Dialogue on Darfur

(This graphic will be important for later in this post.)

(This was also a dialogue about the media in general in this country...definitely a long one coming up here.)

I was involved in an interesting Email thread yesterday, and it started out as comments about this column from the New York Times on Tuesday.

All Ears for Tom Cruise, All Eyes on Brad Pitt

By Nicholas D. Kristof

Some of us in the news media have been hounding President Bush for his shameful passivity in the face of genocide in Darfur.

More than two years have passed since the beginning of what Mr. Bush acknowledges is the first genocide of the 21st century, yet Mr. Bush barely manages to get the word "Darfur" out of his mouth. Still, it seems hypocritical of me to rage about Mr. Bush's negligence, when my own beloved institution - the American media - has been at least as passive as Mr. Bush.

Condi Rice finally showed up in Darfur a few days ago, and she went out of her way to talk to rape victims and spotlight the sexual violence used to terrorize civilians. Most American television networks and cable programs haven't done that much.

Even the coverage of Ms. Rice's trip underscored our self-absorption. The manhandling of journalists accompanying Ms. Rice got more coverage than any massacre in Darfur has.

This is a column I don't want to write - we in the media business have so many critics already that I hardly need to pipe in as well. But after more than a year of seething frustration, I feel I have to.

Like many others, I drifted toward journalism partly because it seemed an opportunity to do some good. (O.K., O.K.: it was also a blast, impressed girls and offered the glory of the byline.) But to sustain the idealism in journalism - and to rebut the widespread perception that journalists are just irresponsible gossips - we need to show more interest in the first genocide of the 21st century than in the "runaway bride."

I'm outraged that one of my Times colleagues, Judith Miller, is in jail for protecting her sources. But if we journalists are to demand a legal privilege to protect our sources, we need to show that we serve the public good - which means covering genocide as seriously as we cover, say, Tom Cruise. In some ways, we've gone downhill: the American news media aren't even covering the Darfur genocide as well as we covered the Armenian genocide in 1915.

Serious newspapers have done the best job of covering Darfur, and I take my hat off to Emily Wax of The Washington Post and to several colleagues at The Times for their reporting. Time magazine gets credit for putting Darfur on its cover - but the newsweeklies should be embarrassed that better magazine coverage of Darfur has often been in Christianity Today.

The real failure has been television's. According to monitoring by the Tyndall Report, ABC News had a total of 18 minutes of the Darfur genocide in its nightly newscasts all last year - and that turns out to be a credit to Peter Jennings. NBC had only 5 minutes of coverage all last year, and CBS only 3 minutes - about a minute of coverage for every 100,000 deaths. In contrast, Martha Stewart received 130 minutes of coverage by the three networks.

Incredibly, more than two years into the genocide, NBC, aside from covering official trips, has still not bothered to send one of its own correspondents into Darfur for independent reporting.
"Generally speaking, it's been a total vacuum," said John Prendergast of the International Crisis Group, speaking of television coverage. "I blame policy makers for not making better policy, but it sure would be easier if we had more media coverage."

When I've asked television correspondents about this lapse, they've noted that visas to Sudan are difficult to get and that reporting in Darfur is expensive and dangerous. True, but TV crews could at least interview Darfur refugees in nearby Chad. After all, Diane Sawyer traveled to Africa this year - to interview Brad Pitt, underscoring the point that the networks are willing to devote resources to cover the African stories that they consider more important than genocide.

If only Michael Jackson's trial had been held in Darfur. Last month, CNN, Fox News, NBC, MSNBC, ABC and CBS collectively ran 55 times as many stories about Michael Jackson as they ran about genocide in Darfur.

The BBC has shown that outstanding television coverage of Darfur is possible. And, incredibly, mtvU (the MTV channel aimed at universities) has covered Darfur more seriously than any network or cable station. When MTV dispatches a crew to cover genocide and NBC doesn't, then we in journalism need to hang our heads.

So while we have every right to criticize Mr. Bush for his passivity, I hope that he criticizes us back. We've behaved as disgracefully as he has.

E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com

Here are the responses from two individuals in the thread:

Person 1: That is how it works. Media brainwashes people not informing them. Most people are more interested in cheesy celebrities stories, then what is going on in the world. Most Americans don't know what Darfur is.

Person 2: So what is this? A 'mea culpa' beating of the chest and tearing of cloth to show shame?

What can this Times journalist tell any conscious Black person or anyone with a social conscience about the perception of any story pertaining to Black people that could show Black people to be human with human feelings, or achievers in anything besides entertainment and sports?

What can this Times journalist tell us about Earl Caldwell, a Black journalist, who worked for the Times during the turbulent 60s and early 70s who was left on his own by the managing staff of the Times when he didn't want to reveal a source? Caldwell's case that was taken to the Supreme Court is the decision that ultimately cemented the legal footing that The Times and Judith Miller can stand on today to protect her so-called sources.

How can this Times journalist be so bold as to pat his profession and employer on the back and his charlatan of a colleague, Judith Miller, when it is apparent that the Times failed to fact-check Ms. Miller's narratives when it came time to bombing Iraq.

Let's not forget the point here - the burden of guilt will never leave people who know they've done wrong. It's overdue for the Times to address their lack of reporting on Darfur. National and International organizations are denouncing that news outfit left and right.

The NY Times is considered the foremost periodical in the US and the world. Yet - you find no one reporting on the devastation happening in Haiti, no one reporting on genocide in Darfur, no one reporting on the continued uprisings in Sierra Leone, no one reporting on machinations that will spur a genocide in Ecuador, no one reporting - no one reporting.

That newspaper and others like it - took up two weeks going over the details of the bombing in London. Bombings are not so infrequent in Europe - why then the emphasis on the numbers dead and injured? You have more people dying and injured in non-white countries all the time...Yet no one bothers to look - why?

