Reinhold Niebuhr and Harry Truman. It was the Democratic Party and liberals who first hardened America's stance against communism and founded the policy of containment, successfully practiced by two generations of Democratic and Republican leaders.

Beinart argues that a hawkish liberalism must necessarily include liberal domestic ideology, and here, too, he points to Truman, who explicitly linked the struggle against Communism to the fight for civil rights. Liberals might effectively do the same today, perhaps with Islamism and gay marriage, if only they could overcome the impulse to believe that all cultures are of equal moral worth. Highlighting the importance of gay rights would necessitate pointing out that cultures which treat homosexuals as criminals are inferior. For many liberals, making such judgments part of their politics would be distasteful.

Again, we’re returning to “hating the gays” as the supposed central issue of our time – it certainly is for the radical right – though how that could possibly be associated with radical Islam is a mystery to me.

Here’s what’s going on; Beinart and Ponnuru want liberals to argue with conservatives about gay marriage/civil unions and abortion at the expense of everything else, and this is a win-win-win for the Repug base, which will NEVER CEDE ANY GROUND WHATSOEVER ON THIS ISSUE. Cutting through all of the theoretical and high-minded jibberish in this column, this is truly the heart of the matter.

Therein lies the problem. In the 1940s, liberalism excommunicated Communism, and along with it men such as Henry Wallace, who had once been heroes to the movement, but who refused to condemn Communism. If contemporary liberalism is to bloom again, it will have to do the same painful pruning of those unwilling to put aside cultural relativism.

“Cultural relativism” is another code phrase for supporting gay marriage/civil unions and abortion rights (and despite all of this, “Roe v. Wade” is still the law of the land, though I’m not sure how much longer that will be the case). As Atrios says, a woman’s uterus should not be community property, and I entirely agree.

If liberalism is to become, once again, one of our great governing philosophies and Democrats are to have a serious political future, the two institutions must find their way to change. Beinart and Ponnuru have given them a map.

As I said earlier, Beinart and Ponnuru have given them a “How To” book for becoming a Repug and establishing a one-party state, which would suit Last just fine.

I would really like to hear what Last thinks, by the way, of the latest bit of conservative bile floating around online having to do with the freeper war on the New York Times (as Hunter over at The Daily Kos has posted on with totally unsparing language, which I applaud). This is the very heart of right-wing, jackbooted Repug neo-conservatism as far as I’m concerned; vicious, hateful, and ignorant adherence to a worldview that is dying an inexorable death under the weight of untold tragedy it has authored primarily in this country and Iraq.

And Last, Beinart and Ponnuru each are guilty of bringing it to life and thus sustaining it to this moment (that line about "overcom(ing) the impulse to believe that all cultures are of equal moral worth" just hit me a minute ago...as far as I'm concerned, that could only come from people who are soulless monsters).

Update 7/7: I read an excellent review of Beinart's book earlier today by George Packer in The New Yorker, and I've been reconsidering the book a bit more based on that.

I think a point can be made that the Democrats should state more forcefully that they support movements towards democracy in the Middle East; I'll be honest and say that I haven't found them doing that (maybe they are, and I've just missed it). Just because Dubya and the Repugs have so thoroughly botched the Iraq War doesn't mean that we should become totally isolationist under the next administration (make it the Democrats, please God, and help them get their act together to make it happen). And of course, I'd like to see ALL of the Dems embrace something like John Kerry's position on pulling everyone out by the end of the year (the last "next six months" that there is). Mrs. Clinton would do well to get on board with that, especially since Joe Lieberman, the Dem she was closest to on this, is being politically destroyed at this very moment (though, if he runs as an independent, he may take down Ned Lamont with him and hand the Connecticut Senate seat to a Repug, which would be Lieberman's final ignominy as far as I'm concerned).

From what Packer said, Beinart said today's Democrats have to embrace "the war on terror" the way Harry Truman and Democrats of his generation embraced anti-Communism. Packer disagreed with Beinart based on the fact that anti-American sentiment in Muslim countries manifests itself in all kinds of ways that are radically different from the "us vs. them" mentality of the Cold War years, basically saying that Beinart can't draw a one-to-one correlation between the two (tribal/ethnic/regional fanaticism vs. nation/state gamesmanship). Also, the fact that Beinart apparently ignores the Israeli-Palestinian conflict severely undercuts whatever validity some of his arguments may have.

Finally, let's keep this in mind; the Democrats need to work on this issue, sure, but guess what? As we know, they have been OUT OF POWER AND WITHOUT A MAJORITY IN ANY BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT SINCE JANUARY 2001 (despite the Jeffords switch to Independent which forestalled what was inevitable in the Senate, unfortunately). The MAIN ISSUE is the INCOMPREHENSIBLE ARROGANCE AND INCOMPETENCE OF THE REPUGS that has put us in this terrible mess! In light of that, I don't see that some inter-party quibbling disqualifies the Democrats from calling the shots once more on this or ANY OTHER issue.

