Patrick Supports Our Vets Again

Back to the Courier Times for this (in their “Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down” segment from Saturday)…

(Thumbs Up) To Congressman Patrick Murphy for his willingness to fight the small battles for veterans.

After hearing about veterans unaware of benefits they were eligible for at the state and county level — such as an exemption from paying property taxes — Murphy and another congressman wrote a letter to Daniel Cooper, the VA's undersecretary for benefits, encouraging him to better inform veterans.

Cooper responded by promising to include a paragraph about local benefits in award notification letters, instructing veterans to contact their state and county governments to find out what other benefits they can receive.

“It's a small thing, but it will go a long way to make sure all veterans receive all their benefits,” said Dan Fraley, director of Veterans Affairs for Bucks County, who said he gets five to 10 calls a year from veterans unaware of their benefits.

Too often it seems politicians only take action when it is sure to generate a lot of publicity, even if the public benefit is marginal. It's nice to see Murphy looking out for veterans by taking the time to ask for this small change, which might only amount to a couple sentences but could translate to hundreds or thousands of dollars staying in the pockets of eligible veterans. And, as far as we're concerned, that's no small change.

To learn more, click here.

A New Fight Against Guns

This letter appeared in the Bucks County Courier Times yesterday (no link available)…

The New Year is a time for annual resolutions, and the standards for these include weight loss, exercise routines and spending quality time with loved ones. If, however, you spend a minute looking back at 2007 to try to develop a meaningful resolution, look at the nearly 400 families in Philadelphia who lost a loved one to gun violence and murder, more than 125 of the victims under the age of 25. Unfortunately that statistic included our family (sic).

Eric was a 20-year-old college student, on the right track, going to school, working and enjoying his friends. His was not a typical gun death, barely newsworthy, but devastating to our family just the same. Perhaps if the gun laws included licensing and education requirements, his death may have been prevented. Our wish for the New Year is to help others avoid such a senseless death.

Most people watch the news and feel sad, but most also feel powerless to enact change. But what if you could – what a New Years resolution that would be. If you help with the fight for better gun laws, that action or the attention you give it could save one life, making it a very worthwhile effort.

My son was well liked and we received hundreds of letters of condolences. We ask that folks expend the same thoughtfulness and effort by signing the petition for better gun laws available on http://www.momsagainstguns.org. Moms Against Guns is a fairly new organization founded by Philadelphia resident and philanthropist, Lynne Honickman. Frustrated by the political rhetoric and lack of change, Ms. Honickman has formed this group hoping to bring individual voices together for a stronger united front calling for changes to the current gun laws.

You will see on the web site they have the support of (Philadelphia) District Attorney Lynne Abraham, (Wife of Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter) Lisa Nutter and others. All agree the safety of our children must come before anything else. Moms Against Guns has a goal of 50,000 signatures to be sent to our legislators, forcing this very political issue out front. It is too hard to fight the gun lobbyist alone; together each of our signatures will count. One death, let alone the many that have occurred, is too many.

So for yourself, your children and maybe for the memory of our son Eric, please start with this one accomplishment and make a difference.

Lisa and Robert Aberman and family
Middletown Township, PA

My sympathies go out to the Aberman family and Eric's friends; to learn more, click here.

A "Real Time" Snow Job

I know ThinkProgress noted here (h/t Atrios) that Tony Snow poked out from under his hidey hole to spout freeper propaganda on the writer's-strike-affected season premiere of "Real Time" on Friday ("everybody gets it wrong at the beginning of the war"; some day, elementary school classes of some other country/planet/universe that comes after us will study how the arrogance that gave rise to that statement helped denigrate every aspect of our political life, to our ultimate ruin if things keep going the way they are).

I wanted to take note, though, of Snow yakking about "voter fraud" when Maher brings up the issue of the integrity of our voting machines (a typical Repug tactic, and watch how seamlessly he transitions to "REAL ID" in the clip below, but then Catherine Crier quite rightly notes that no case has been documented, and Snow quickly says, "Are you kidding" but then changes the subject without providing evidence, and kudos again to Crier to stating how important it is to have a paper backup).

This, courtesy of Democratic Underground, provides links to a series of articles by McClatchy Newspapers about the role that the charge of "voter fraud" played in the U.S. Attorneys scandal (and doesn't it figure that the only one by Bushco apologist Matt Stearns is an attempt at exoneration?).

Also, I didn't see the entire show, but Mark Cuban, speaking about John Edwards, impugned his populism by stating that he was pretty much nothing but an angry rich guy "who should have his own blog" (which the Edwards site has anyway, of course, though I know what Cuban meant). I didn't see the whole show yet, but I hope someone mentioned that Cuban has had a lot to do with that Unity '08 farce.