Good points, and I don’t have any answers to those questions, except to speculate that those locations have nothing to do with what our politicians define as “protecting our national interests” (re: if they have oil, it isn’t worth the time and trouble to go get it). Also, Clinton backed off on anything to do with Africa after our Marines were shamefully killed and dragged through the streets of Mogadishu.

Here is my response to the first two responses:

Thanks very much for passing this along. The responses are excellent (reflecting the truly depressing reality, however).

I don't think Nicholas Kristof, who I usually respect, is trying to let himself off the hook in his comments. At least he is showing a conscience and a recognition that something is unbelievably wrong in the news business in this country. For what it's worth, I just did a Google search on Darfur, and the first article I came across, aside from a Washington Post blurb about naming a new envoy yesterday, was in The New Yorker Magazine dated last August. So far, it's the only story of any depth that I can find from a US news organization.

At times like this, I am grateful to the really good "bloggers" who are out there, such as The Daily Kos and the people at the Al Franken Show web site at Air America. These are the only places where I can find some reporting on Darfur aside from what I just mentioned.

There are all kinds of travesties in reporting out there aside from what the respondents mentioned. When I talk to people about this, I say that this all started in the 70s when news organizations had to become profit centers (which coincided with the conservative ascendancy in this country that currently subjugates us). There was a time when you would watch a network newscast and see real, live reporting from actual locations around the world, and it wasn't because some celebrity showed up there to make a movie, hunt big game, get a divorce, or whatever. It was legitimate news analysis of what was going on in that country by professional journalists who were actually there. Now, I would imagine that approximately the same amount of time is spent on Britney Spears' morning sickness as would be spent on coverage of factional infighting in Venezuela or cash outflow in Russia due to dollar appreciation against the ruble, and I don't think even turning off the damn TV in protest (which I've done, in part) would matter at this point.

Here's another one for you - did any of the TV networks report about Sir Richard Doll, the epidemiologist who first reported the link between cigarette smoking and cancer? He died a few days ago. But oh, someone found a blonde hair in Aruba that might belong to Natalee Holloway (not trying to minimize that tragedy), so guess what made the newscast instead?

Person 2 responded with this:

The Nation, Trinity Broadcasting, The Word Network, LINK TV, WBAI, AgencePresse, AlterPress, Madre etc..have continuously reported on Darfur. There is no 'mainstream' analysis - what there is the same type of editorial-non-reporting hogwash that Kristof gave in his piece.

What is a report? I think a report is a verbal or written summary of an event that occurred. Many times, it is in a comparative manner; sometimes in a cumulative. Since no one is omnipresent - the reliance on others to coordinate their efforts to keep the general public apprised of events is more than a job - it's a de facto statement of trust.

When Corporations own media houses, like weeklies, monthlies, publishing houses, and tv/radio stations - what kind of reporting can the public receive? The journalists become mere mouthpieces. There can be no analysis. How can you talk about the greenhouse effect when your owner is Toyota Corporation? How can you criticize bias in election coverage when Rupert Murdoch is your boss? Need I go on?

Kristof is not showing conscience...Let's think about the point he's trying to make. I can't 'speak' for the man...nor can I pretend that I know it all. What then is Kristof's point?

Is he saying there should be actual reporting done in mainstream media as journalists are expected to do? Is he decrying the fact that systemic slaughter is overlooked in 'Dark' countries? Is he even hinting that the root of under reporting of actual news is due to the prostituting of the very journalistic principles that the Times and Ms. Miller are so quick to reference now that their backs are against the wall?

(By the way, I know one of the respondents in this thread is African American and I strongly suspect that the other is also, and I am not. However, even though I am mentioning this, I consider that point to be totally irrelevant.)

Person 1 responded with this:

There’s plenty of blame to go around.

My contention is that there are things that the “liberal” press won’t cover, and there are things that the “conservative” press won’t cover. Many talking heads being advanced by both sides never reveal when there are PAID shills for a particular agenda. They also don’t disclose that they once worked in previous administrations. Neither “liberal” nor “conservative” media tells you that a piece of video they play during the broadcast was compiled by the PR department of some corporation, or by a government agency.

Let’s take, for example Amy Goodman, who I do credit for covering\uncovering some big stories way before the rest of the media chimed in. Why doesn’t she ever talk about Soros’ influence in her organization? Or her sweetheart deal with Pacifica? Why doesn’t the media (both liberal & conservative) not disclose that their guest so-and-so who’s the head of such-and-such organization has served in a lobbying capacity for a particular interest? Who funds their so-called think tank?

I suspect there is so much compromise and corruption in both camps that neither side really wants to go all out and attack the other. So they make their stand for their pet issues, and never really advance the national dialogue beyond sound bites.

(I’m still checking on the Amy Goodman/George Soros thing, by the way. If I find anything, I’ll post it here.)

Here is the last comment (from Person 1)

(Person 2’s) response prompted me to do a quick search on the following sites, and here are the results of stories (see graphic at top of post). And CBS has a whole interactive section about Holloway, complete with photos, right on their main page.

We’ve all heard of Laci Peterson. Today marks only the first time I’ve seen a national news outlet mention Latoyia Figueroa, another missing pregnant woman, but from Philly. She’s been gone over a week.

I know CNN and Atrios each had something on Latoyia Figueroa yesterday, by the way. I don’t know of any updates in that story right now.

I think all of this stuff is worth thinking about. I will provide any and all updates if and when I can.

(By the way, I think Tom Cruise is a dick for poking fun at psychiatry and trivializing postpartum depression, and so is anyone else who feels that way also, including Howard Stern.)

Well Intended, But Late

From today's Inquirer Entertainment section...

First came the utterly crass (but rib-fracturing funny) movie Wedding Crashers.