Smile For The Camera, Roy

So U.S. House Majority Whip Roy Blunt thinks a new football movie was rated PG instead of G because it contained religious content, even though the ratings board denies that (of course...how dare the object of a wingnut’s accusation actually have the impertinence to FIGHT BACK, right?).

Actually, this all raises a question as far as I’m concerned, which is this; when did the U.S. Congress somehow morph into Jack Valenti?

You don’t think Blunt could be making an issue out of this to divert attention from all of his other dirty laundry, do you, including his strikingly-similar behavior to that of his one-time mentor? Naaaahhh…

And speaking of film critics, our prayers go out to a REAL one (one of the best) dealing with difficult health issues at this time.

Kansas Would Be Proud

I’m sure that, if I read the fine print of the recently passed PA state budget which was signed by Gov. Ed Rendell last night, I would realize that it does a lot to provide health care for the neediest families in our state as well as funding for our schools and libraries, and even some business tax cuts (though there was some last-minute Machiavellian maneuver by Sen. Vince Fumo in the process, which is typical). This is all good and marks another accomplishment in Rendell’s administration, along with delivering property tax relief.

But I’m really burned up over the following item (from the Inquirer story that can be accessed here – registration required of course):

The only major defeat for Rendell was a proposed $1 billion program to advance bioscience research. Republicans, who control the House and Senate, balked at the so-called Jonas Salk Legacy Fund, named after the developer of the polio vaccine, believing it was too costly.

Speaking with reporters shortly before signing the budget bill, Rendell criticized legislators for axing the proposal, which "had no budget implications."

The two-year program would rely on $500 million in matching funds from research institutions and would be financed by $35 million a year in future funding from the national tobacco settlement. Rendell stressed that he would work in the coming months to build enough support to enact it.

The senators who axed this program obviously have no clue of what the life sciences industry means to Philadelphia. This is why students from all over the world come to this area for study.

I sincerely hope Rendell is successful in reviving this program despite the dunderheaded actions of some provincial pols who apparently want this state to regress into the dominion where those who teach evolution are threatened as part of the ongoing war against the scientific method and critical analysis, relying exclusively instead on the sort of blind adherence to doctrine best practiced by those who chant incantations in the woods, read ouija boards and rely on The Psychic Friends Network for everyday guidance.

By the way, I don't know how my state senator Joe Conti voted on this. If I find out, I'll update this post.

A Bang-Up Business

I realize some people have started shooting off fireworks already, but in an effort to perform a bit of a public service, I thought it would be a good idea to link to this story to remind everyone to be careful. The vast majority of injuries in fireworks accidents are suffered by children, young boys in particular.

My rule of thumb, for whatever it’s worth? If you don’t have ready access to a field and supervision by someone 18 or older, you shouldn’t even be handling them (and I’m talking about sparklers, Roman candles, that sort of thing – small cap explosives should still be supervised because they can cause injury; also, M-80s shouldn’t even be part of this discussion).

And if you want to read about something truly bizarre, this tells you about how Pennsylvania residents can go into a fireworks store to look around, but if you haven’t filled out a permit application, then you can’t purchase them (sensible), but if you’re from New York, you can get them without a problem even though fireworks are illegal there (weird).

Memo To Mikey: Because Water Is Wet

(Before I say anything, I have a messsage for anyone who may be reading this who works for The Bucks County Courier Times; your web site is absolutely horrible. Either reformat it and update your links or give up.)

So our illustrious 8th district U.S. House rep from PA wants to hold hearings to "gather information on the causes of frequent flooding in Bucks County," as reported in the Courier Times this morning.

Does the phrase "global climate change" ring a bell or two, Mikey?

See, it's that meteorological inconvenience mentioned over and over again by the vast majority of scientists who study the earth's temperature fluctuations. It's the phenomenon that is denied over and over and OVER again by the head of your party; you know, the guy who's entertaining the Japanese Elvis impersonator at the moment.

It's the reason for the increased water temperature in the Gulf of Mexico leading to more hurricanes there and elsewhere (where only a fraction of a degree can make a difference between a Category 3 and a Category 5 hurricane).

I'll tell you what; here's a link (this has sound) to learn more about Al Gore's great new movie "An Inconvenient Truth" (which, if I don't manage to see in the theater, I definitely will watch when it comes to DVD). Save us the money you would spend on phony baloney hearings which would do nothing but generate photo-ops for your re-election campaign and watch it instead, OK?

Update 7/5: As Above Average Jane noted (can't find her link at the moment), Fitzpatrick served on the Delaware River Basin Commission, so how necessary should it be for him to conduct hearings on this anyway? Shouldn't he already be familiar with the background on this? And by the way, Mikey...class move to remain in Washington while Yardley "takes it on the chin" again and Patrick Murphy and his staff actually helps those people flooded out of their homes.