Anyway, here's the video with Snow, Cuban, Crier and Matt Taibbi (many thanks to The Brad Blog)...



Update 1/15/08: As Kagro X so correctly puts it here, regarding the Kos campaign of trying to get Dems to vote for The Mittster (which, under Michigan rules, is perfectly legal)...

This case should tell you in no uncertain terms that when wingnuts cry to you about voter fraud -- and let's be honest, they're constantly crying about it -- they have not a clue in the world what they're talking about, and they should be given no more attention than if they'd told you they've got video of Elvis descending from a UFO to cast a stretchy, sequined ballot.

Do not forget this. There's nothing the Republicans whine about more annoyingly or more frequently these days than "voter fraud." And here they are, once again, demonstrating embarrassingly for all to see, that all they can really hope for is for the media not to ask any questions when they slap that oh-so-scary-sounding label on... well, whatever the hell they happen to have at hand.

Do not believe Republican crocodile tears about voter fraud. They don't know what it is.

Yep ("Election fraud," however, is another story).

Saturday Videos

I was really sorry to read here that the 40th anniversary of Johnny Cash's concert at Folsom Prison was canceled (here's "The Man In Black" performing "Folsom Prison Blues" in 1990 with The Highwaymen)...



...and to mark the end of the first week of ultra-conservative shill and Iraq War cheerleader Bill Kristol's new gig at the New York Times (where he ran into a bit of difficulty), here's "I Don't Like Mondays" by The Boomtown Rats, featuring a very young Sir Bob Geldof (fitting for the only day Kristol's screeds appear, and yes, I know this song is about the shootings by Brenda Ann Spencer in San Diego in 1979, mentioned here).

Today's "Dubya Moment"

From this post I found on the web site of the Baltimore Sun yesterday, concerning the visit of George W. Milhous Bush to the Middle East...

BETHLEHEM, West Bank — After descending the stone stairs to the dim grotto beneath the Church of the Nativity, President Bush lit a candle Thursday and stood in silent, somber reflection at the place where Jesus Christ is believed to have been born.

Emerging a short while later into the sunlit courtyard outside, he described the experience as "a moving moment for me. ... For those of us who practice the Christian faith, there's really no more holy site than the place where our Savior was born."

From this post by Chris Kelly at HuffPo yesterday...

"War on the one hand is such a terrible, such an atrocious thing, that no man, especially no Christian man, has the right to assume the responsibility of beginning it." - Tolstoy

And don't worry; even though Coulter would never return the favor and Kelly's post is funny, I won't take a shot at her as she deals with the recent loss of her father.

And time is short at the moment, so I also wouldn't expound on the laughable notion that George W. Bush is actually a Christian.

Friday Videos

Louis XIV ("Finding Out True Love Is Blind" - kind of loud and a little spacey looking, for effect of course; "hey, carrot juice," huh?)...



...Happy Birthday to Tom Rowlands of The Chemical Brothers ("Galvanize," a cautionary tale for sneaking into a club without proper ID; hip hop definitely isn't my thing, but it's got a good beat and the kids like it, so...)...



...happy belated birthday to David Bowie ("Ashes To Ashes"; I read that he was going for a Salvador Dali thing with this - vivid imagery and unforgettably strange)...



...and Happy Birthday to Vicki Peterson of The Bangles (their cover of "A Hazy Shade Of Winter" by Simon and Garfunkel; I think the movie clips are from "Less Than Zero," but I'm not 100 percent sure - foreshadowing what really happened with Robert Downey, Jr. a bit, though thankfully he's still with us).

Friday Political Stuff

I've been meaning to give a plug to the campaign at The Daily Kos to encourage Michigan Democrats to vote for Willard Mitt Romney in their upcoming primary (more info here - and in a related vein, Jackie and Dunlop offer their commentary on the flap over Mitt and the dog doody on his car from awhile back; the "s" word is flying around all over the place here)...



...and for a complete change of pace, here's the trailer for "For The Bible Tells Me So" from Brave New Films (more info here - powerful stuff).

Trying To “Ground” “REAL ID”

The Bushco beat goes on (here)…

Residents of at least 17 states are suddenly stuck in the middle of a fight between the Bush administration and state governments over post-Sept. 11 security rules for driver's licenses – a dispute that, by May, could leave millions of people unable to use their licenses to board planes or enter federal buildings.

And you just knew that DHS Secretary Mike (“City Of Louisiana”) Chertoff was in the middle of this somehow, didn’t you?