Then came the Web site, with its interactive crasher kit. Inside a virtual briefcase, you clicked on a microphone to say a few words at the reception. Or the guide book containing the rules (No. 27: "Don't overdrink. The machinery must work in order to close."). Or the photo of a guy on top of Mount Everest - with the face blank so you could insert your own. And for the ultimate babe magnet, a make-your-own fake Purple Heart medal.

Then came the critics.

Not the esteemed film mavens who tell us how many stars or thumbs a movie merits. But the ones who determine where the line is drawn between good and bad taste.

They had no problem with rule No. 27. But the Purple Heart?

U.S. Rep. John T. Salazar (D., Colo.) was not amused.

Neither were the Vietnam Veterans of America.

"It is unconscionable to me - and is an insult to everyone who has served the nation in the military - to trivialize the Purple Heart in this way," Thomas H. Corey, the group's president and a medal recipient, said in a statement.

New Line Cinema responded: "We understand the sensitivity regarding the medal and did not intend to make light of its significance in any way."

Jokers who wear a faux medal to up their allure factor may be risking more than just offending real-life war heroes and their families.

Salazar is working on a bill, called "the Stolen Valor Act," that would make it a crime to pretend to have earned a medal.

I don't think Salazar had been elected to the U.S. Congress yet when the Repugs and their sheep followers were wearing those highly insulting band aids with a replica of what was supposed to be John Kerry's Purple Heart on them during their national hatefest/fear-and-smear show in New York City last year, but it's a shame no one in Congress took the lead at that time and made his commendable efforts unnecessary.

Once A Repug...

I just added a link to the “Patrick Murphy for Congress” web site to the “Get In The Game” links (for the 8th Congressional District). He’s an Iraq War veteran running as a Dem for the U.S. House.

I’ve absolutely had it with Mike Fitzpatrick. This is about the third time I’ve contacted him about voting or not voting for something, and he’s disregarded my advice every time (David Sirota today lists the 15 DINOS – Democrats in Name Only – who voted for CAFTA in the U.S. House yesterday along with Fitzpatrick).

How dumb was I anyway to think a Repug would actually look out for me?

Mea Culpa

I have a problem with Michael Smerconish. I will always have a problem with Michael Smerconish. However, this column is not the work of an idiot, and it should not be regarded as such.

Wednesday Roundup

I’m trying to catch up a bit on this – it sounds like former U.S. Marine Paul Hackett is getting a bad time from the Repug attack dogs in his campaign to run for the 2nd U.S. Congressional District seat in Ohio (cowardly scum all for attacking one of our service people in particular). It’s nice that the Cincinnati Post has endorsed Hackett, though (counts for something, I guess).

More Repug garbage (from the Air America site)…it sounds like Joe Conason has found out that Pat Roberts, Repug chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee (from Kansas, where they are de-evolving even as I type this) is going to hold hearings on Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor in the Valerie Plame case, alleging prosecutorial misconduct (gee, funny thing…I don’t recall, in any of my civics classes growing up, any discussion telling me that this is how our government is supposed to work).

The Daily Kos reports on a Pittsburgh-area nun standing up to Scumbag Santorum (go get ‘em, s’ter!), along with declining popularity ratings for Dubya and also declining numbers for our volunteer army (a shame and a cause for concern regarding the army, but really a surprise?)

Also, go to David Sirota’s blog to find out how to contact your politicians and tell them to vote against CAFTA. I just called Fitzpatrick’s office and was greeted by a prompt and courteous aide who took my call, and the same is true for Specter – great classical “hold” music also. I don’t even bother when it comes to Mr. “It Takes A Family” (and way to come up with a thinly-veiled ripoff of Hillary Clinton’s book title and Maya Angelou also, by the way).

A Hero Departs

I meant to link to this a day or so ago - think of how many people this man saved through his research.

Wasted Energy

From this morning’s Inquirer…

WASHINGTON - After coming up short for years, Congress is preparing to enact a broad energy plan that would provide generous federal subsidies to the oil and gas industries, encourage construction of nuclear power plants, and try to whet the nation's appetite for renewable fuels such as ethanol and wind power.

The mammoth bill, whose final details were being negotiated yesterday, also would give the government new power to override local objections to facilities for handling growing imports of liquefied natural gas.

(the legislative version of the “eminent domain” ruling I guess, not wasting any time to hop on that bandwagon…)

"It is a darn good bill and it is going to help this country, and the sooner we get it done, the better," said Rep. Joe L. Barton (R., Texas), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

That tells me all I need to know.

Joe Barton is an energy industry whore, sent to Washington by life forms that generate merely a momentary blip on the IQ meter. Barton, in the metaphorical sense only as far as I know, hikes up his skirt for any lobbyist in that business with a handsome campaign contribution.

I don’t always agree with Froma Harrop, the columnist for the Providence (R.I.) Journal, but I agreed with about 90-something percent of what she had to say in her most recent column about this (appears below). The only thing I really didn’t see eye to eye with her on was her assessment that Bush wants to bring democracy to the Middle East. Yeah, sure – that’s what he says, but you can’t cram that down someone’s throat and expect them to be happy about it. He wants the oil and expansion of empire and isn’t prepared to waste further calories on anything else.

It is oil's fault. The London bombings are almost surely al-Qaeda's work, which means oil paid for them. Oil keeps the Mideast backward. It funds the madrassas that fill heads with anti-West poison. And it pays the terrorists who plant bombs on European trains and drive airplanes into American buildings. It is time we did something about oil.

The United States accounts for 25 percent of the world's oil consumption. We could crush oil's power to hurt us with a serious campaign to kick our fossil-fuel habit. But we don't, because we have an administration and Congress that care more about the oil industry than about us.

That said, not everyone in Washington is craven to the god of petroleum. The Senate passed an energy bill that provided real incentives for conservation and alternative sources. But little of the good stuff made it into the House version. The conferees have tried with little success to reconcile the Senate's modern vision with the House's primitive worship of fossil fuels.

We're in Iraq because of oil. That's not to say our intentions were ever to take over Iraqi oil fields. Our interest is to transform Mesopotamia and the rest of the Mideast into stable democracies. The theory is that angry theologies and genocidal tyrants frustrate economic advancement and breed dementia. Change all that, and the Mideast will become a peaceful and prosperous region.

But were it not for oil, that part of the world would have long ago moved toward modern economies. The people would have had no choice. They would have done it themselves. Americans would not be sending their soldiers to build democracy for them.

But the corrupting influence of oil goes on because the United States hasn't had the discipline and courage to end the oil game. The Bush administration's only energy policy is to provide new tax breaks to the drillers and open up wildlife refuges to energy companies. As national policy, it's a sideshow: The amount of oil that could be economically taken from the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge is minuscule next to our energy needs.

This approach damages us because it maintains the myth that America can somehow reduce its dependency on foreign oil without giving up oil consumption. World supply and global demand ultimately set the price of oil. China's mushrooming economy alone will keep it rising. The idea that U.S. oil companies would give Americans a break on the world price because the crude came out of Alaska is utter fantasy.

The lack of will to tackle the problem lies not in the American people but in their leadership. An Associated Press poll in April asked this simple question: "Do you think George W. Bush is or is not handling the nation's energy problems effectively?" Two-thirds answered, "Is not."

Every time someone suggests programs to reduce America's oil consumption, the President says "can't do." It would harm the economy, he argues. But empowering terrorists with oil money also damages the economy.

For further reference, study the recession that intensified after the Sept. 11 attacks. Look at our limp response to something as simple as applying fuel-efficiency standards, now required on cars, to light trucks. The President and Congress quickly squelched that idea. Why? It would raise the price of SUVs, and that is purportedly more than Americans can stand.

The civilized world's struggle against terrorism is a fight against oil. We must fight it everywhere and with every weapon. That means fuel-efficient appliances, wind turbines, solar panels, nuclear energy and hybrid engines. And yes, throw in ethanol. Thanks to improved production techniques, corn-based fuel now produces more energy than is required to make it. Ethanol is a player.

The awful bombings in London - no matter who did it - remind us that terrorist attacks on the West are not one-time deals. There will be more of them, and some will happen here. And when they do, there will be more hand-wringing about our addiction to oil.

But instead of wringing hands, we could start applying elbow grease. Americans really do want to reduce their dependency on oil. They are willing - even eager - to make short-term sacrifices for this longer-term good. But they need leaders who are with them and serious about taking America out of the oil quagmire and into an enlightened age.

The typical reflexive right-wing crying, name calling and faux outrage will begin momentarily.

I'll Skip The Swimsuit Competition

This is how that august MSM publication Time Magazine described its featured article on Supreme Court nominee John Roberts in the magazine's table of contents this week:

"He's so cute, smart and conservative, he could almost be a Stepford judge. Is Harvard hunk John Roberts too good to be true?"

Luckily, I hadn't eaten yet, or I surely would have seen my food once more in an undigested form.

It's hard to believe that this rag once carried the work of pioneering investigative journalists Bartlett and Steele, isn't it?

Message From Elizabeth Edwards

Note: the link to the One America committee appears at this site under the "Get In The Game" category. Please go there to make a contribution - thanks.

Dear Friend,

While Democrats ready for the important Roberts confirmation process in Washington, there is still important work to be done to win state legislative seats for Democrats and to support those state candidates who are the future of the Democratic Party -- so we won't always be in this position in Washington. John has been on the road this past week fighting to Raise the States, so he asked me to update you on his progress and to stress again the importance of this fight.

Both of us have been so deeply touched by your enthusiasm and by the help you have given John and the Raise the States initiative, and I'm proud to report that you're already making a difference.

Since John last wrote to you, he has traveled to Missouri, Oklahoma and Wisconsin to raise money for Democratic candidates for state legislatures. The stakes are high -- big victories would tip the scales in Missouri and Wisconsin, and wins in Oklahoma would strengthen our delicate majority there.

But we are up against a juggernaut - the special interests, corporate money and national donors that converge wherever there is a chance to pick up a seat for the GOP. In nearly every state, candidates tell John it's almost impossible to compete with this Republican fundraising machine. Our candidates don't have to match these special interests dollar for dollar; they just have to be able to get their message - our message - heard above those Republican megaphones.

If you can help John help them, we can go a long way toward leveling the playing field - and winning majorities in the legislatures of several closely divided states. Let's show our candidates that we are behind them and that, like them, we're sick and tired of watching Republican money dictate our nation's course.

We've seen enough by now to know that help will not come from Washington. Whether it's the Republicans' Social Security plan (which plans to worsen rather than improve Social Security solvency), their capitulation to credit card companies and other special interests in the new bankruptcy law, or their refusal to raise the minimum wage - they protect the interests of their wealthy friends and contributors while denying working Americans the opportunities and the dignity they deserve.

That's why we must take this battle directly to state legislatures - the grassroots of our nation's government - by working to elect more Democratic candidates! And that's why we have to succeed. Decent working people everywhere depend on us.

There's so much we can do at the state level. We can raise the minimum wage for millions of hard working Americans who've seen their buying power dwindle as the pay of corporate executives - whose companies depend on those workers -- goes up and up and up. We can begin to address the fact that 45 million Americans still don't have health insurance which means that some Americans cannot take their children to the doctor even though we live in the wealthiest nation in the world. We can create real education reform that helps our children compete for 21st century jobs because our economy and our country depend on it. And, by increasing our presence and our power at the state level, we can take the first steps toward getting our party back on top.

Thus far, John's fundraising events have been very successful, and we can feel the momentum building - but we need your help if we want to take it further. As Democrats, it's our responsibility to make our candidates viable; we should never have to watch promising Democrats lose because they didn't have the money they needed. John has worked with these candidates, and they have pledged to fight for all working Americans - so now it's our turn to fight for them. Support John as he travels the country raising money for their campaigns.