(Chertoff), who was unveiling final details of the REAL ID Act's rules on Friday, said that if states want their licenses to remain valid for air travel after May 2008, those states must seek a waiver indicating they want more time to comply with the legislation.

Or, of course, Chertoff could use some common sense for a change and actually delay implementation until the concerns of the states in question were addressed…but we know that’s not Bushco’s “M.O.,” don’t we?

Chertoff, as he revealed final details of the REAL ID Act, said that in instances where a particular state doesn't seek a waiver, its residents will have to use a passport or a newly created federal passport card if they want to avoid a vigorous secondary screening at airport security.

“The last thing I want to do is punish citizens of a state who would love to have a REAL ID license but can't get one,” Chertoff said. “But in the end, the rule is the rule as passed by Congress.”

And what an appropriate transition to this Wikipedia article on the REAL ID Act, which notes that the Act was “attached...as a rider on a military spending bill (H.R. 1268, which also included tsunami relief)” and then “passed the joint House-Senate conference report on that bill 100-0…There was no debate whatsoever on this piece of legislation.”

Of course there wasn’t. Why, who on earth would want to look soft both on the War On Terra, Terra, Terra You Godless Hillary-Clinton-Crying-Lovin’ Li-b-uruul and the urgent matter of assistance for the victims of a catastrophic act of nature halfway around the world by actually discussing this crappy legislation like adults?

And fittingly, Dubya signed this mess into law in May 2005 (stand up and take a bow one more time, you boneheads of the 109th Congress).

And if you’ll notice, the AP article states that “at least 17 states” are contesting REAL ID, but according to the Wikipedia article, it sounds like the only states that are nearing full compliance are California, New York, Alabama, North Carolina, and North Dakota. There are 17 states that have passed legislation opposing REAL ID, as noted, but there are 19 other states contemplating similar legislation.

Gee, that sounds like a pretty sizeable majority of our country opposes REAL ID, and this CNN legal analysis tells us why. In addition to the fact that this unfunded mandate puts huge financial burdens on the affected states…

...The act requires photos to be digital so authorities can include them in the multi-state database…But the IDs must also include additional features that drivers' licenses and non-driver ID cards do not incorporate.

For instance, the ID must include features designed to thwart counterfeiting and identity theft. Unfortunately, while including such features may sound appealing, on the whole, these IDs may make our identities less safe.

Once Real ID is in effect, all 50 states' DMVs will share information in a common database and may also verify information given to them against various federal databases. In addition, it's very possible that such data will be sold to commercial entities: Some states already allow driver's license data to be sold to third parties.

Even with current, unlinked databases, thieves increasingly have turned their attention to DMVs. Once databases are linked, access to the all-state database may turn out to be a bonanza for identity thieves.

Finally, the IDs must include a "common machine-readable technology" that must meet requirements set out by the Department of Homeland Security. And, somewhat ominously, Homeland Security is permitted to add additional requirements -- which could include "biometric identifiers" such as our fingerprints or a retinal scan.

…

It's that "machine-readable technology" requirement, along with the possibility of Homeland Security add-ons, that raises the most serious risk that the Real ID Act will cause privacy violations. (The fact that the technology must be "common" also raises the already-high risk of identity theft.)

The AP story also notes that the ID cards won’t contain microchips, a concern noted in the CNN analysis. However, who’s to say that that issue won’t be revisited by DHS?

And a huge issue for yours truly, among many others I’m sure, is who would be responsible for the manufacturing of these cards and how “open” would the technology be used in this process? And what kind of legitimate congressional oversight would be involved?

Personally, I’m still torn on the theory of a national ID card, which is what we’re talking about here of course despite the fact that the states are shouldering the burden (and this tells you how REAL ID was intended as a tool to be used by anti-immigrant hysterics such as House Repug James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, the creator of this monster, pictured above).

Update 1/12/08: "They could screw up making jello," indeed.

Et tu, Ned?

I gritted my teeth a bit, I’ll admit, when I read here that John Kerry endorsed Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination; though I honestly don’t think Kerry was trying to slam John Edwards, I don’t think it showed much loyalty either (but then again, I think endorsing The Last Honest Man would actually have been the right thing for Al Gore to do in 2004; even though Lieberman had no shot, thank God, they did campaign together four years earlier).

But when I read here from Matt Stoller that Ned Lamont, the former Democratic senatorial candidate from Connecticut in 2006, endorsed Obama, that’s when I knew I had to say something.