Thanks to your help, John has already raised over $1 million for our candidates - enough to make a real impact in several state campaigns. And we know John will keep on fighting as long as he is able, as long as you are right there with him.

It would mean so much to both of us if we can count on your help.

This is a battle for the values we hold most dear - the dignity of hard working Americans, the power of grassroots initiatives, the resurgence of the Democratic Party, the dream of One America - and it means so much to both us to know that we have your support.

Thank you for all you've done, and all that you continue to do.
- Elizabeth

Fair Is Fair

If you're going to pull Garry Trudeau and Doonesbury over this (link included on this site), then as far as I'm concerned, you have to pull the conservative propagandist Glenn McCoy also.

Bushco's Poodle

Even though he's totally "lied down with the Bushco dog and gotten up with its fleas," Blair is better than this.

(I wonder where he got the idea to exploit terrorism for political gain, by the way?)

Left Hand, Meet Right Hand

The Daily Kos, Atrios, David Sirota and other big-hit bloggers chimed in yesterday on Hillary Clinton’s little love fest with the Democratic Leadership Council at their meeting in Columbus, Ohio. For whatever its worth, and as you may have guessed, I think the DLC can take a hike.

I’ve always believed that this country suffered a nervous breakdown on 9/11, and I think that awful day ended up causing the rift between what I would call the progressive, left-wing elements of the Dems and the corporate-backed DLC perpetual losers to grow into a yawning chasm.

It seems that the party is split between the foot soldiers (represented by the bloggers I mentioned above) who understand that MANY PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY ARE SUFFERING UNDER BUSHCO and we MUST FIGHT BACK, and the DLC who seem to be still smarting from Repug propaganda that the Dems seem to lack “moral values” (whatever that means in the Repug context) and aren’t as patriotic as the Repugs (a laughable and insulting charge when you find out how many Dems have actually served this country and how many Repugs did nothing about combat but run away from it), and for that reason, just want to “go along.”

It’s going to take someone with a hell of a lot of imagination apparently on the Dem side to craft some kind of platform, agenda, “mission statement” (ugh – corporate speak!…causing negative waves….must….resist!!), or whatever the hell else you want to call it, and just say, “OK, everybody, this is the law of the land. Follow this in lockstep like the Repugs do with their program, or go home. Now, if we all agree on this, then let’s all just gather around and play nice, have a swim in the pool, maybe take a few minutes after we towel off and play with our Gameboys® with the exploding graphics of Dubya, Cheney, Rummy and Condi, and then, if we all eat our green beans for dinner, we’ll gather around the fireplaces and make S’mores.”

(Oh, OK, I threw down the gauntlet, so I might as well take a crack at this thing myself)…

It was wrong to listen to Bushco and invade Iraq solely on their word without the corroboration of Hans Blix and the UN-appointed weapons inspectors. Further, it was wrong of the US Congress to approve a resolution for Bushco to “use force,” when we never bothered to determine whether or not that meant a quick-strike military action or a declaration of war.

It was wrong to support the so-called “Tort reform” legislation, making it harder for individuals to file class action lawsuits, and the so-called bankruptcy bill, since both those pieces of legislation are utter betrayals to our core constituency.

It is wrong to allow Bushco carte blanche to underfund our first responders in the event of another terrorist attack, as well as to continue allowing the underfunding of our schools and the pollution of our environment on behalf of Bushco’s corporate benefactors.

It is wrong to allow Bushco to pursue an economic policy that rewards corporations and CEO while casting a blind eye to working men and women in this country who must work multiple jobs, many with inadequate or no health care, in order to provide for themselves and their families.

It is wrong for Bushco and the Republican congress to totally ignore the separation of powers in our form of government, as witnessed by the intervention of Congress in the Terri Schiavo matter in which they attempted to overrule the verdict of a Florida court, and in the ruling granting Bush powers to declare a U.S. citizen an “enemy combatant” and thus ridding that person of habeas corpus and rights of due process.

OK, it’s not much, but it’s a start. There is much, much more that could be added to this list, but every single Dem should stand up and pledge an oath that this represents their core beliefs. That’s what the people of this country want to see – a living, breathing, viable opposition party that ACTS LIKE IT and HAS A CLUE ABOUT HOW TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES. Further, if you want evidence to see how the out-of-power party is supposed to act, all you have to do is watch the rough-and-tumble activity of British politics, which makes us all look like wusses by comparison.

Also (though this goes without saying), every Dem that has acted against what this “platform” (if you will) states should stand up and take the hit and pledge NEVER to act against it again. They and the rest of the party will be berated on cue by the Repugs and the right-wing media echo chamber, but that’s the price you pay (which is nothing compared to the price our people are paying in Iraq, after all).

There you have it. For whatever it’s worth, I’m throwing out a plan of sorts, gratis. I don’t want a dime for it. You can pay me back by winning some congressional elections, and maybe (dare I hope?) the White House in ’08.

To Infinity And Beyond

Blast off...

I heard some of the photos from the cameras near the fuel tanks were truly amazing (every time I hear about fuel tanks, though, I have to admit that I cringe).

God bless our people - let them do their great work and return them home safely.

Update 8/9 - Thank God.

White People With Too Much $$ Dept.

What's the matter...go go bars and mall parking lots are too good for this guy?

Katy Graham Is Spinning In Her Grave

Atrios (and Steve Gilliard) report today on the unbelievable softball treatment The Washington Post gave to Scumbag Santorum in his book interview. Also, Atrios has an update on Ohio treasurer Tom Noe and “Coingate,” where Noe apparently did some things he shouldn’t have done with the state’s $50 million rare coin fund (I have a feeling there's a lot more to the story than that, but that's what I know for now).