I should note that the numbers definitely favor Obama over Edwards at the moment as we know, though Hillary has a huge lead in the super delegate count – sorry, but you’ll have to check The Daily Kos if you want to find out more about what that means exactly. And I also realize that many big Democratic names are jumping all over themselves trying to climb onto the “Obama-rama” bandwagon (Patrick Murphy’s decision to endorse when he did still looks prescient, but we’ll see).

But see Ned, here’s the rub; John Edwards campaigned for you. Not Barack Obama (who spoke out for Lieberman and didn’t even come to Connecticut for fear of offending Holy Joe), and certainly not Hillary Clinton (Bill, according to Stoller, went on Larry King soon after Lamont won and said “there was no difference between the candidates,” basically torpedoing Lamont’s support and costing him the election).

No, Ned, John Edwards had your back. And that’s one of the reasons we in the netroots hold Edwards in such high regard; because he stands on principle even when it’s unpopular.

I think you’re a fair minded guy who’s trying to do what you think is right for the party as a whole.

But still, you blew it.

Update: Jane Smiley of HuffPo has more here; Larry O'Donnell was a fraud when he lost his mind tearing into Willard Mitt Romney also - the last thing I'm doing to do is defend The Mittster, but that doesn't mean that you turn into a spitting, hysterical fool against him either.

And by the way, I encourage anyone reading this to follow Jane's example (here).

A Correct But Painful Strategy

This Yahoo News story tells us...

JERUSALEM - President Bush had tears in his eyes during an hour-long tour of Israel's Holocaust memorial Friday and told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the U.S. should have bombed Auschwitz to halt the killing, the memorial's chairman said.

Bush emerged from a tour of the Yad Vashem memorial calling it a "sobering reminder" that evil must be resisted, and praising victims for not losing their faith.

Wearing a yarmulke, Bush placed a red-white-and-blue wreath on a stone slab that covers ashes of Holocaust victims taken from six extermination camps. He also lit a torch memorializing the victims.

Bush was visibly moved as he toured the site, said Yad Vashem's chairman, Avner Shalev.

"Twice, I saw tears well up in his eyes," Shalev said.

At one point, Bush viewed aerial photos of the Auschwitz camp taken during the war by U.S. forces and called Rice over to discuss why the American government had decided against bombing the site (during World War II), Shalev said.

Reasonable people can disagree on this matter (one of the most serious imaginable, I know), but this Wikipedia article concerning the question of the Allies bombing Auschwitz tells us…

The British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, did not see bombing as a solution, given that bombers were inaccurate and would also kill prisoners on the ground. The land war would have to be won first.

The article also goes on to describe the bombing runs that took place in the vicinity of Auschwitz after the Allies took control of European airspace in March 1944, and "one bomb fell into the camp grounds (and the) Monowitz forced labor camp 5 kilometres (3 miles) from Auschwitz was bombed four times. On December 26, 1944, the U.S. 455th Bomb Squadron bombed Monowitz and targets near Birkenau (which was part of Auschwitz)."

Knowing what I know of this (and for whatever my opinion is worth here), I believe the only way to liberate the Nazi death camps was the manner in which it was accomplished by our forces through ground patrols. Bombing would have caused the Germans to evacuate and either leave their camp prisoners or kill all of them outright, though I realize that might have been preferable to some of the treatment they endured. And many of the prisoners required medical attention; how would they have received that while bombs destroyed everything in sight (and also consider the very real possibility of errant bombing that would have killed prisoners on top of those who had died already).

And on the other side of the argument, author Michael Berenbaum presents this.

As I said, reasonable people can disagree here, and this is a rare occasion where I will acknowledge that Bush could have been carried away by the intense emotional fervor of the moment. But his words indirectly cast blame on a generation of leadership that preceded him, betraying his cluelessness on the job once more.

Besides, maybe this would not have been a question had Dubya’s grandfather not cozied up to Fritz Thyssen, one of Uncle Adolf’s leading steel manufacturers, and the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC), based in mineral rich Silesia on the German-Polish border whose company used slave labor partly from Auschwitz (here).

Maybe that’s a reason why Dubya is so ignorant of history; it’s got too much dirt in it from his family.

Thursday Videos

James ("Laid")...



...Jim Croce would have been 65 today ("These Dreams," with Maury Muehleisen, as always)...



...Happy Birthday to Shawn Colvin ("Round Of Blues," keeping it in a folky vein)...



...and happy belated birthday to Steve Harwell of Smash Mouth ("Walking On The Sun").

Thursday Political Stuff

Memo to Al Sharpton: You want to protest something? Then how about helping with this instead of trying to persecute a golf announcer (and yes, I know she was suspended for two weeks, which is ridiculous)...



...and "The Pap Attack" takes on George Will (awesome).