Plame-Gate In A Nutshell

So either Karl Rove or Lewis Libby leaked Valerie Plame’s identity as a CIA agent to Matthew Cooper, Judith Miller, Walter Pincus and Robert Novak, and then Gonzales found out that the Justice Department was investigating, and then Gonzales talked to Andrew Card but Gonzales waited until the next morning to tell everyone else, and after a grand jury was empanelled, then Patrick Fitzgerald of the Justice Department may or may not have had Novak testify before the grand jury, then Fitzgerald decided to go after Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper, then Daniel Pearlstine, Cooper’s boss at Time, agreed to turn over Cooper’s notes, but Bill Keller didn’t force Judith Miller to do that at the New York Times and stood behind her, and Miller didn’t reveal her source to Fitzgerald, so she was sentenced, but then when Cooper did, it was documented in his notes that he got the information on background from Rove, and then there was a question of who sent Joe Wilson, Plame’s wife, to Niger anyway to contradict the Bushco claim that yellowcake uranium was being purchased by Saddam Hussein for nukes, but then it was established that Plame’s bosses at the CIA requested that Wilson go and he didn’t go on his own, so it looks like a total slam dunk that Rove and possibly Libby leaked the name of a CIA agent to the press, blowing her cover and possibly that of others.

Did I miss anything (God, my head hurts now)…

Notice how “out of the loop” Dubya is in all this, of course. Typical.

Update 7/26: Great digging by Brendan Smith at Brandoland to come up with this link to a document from CA Rep Henry Waxman's office detailing 11 security breaches in this investigation (looks like I missed some above...oops). Also, how cool is it that human-scab-and-nude-web-poser James Guckert has gotten sucked into this?

A Reading From The Book of Orrin

This was inspired (if that’s the correct word) from last Thursday’s Daily Kos post that describes the interview Orrin Hatch, Repug capo of the Senate Judiciary Committee, gave to Faux News about Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. In the interview, Hatch compared Roberts and the judiciary committee to Jesus and the Pharisees (I swear, I couldn’t make this stuff up if I tried).

Hypocrisies, CH 12, V7-11

And it came to pass that the woman Arizonan judge unburdened herself and sheddeth her cloak of righteousness that had been much afflicted by her remarks upon the Eminent Domain ruling and her decision in the holy cause of the well-moneyed oppressed in the University of Michigan law suit, though she had helped install the High Exalted Leader upon the throne of Christian domination.

And yea, upon such turn of events, the pestilence of George Soros, Moveon.org and the People For The American Way descended, and a darkness spread upon the land.

And lo, upon this blight, the clamor of millionaires and Fortune 500-company stockholders arose, and their cries of neglected return on investment touched the ears of the High Exalted Leader, and he was much afraid.

And it fell beholden unto him to appoint a worthy nominee to succeed the woman Arizonan judge, and this he did so, yea and verily and forthwith, reaching across the broad conservative firmament to touch the wallet in lieu of a heart of a man not unlike himself, a true believing foot soldier who had been there all along anyway.

The High Exalted Leader thus did endure questioning and sentiment averse to this, even unto sleeping a few nights on the couch at the behest of his wife.

And thus did the High Exalted Leader speak. “Behold, I have called ye forth, John Roberts, fellow middle-aged intolerant conservative shill and worthy counselor upon whose recommendations I determine the asset allocation of my stock portfolio.

Thus beginneth now the trial in front of the TV cameras among those that doth blighteth the land with fables of multi-income households, substandard wages, lack of health coverage, and employment migrating to other countries. Thou are the unbelievers, the husband of heir to ketchup and pickle fortunes, driver of automobile off Chappaquiddick Bridge, and harlot to the pretender who once sat on my throne. Yea, speaketh unto them not about Roe v. Wade, the 2000 Florida recount, and thou membership in the Federalist Society.

I cast you now unto the den of iniquity known as the U.S. Congress. Smile and nod, laugh, cajole, even picketh thy nose, but keepest thou thy silence. "

And thus did John Roberts go forward unto his confirmation hearings with the pride of arrogance, smile of deception, and the quick-fading warmth of self satisfaction.

Lector: This is a reading from the Book of Orrin
All: Thanks be to Shrub

If I keep going with stuff like this, I guess a spit is going to get warmed up for me too...

Can't Judge A Book By Its Cover

Indeed not - he launched the careers of a whole bunch of rockers.

Also, in memoriam for another relatively unheralded music giant...

Bang You're Dead, Homey

I think this is a good companion piece to "Take Your Gun Party Somewhere Else!," echoing some of the same themes I mentioned earlier. Of course, this deals on a personal level with the tragic story of would-be college student Richard Johnson. Tom Ferrick Jr. wrote this column in today's Inquirer.

The circumstances surrounding the death of Richard Johnson are as mundane as they are sad.

On July 9, Johnson, his girlfriend and his cousin were emerging from a corner store near 20th and Tasker Streets in South Philly when they found their path blocked by a teenager on a bike.

Words were exchanged, but the kid eventually rode off. Johnson and his cousin escorted the girl to her bus.

After she left, the boys started to walk back to Johnson's house when the kid on the bike came back. He had a gun.

He proceeded to pump bullets into Johnson, 17, and his cousin, Christopher Little, also 17.

Police say as many as 16 shots were fired by the boy on the bike before he rode away.

Little was wounded in the buttocks and the legs, but survived. Johnson was shot in the stomach and head. He died the next day.

Richard Johnson had just graduated in June from St. Joseph's Prep. He had won an academic scholarship to St. Joseph's University. His goal in life was to become a lawyer. One of his teachers called him a "genuine soul," destined for success. Now, he is dead.

On Monday, police arrested a neighborhood kid named Alante Manigault. He is 16 years old.

His 17th birthday is Aug. 12. Alante will spend it in jail awaiting trial on a murder accusation. Odds are that he will spend his 75th birthday in jail, as well.