"Duffer" Sharpton Tries To Club His Way To Relevancy

(Posting is a question mark for tomorrow, by the way – I just don’t know at the moment. And a “duffer” is a term for a really bad golfer, just so you know.)

This may all sound strange from someone who calls himself a liberal, but I have to say it; I had a feeling Al Sharpton was going to worm his way back into the spotlight somehow (and he keeps such good company also, as you can see).

As incendiary and ultimately annoying a figure as he is, I didn’t really take issue with him over the Imus/Rutgers women’s basketball team brouhaha last year because I thought he was fundamentally on the right side of the issue (primarily because Imus was a repeat offender who made his name doing that sort of thing).

But today, we find out that Kelly Tilghman, an analyst for The Golf Channel, made a remark about lynching concerning Tiger Woods, but quickly realized what she’d done and apologized (and Woods, who has been nothing but gracious in incidents like this as far as I’ve ever read, accepted her apology).

And that should be the end of it.

But of course, with Al Sharpton lurking out there, you know it isn’t.

Sharpton says it is the word -- not the person or their history -- that matters. In a Wednesday interview, he compared Tilghman's statement to calling for a woman to be raped or for a Jewish-American to be sent to a gas chamber.

"Lynching is not murder in general. It is not assault in general. It is a specific racial term that this woman should be held accountable for," the reverend said. "What she said is racist. Whether she's a racist -- whether she runs around at night making racist statements -- is immaterial."

Wow, easy to throw around unsubstantiated charges knowing you may not get called on it, isn't it, Al?

Sharpton said he wants Tilghman fired, period. And if the Golf Channel doesn't comply, the network can expect to see Sharpton and his National Action Network supporters picketing its Orlando, Florida, headquarters.

Fine. Go protest over this, then. If you do, I’m going to ridicule you from my admittedly tiny perch here in the lefty “blogosphere” (still can’t get comfortable with that word, actually). And if it turns out that I’m in ideological unity for a change with the freepers and their online brethren whom I usually loathe and despise, then so be it.

Of course, you can protest anyone and anything with impunity, Al, because you’re perfect (by the way, have you heard from Tawana Brawley lately?).

The one aspect of the 2008 Democratic presidential primary that I have to admit I’ve enjoyed is your absence from the stage! If there was one thing that continually disgusted me in past elections, it was the fact that none of the candidates would call you out for being a buffoon and an expert at self-promotion because they needed the black vote to win the election.

However, with Barack Obama running, you automatically lost any faux legitimacy you may have ever had in the eyes of some men and women of color (though I would have loved to actually see you on stage with Obama so he could have oratorically taken you apart).

To change the subject slightly, I have to admit that the timing of this latest Sharpton mess is particularly bad for your humble narrator, since it comes on the heels of New Jersey’s recent apology for slavery, hence my admitted crankiness here.

And what exactly is it that that’s supposed to accomplish, other than “grease the skids” for someone in New Jersey government to mention the “R” word (“reparations,” that is)? If someone does that, I hope they get hooted down as quickly as Reverend Al should be.

You want to talk apologies? Fine. I’m waiting for the City of Philadelphia to apologize for the Nativist Riots of 1844, since I’m an Irish-Catholic descendant who grew up in “The City of Brotherly Love.”

But just to let you know, Al, I don’t plan to protest over it outside of a government building or place of business. You see, I’ll be doing something else.

I’ll be working.

For my employer.

Getting paid.

And not feeling sorry for myself.

Why don’t you try it sometime?

Update: I think this is utter crap.

Wanna Watch "Seven Days In May"?

This post from Chris Bowers at Open Left, echoing Matt Yglesias, tells us that the winner of the Repug primary in New Hampshire, along with his fellow party mate Joe Lieberman, believes we…

…should adjust those (Iraq troop) numbers based on conditions on the ground and the recommendations of our commanders…first and foremost, Gen. Petraeus, who above all others has proven that he knows how to steer this war to a successful outcome.

Can someone please notify me when this “successful outcome” in Iraq is finally achieved? Because only then will I make a final judgment as to whether or not Petraeus and our military leadership have been successful (as opposed to those in our political leadership who aren’t so stupidly willing to cede the power they were endowed by virtue of their election to public office; actually, the character played by Burt Lancaster wouldn’t even have to stage a coup since “Senator Honor And Virtue” and his “independent” flunky would hand the power over to him).

And in other war news (here)…

Democrats are likely to try again to set a timetable on troop withdrawals from Iraq when Congress reconvenes this year. But with Republicans sticking firmly behind the president, Democrats know it is unlikely such measures will pass for now.