Extra bullets

Police didn't find the gun used in the crime, but that's not a surprise. Guns used in a homicide - guns with a body on them, as they say in the streets - are usually sold quickly, often at a discount price.

Odds are it was a 9mm Glock or Ruger semiautomatic with an extended clip to hold extra bullets. You never know when you are going to need extra bullets.

Police call what happened to Richard Johnson a "respect killing." One kid disses another. The other kid either has or gets a gun. The next thing you know, shooting starts.

A week hardly goes by in Philadelphia without a young man - often a black man under the age of 24 - getting killed for one reason or another.

If you get the impression it's easy to get guns in Philadelphia - even if you are a teenager and it's illegal to own one - you would be right.

I'm sure that if you walked into poorer neighborhoods in the city and the kids were candid with you, most of them could tell you where to buy a street gun, how much it sells for, and give you tips on best buys.

A lot of those guns were purchased at local gun shops by straw buyers, who turn them over to illegal gun dealers, who sell them on the street.

One a month

One way to stem this practice is to limit multiple handgun sales. There is a bill in the Pennsylvania legislature to do that. It would set the limit at one handgun a month.

To the gun lobby, that is a totally unacceptable restriction. And many state legislators are whores to the National Rifle Association. The bill has been bottled up in the House Judiciary Committee.

In Pennsylvania, we can talk about the culture that creates gun violence. We can talk about stiffer sentences for those who commit a crime with guns. But, we can't talk about restricting the flow of guns. That is politically taboo.

It's also lunacy. It's as if we put every ounce of effort at treating cancer, but refused to consider any attempt at preventing cancer.

If you have this much blood on the streets, you should be willing to try anything to slow the flow.

Everyone knows you can't stop it. Murder has been with us since Cain slew Abel. But, the one-a-month restriction is a sensible and worthy experiment.

So, here is something to do in memory of Richard Johnson.

Write a letter or call state Rep. Dennis M. O'Brien (R., Phila.), who is chair of the House Judiciary Committee, and ask him to report out House Bill 871, the bill to limit handgun sales.

O'Brien's office number is 215-632-5150. His office address is 9811 Academy Rd., Philadelphia 19114-1715.

Pride of St. Albans Departs

The Flyers bought out John LeClair's contract yesterday, leaving him to negotiate with other teams. It was well known for years that, though LeClair's production was prolific in the 90s playing alongside Eric Lindros, his numbers had fallen way off and he was missing time from frequent recurring injuries, and the Flyers were basically overpaying him for his services.

Personally, I wish his goals and assists totals had been better in the playoffs than the regular season, but he worked hard and played with a ton of guts. Also, you can click the link for the Greater Philadelphia Food Bank on this site and join "John LeClair's Faceoff Against Hunger," so he definitely gave back to the community, both here and in Vermont.

Anyway, I personally want to wish him good luck and say thanks for a lot of good memories on the ice.

P.S. - By the way, the Flyers wasted absolutely no time in removing LeClair from the team roster, bottom-line guys that they are. I tried to link to LeClair's career stat sheet, and it was unavailable from the team site.

Update 8/16: Good luck playing with "Rex" and Sidney Crosby in Pittsburgh, big guy (but not against us).

The Mark Of A Leader

It's called H-U-M-I-L-I-T-Y, something Bushco will never understand.

Land of Pharaohs Tinged With Blood

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak is never shy about waging a crackdown when he thinks he has to, and you KNOW one is coming after this.

Labor Pains

God, this is sad.

In an excellent column in today's Inquirer, columnist Jane M. Von Bergen describes how some rank-and-file workers feel about the sparring within the AFL-CIO that is currently taking place. Here is what she wrote:

They say nothing is as American as baseball. Fifty years ago, when the AFL-CIO was founded, one could have said the same thing about labor unions. One in four Americans belonged to a labor union; now, only 12 percent of the nation's workforce is unionized.

Tomorrow in Chicago, the AFL-CIO may split in two, a potentially seminal moment in labor history and one that's been chewed over for months by union leaders, consultants and pundits.

On Wednesday in Camden, the Riversharks pulled out a seventh-inning rally to defeat the Newark Bears, 6-4, at Campbell's Field. It was a pleasant night, with the humidity down and Philadelphia's skyscrapers etched in soft relief against a pink sky.
The AFL-CIO splitting up?

Nobody knew, and not too many cared.

"What's a labor union?" asked Rodney Black, 17, a Camden high school senior who works at the ballfield making funnel cakes.

It was way too serious a topic for Jeff "Beep-Beep" Pennell, a nonunion clown from Maple Shade who was volunteering at the ballpark that night. "I really don't know," he said. "Have fun. Beep. Beep."

In Chicago, the debate is over how to increase union membership. One side wants to spend more of the labor movement's financial resources on grassroots organizing. The other side puts the focus on politics to elect officials who would enact more labor-friendly policies.

At the ballfield, the question was much more personal. Do unions matter?

"I don't think any kind of union matters," said Mount Ephraim's Harry Smith, 34, who attended the game with his son Zachary, 5.

"If your company wants to get rid of you, they are going to find a way to get rid of you - union or not," he said. That's what happened to Smith, a member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, at his last job.

Now he has another union job, as a maintenance worker in Mount Ephraim's streets department. "The union does fight for you on wages and benefits, like sick days," Smith said. "That's one good thing about the union."

Nonunion paratransit driver Jesse Banks, 49, from Northeast Philadelphia, wishes he were still making the money he earned when he was a Teamster, behind the wheel of a tractor-trailer.

"There are some positives," he said, as he methodically worked his way through a tray of peanuts. "The workers need a voice when they find themselves in a tough situation."

But his feelings are mixed. The trucking company owner told union negotiators he couldn't afford what they sought. No compromise was reached. The company closed, and Banks lost his job. "If the union could have accommodated him, we would be in business now," he said.