Some moderates say they hope 2008 will be the year of compromise, in which Democratic leaders will agree to swing behind softer anti-war legislation in a bid to entice moderate Republicans. Republican support for legislation is crucial because Democrats hold a narrow margin of control in Congress and lack the two-thirds support to overcome a veto.

Here we go with the same pathetic song-and-dance we heard about this time last year from Repugs like John Warner and Huckleberry Graham about how they might be persuaded to support a timeline for troop withdrawal (and nothing changed, of course).

Dear God…

Bear-ly Tolerable Freeper Attacks On Global Warming

The Philadelphia Inquirer, in its “Lightning Round” editorial segment today, actually made a good observation concerning the delay of Bushco’s Interior Department (under Dirk Kempthorne, who is at least as big of a disaster for the environment as his predecessor Gale Norton) to list the polar bear as an endangered species, allowing the Minerals Management Service to “open up nearly 30 million acres of Alaskan waters to oil and gas leasing in the heart of polar bear country.”

By the way, the head of the Minerals Management Service is Randall Luthi, who rose within the Repugs ranks with the mentoring of “Deadeye Dick” Cheney (both came from Wyoming). Need I say more?

And in this related New York Times opinion column from last Saturday, Alaska Repug governor Sarah Palin makes a few disingenuous arguments against listing the polar bear as endangered, including this one…

“(It would be) based on uncertain modeling of possible effects.”

That’s some fancy language that translates to “junk science,” by the way. And Palin also states that “the Endangered Species Act is not the correct tool to address climate change,” a sentence which, to me, is breathtaking in its stupidity.

And here with the point of view of the reality-based community is Kassie Siegel, climate program director at the Center for Biological Diversity…

(Siegel) said all science has a degree of uncertainty but that uncertainty is very low for the polar bear.

Polar bears eat mostly seals and other fatty marine animals that they hunt from sea ice. The bears prefer to hunt from ice that hangs over shallow continental shelf waters, which contain more prey than deeper waters offshore.

But summer sea ice in the polar bears' Arctic habitat is shrinking and retreating farther and farther from the coastline, which crimps the bears' ability to forage efficiently. Some bears are starving to death.

Scientists believe human-caused global warming is contributing to the decline in sea ice habitat.

Saving polar bears, therefore, requires human action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, Siegel noted. But taking such action is a political decision.

"We know what we have to do to save polar bears," she said. "We just have to start doing it."

And to help, click here (and a reminder for our dear corporate media cousins appears below).

Somewhere Dubya Is Loved At Last

Yes, we all know that George W. Milhous Bush is currently in the Middle East playing president and pretending to care about negotiating peace between Israel and Palestine (even predicting a peace treaty by the time he is FINALLY out of office), but I’d just like to take a moment and contrast this frantic, last-minute scramble by a highly unpopular head of state with the more methodical approach of a president who actually knew what he was doing on this vital issue (aided in a huge way by Anwar Al Sadat of Egypt, who ultimately died because of his recognition of Israel).

As this Wikipedia article about the Camp David Accords tells us…

(Former President Jimmy) Carter also wasted no time in visiting the heads-of-state on whom he would have to rely to make any peace agreement feasible. By the end of his first year in office, he had already met with (Sadat), King Hussein of Jordan, Hafez al-Assad of Syria, and Yitzhak Rabin of Israel. Carter's and (Secretary of State Cyrus) Vance's exploratory meetings gave him a basic plan for reinvigorating the peace process based on the Geneva Conference and Israeli withdrawal on all fronts, including the West Bank.

Of course, concerning Camp David, the call for West Bank withdrawal came in 1977-1978, and 30 years later, it is still being negotiated with the Israelis (noted here).

Also, I just want to note the following paragraph of the New York Times’ coverage on this story...

Mr. Bush’s visit was only the second by an American president to the Palestinian territories. Bill Clinton visited Gaza and the West Bank in 1998 during a previous push for peace that was overshadowed by his impending impeachment concerning his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

God, was it really necessary to point that out (seeing as how it has so much to do with that area of the world - not)? Again??!!

And not that I’m actually taking President Nutball’s antics seriously, but Atrios noted here that Dubya’s record on foreign policy predictions in particular leaves a bit to be desired.

The post title, by the way, refers to the reception Dubya received in Tel Aviv when he arrived. I heard about it on NPR (can’t find a link at the moment), and it doesn’t surprise me in the least; Israel should love him seeing as how this president launched his proxy war in Iraq on their behalf.

Update: Oh, and I'm...umm...honored (yeah, that's it, honored) to be on the same wave length here as The Onion (h/t kos - actually I really am; some very indelicate but true commentary here).

Wednesday Political Stuff

"Straight Talk McCain" wants his own "Hundred Years War," I see (aren't you proud of your vote for this clod, you Granite State Repugs? And I'll take a shot at Chris Shays another time)...



...and Chris Matthews has ALREADY provided us the stupidest pundit blatherings of 2008 so far (h/t Atrios, and here is a response from Molly Ivors to the "Hillary treatment" from Maureen Dowd that applies to Tweety also; MoDo was another offender today, and here is something we can do about it).

Patrick Pummeled In Wednesday Wingnuttia

Wow, check out this joke of a letter that appeared in the Bucks County Courier Times this morning…

In a recent interview with the Courier Times, Bucks County Congressman Patrick Murphy speaks proudly of his accomplish- ments during the past year. If only long hours and self promotion equaled accomplishment.

The approval ratings for Congress are at an all-time low, mostly the result of Nancy Pelosi's leadership in the House. Murphy was useful initially in Pelosi's anti-war agenda but the Democrats have failed miserably with the execution of their strategy, of which Murphy was an important component. Sixty attempts to force troop withdrawals or de-fund the war resulted in failure.

Meanwhile, the Democrat-led Congress conducted some 400 partisan hearings or investigations as part of their real payback agenda to Republicans and President Bush.

Murphy can, however, claim distinction for being near the top of the list of freshman Democrats requesting and distributing special interest money or earmarks, according to USA Today. He'll need that influence in the next election cycle when he's the incumbent, not the first-time challenger. As an incumbent he'll need a record of achievement to run on. Unfortunately for Murphy, there is none.

Austin Thornton Jr.
Middletown

Oh really?

Let’s see, just the other day, Patrick was praised by Gene Karpinski of the League of Conservation Voters for supporting the recently-passed Energy Bill (here), he also co-sponsored the Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act, which will prevent Americans from losing their jobs because their employers can't compete with cheaply made sweatshop goods (here), he also worked with Bensalem, PA solicitor Joseph Pizzo in trying to pass the Clean Railroads Act which would close a long-existing loophole in federal law that “(allows) rail companies to run roughshod over state and local laws and the will of a community” (in this case regarding the issue of trash disposal - here), he has also sought input from Republicans on issues that are vital to our district (including former State Senator Joe Conti – here)…am I going too fast for you, Thornton Jr., or did you go to college?

And of course, it’s Patrick’s fault as we know that he hasn’t been able to rein in President Nightmare and his atrocity in Iraq (a pox on the “Democrat” party leadership, I’ll admit, but the Repugs haven’t budged one inch while stories like this have appeared one after another after another after another).

Oh, and the earmarks – here’s more information on how Patrick will supposedly be able to line his pocket according to Thornton Jr. I’m sure our 8th district rep will make himself rich beyond his dreams securing funding for Lower Makefield and Bristol, PA police, at-risk youth assistance, defense against bioterror, flood plain management, sewer infrastructure in Yardley, medical equipment for St. Luke and St. Mary's hospitals, the I-95/Turnpike connector in Bensalem, PA, and the James A. Michener museum in Doylestown, PA.

It’s almost too damn funny for words.

I’ll tell you what, Thornton Jr. – instead of composing such bilious garbage, why don’t you instead write to your Repug party poobahs in these parts and ask them who’s going to run against Patrick this fall. If he’s done so badly, then how come none of the names mentioned here and elsewhere (including Gene DiGirolamo and Mikey himself – hell, this is a wide-open opportunity for Andy Warren to show his true colors once and for all) have committed?

And as always, to learn more, click here.

A Question For Mike Huckabee

This story tells us the following…

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit by journalists seeking to open executions to more scrutiny, saying there was no guaranteed right to see the whole process, including the strapping-down of the condemned inmate and the insertion of needles.

U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright rejected the journalists' argument the public had a First Amendment right to see every step of an execution in Arkansas.

In her ruling issued Monday, Wright also noted that executions have “moved from the public square to inside prison walls,” an area where the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled reporters have no special right to access.

…

A case before the U.S. Supreme Court focuses on a three-drug cocktail used by 37 states, claiming the condemned could suffer intense pain without being able to cry out. That pending case in effect stopped executions in Arkansas and other states until a ruling by justices.

If I could, I would ask Huckabee whether or not he thought this was a fair ruling (as I’ve said before, I don’t have a problem with the existence of the death penalty, but I do have a problem with its application).

I haven’t found any comment from Huckabee on this case yet, but I think we can assume some of what he may think about this based on this information, which states in part…

...in 1997, on the eve of a triple execution in Arkansas, Huckabee was asked on a radio call call-in show about his position on the death penalty. Huckabee responded, "Interestingly enough, if there was ever an occasion for someone to have argued against the death penalty, I think Jesus could have done so on the cross and said, 'This is an unjust punishment and I deserve clemency.' " But since he didn't ask for clemency, Huckabee's argument follows, the death penalty is just fine.

Is this guy a “snake oil salesman,” or what?

Easy to joke about death but not so easy to look the matter in the eye when someone else’s life is on the line, is it, Governor?

Update 1/10/08: And let's not forget that Huckabee considers Scalia his "own personal hero on the (Supreme Court)" (here), so I suppose this isn't so surprising.

"Channelling" Martin And Roberts On “A La Carte” Cable

(Note: I’m posting about this partly because there is so much stupid pundit blathering about New Hampshire last night that I’m trying to do something different – and yes, I’ll admit that it was bad news for John Edwards, though we have a ways to go here.)

The Philadelphia Inquirer notes here that Comcast CEO Brian Roberts gave the keynote address at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas yesterday, with Roberts using the opportunity to plug “tru2way,” the company’s “new technology to allow electronics manufacturers to develop interactive devices that work on its 25-million-subscriber cable network,” according to the story.

However, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, while participating in a panel discussion said that “tru2way” was “a good start, but not the final solution.”

Industry analysts who know more about this stuff than I do think that Roberts and Martin aren’t exactly buds these days because of Roberts’ opposition to “a la carte” cable (supported by Martin) which basically means that cable subscribers would pay for each channel and (so the thinking goes) lower cable TV rates.

Part of what’s difficult for me concerning this story is that it involves two really bad apples as far as I’m concerned; this related New York Times story (referenced in the Inquirer) notes that Martin’s FCC is investigating complaints of Comcast’s alleged interference with online file sharing (a ruling against Comcast would help bolster Net Neutrality as an abiding principle of Internet activity – the FCC has broadly supported it, but that support hasn’t been tested yet).

And as far as Martin is concerned, he narrowly missed being named Dregs Of The Year by yours truly for 2007 (for whatever that’s worth – not much, I’ll admit…many reasons, notably this one).

Martin touts “a la carte” cable as a means to lower subscriber rates, but as noted here…

According to the FCC, the average family only watches seventeen channels. If this describes your family, then there is a chance that you could save money with a la carte programming. However, Booz Allen Hamilton, an industry consultant, says that the FCC overestimated the average cost per cable channel by as much as fifty percent. This so-called error really makes the difference in whether the average family would save money on pay-per-channel programming or not.

(Martin) is the commission's strongest supporter of the change. His primary concern seems to be that cable companies have been raising their rates consistently over the last few years. In the last five years, for example, the average family's television spending increased by 35.7 percent. Martin explains that the FCC is getting involved to try and persuade cable companies to better meat (sic) consumer demands.

The cable operators, as you might expect, don’t think so…

…(they) say full channel choice will result in extra costs for customers, who already pay an average of $40 each month for "extended basic cable" which usually includes between 70 and 80 channels.

"Under an a la carte plan, that same $40 would probably result in a handful of channels, fewer than 10," says Brian Dietz, spokesman for the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, an industry trade group in Washington. The existing "bundle" plans provide "the best value and widest variety of programming for the customer," he says.

I very reluctantly have to go along with the cable operators here, partly because of this (also noted in the CS Monitor story)…

…Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D) of California, warned in a newspaper column last month that "the cable industry's most exciting new talent - scores of programs for Latinos, African-Americans, women and others - would be the first casualties" of an a la carte system because they wouldn't be able to reach enough viewers to survive.

Kevin Martin has one goal and one goal only as FCC chairman, and that is to consolidate the corporate voice at the expense of all others (yet another example of the “values voters” getting played by the Repugs here, since some of their “Bible beaters” of choice could end up getting cut out also). He could care less about rising cable rates; he just wants to pretend he does so we all have our “bread and circuses” and remain as compliant as possible while the information we need to make informed decisions slowly grinds to a halt at the behest of Time Warner, Disney, Microsoft, and General Electric.

Concerning Comcast, though, I should note that this is a theoretical argument only for your humble narrator, since the Doomsy household switched over to Verizon FIOS a few days ago (for a better price, we get enhanced picture quality and sound on TV and much faster Internet connectivity).

And I’ll be honest; we also walked away from Comcast because they continue to give a pay check to this guy (haven’t come up with a “next step” yet, but I’ll think of something).

One more thing - was this a sweet deal for Roberts' old man, or what (update 7/3/08: To be fair, I think he restructured it later, but I'm not positive; I'll keep checking).