Frank Ross' feelings aren't mixed. In the spring, the Collingswood customer-service employee helped his company's management defeat a Teamsters organizing drive designed to unionize many of the 260 employees at Lehigh Press Inc. in Pennsauken.
"I wish every union in this country would shut," he said. "Unions are for the lazy and the weak. I used to work on the docks in Gloucester City, and it was ridiculous. They get paid outrageous wages for nothing."

Lauren Ryan's feelings aren't mixed either. An emergency medical technician from Gloucester City, she has seen first-hand what her father's union - "I think it's the Steelworkers" - did for her family when her brother was killed in Iraq in November.

There was a memorial service on the West Coast, she said, "and they gave us the airfare to fly out there. My dad didn't even have to ask. He just asked for some time off. It was awesome that they did it."

The AFL-CIO's Family Feud

What's going on?Last-minute negotiations to repair a rift in the nation's largest conglomeration of labor unions, the AFL-CIO, are looking increasingly unproductive. The AFL-CIO's convention starts Monday in Chicago.

What's next? Leaders of the some of the largest unions, including the Teamsters, the Service Employees and the United Food and Commercial Workers, may decide tomorrow to leave the AFL-CIO.

Over what?The dissidents want more focus on grassroots organizing and less focus on Democratic-oriented politics.

Then what? If the national unions break up, local branches of the unions will see if they can find a way to work together anyway.

You think I’m going to blame Dubya and the Repugs for this, don’t you?

Well, you’re wrong. The fault for this, as far as I’m concerned, lies primarily with the Democrats, and their capitulation to Repug business interests and the agendas of Beltway insiders, especially during the Clinton years.

For a high-school student to ask “What’s a labor union?,” represents a total failure at the grass roots level to educate people regarding the difference between the agendas of the political parties and defining their core constituencies (the shameful legacy of all of the “me too” Democrats out there, who David Sirota quite rightly rails against so often). It’s also the fault of the public elementary school system in this country for not teaching about this important part of our history, but that’s another story.

The importance of labor unions and their history should be understood by every working person in this country. Also, I think the AFL-CIO faction that wants to do more at the "grass roots" level has the right idea, since I think hoping for the politicians to do the right thing at this point is an exercise in futility.

I don’t have an issue with the people who are saying that unions matter less in this age of globalization, because they’re right unfortunately. These are the people interviewed in Von Bergen’s story and others who are driving tractor trailers, loading freight at our ports, and working in any one of hundreds of other types of jobs.

Also in the business section is an article that analyzes the latest round of layoffs, mentioning, in addition to the layoffs at Hewlett Packard, those at Kodak. This paragraph stood out in particular:

U.S. corporations announced plans in June to cut 110,996 jobs - the highest monthly total in 17 months - and July's toll could turn out to be steeper. Overall job cuts are on the rise in 2005, reaching 538,274 through June, according to Challenger's monthly job-cut analysis.

Here's more from AOL Business News.

This continues the worst economic stewardship under a presidential administration that I can ever recall in my lifetime (yes, I know, the layoffs aren’t entirely Bush’s fault, but, like Herbert Hoover many years ago, he doesn’t have a plan, an answer, or even a clue about what to do about it, or even an inclination since he’s a lame duck anyway).

Oh, and by the way, right below the story about the AFL-CIO appeared an article about how Kimberly-Clark, based in Irving, TX, is cutting 6,000 jobs (hint: globalization). I’m sorry that Frank Ross’s job won’t be one of them.

Update 7/25: The Daily Kos has a great report today on some of the unions that have split off from the AFL-CIO and how, though that isn't a good short-term development, it may be positive in the long run.

Update 7/27: Molly Ivins has a good analysis also.

A Sports Interlude

See Terrell Owens Run.

See Terrell Owens Run and Catch The Football from Donavan McNabb.

See Terrell Owens Avoid A Forearm To His Neck from Charles Woodson.

Run, Terrell, Run.

See Terrell Owens Talk To His Agent.

His Agent Tells Him Terrell Will Make Only $3.25 Million Dollars This Year.

Entire Neighborhoods Don't Make $3.25 Million Dollars In A Lifetime, Terrell.

Spend, Terrell, Spend.

See Terrell Owens Tell The Eagles He'll Hold Out For More Money.

See Terrell Owens Change His Mind And Report To Camp, Pretending To Make A Sacrifice.

Hustle, Terrell, Hustle.

See The Eagles Trade Terrell Owens And His Greedy Butt To The Pittsburgh Steelers Because, Though Antwaan Randle El Is A Talented Receiver, He's Not As Good As Plaxico Burress, Another Selfish Egomaniac Who Just Left And Signed With The Eagles' Rival, The New York Giants.

Goodbye, Terrell. Don't Let The Door Hit You On The Way Out.

Welcome To Wingnuttia!

(Thanks to Atrios for coming up with that one - long one coming up.)

You know, people, I should tell you that I try to keep an open mind about things. I really and truly do. However, I must point out that the Bucks County Courier Times carried a column today written by this carbon-based life form named Alan Caruba titled, “What My Father Didn’t Know: McCarthy Was Right.” Caruba is, of course, referring to the infamous Joe McCarthy and his communist witch hunts of the 1950s.

Don’t worry, you’re not imagining things. You read that correctly. And, as is almost always the case, I’d write to the paper about this, but I already have something else in the pipeline.

As you may have guessed, Caruba has written a book. It is called “Warning Signs,” published by Merril Press (I don’t mind giving it a plug, since I sincerely doubt that anyone who may be reading this would want to buy it – actually, I’m mentioning the publisher so you’ll know to avoid any of their other books in the future, since they funded this nut job.)

Anyway, I started to read Caruba’s diatribe, and of course it’s chock full of the typical right wing Repug agit-prop (“liberals this, New Deal that, leftist propaganda machine, etc.” – another “pot, meet kettle” moment as far as I’m concerned), but I thought, “well, maybe it’s somehow possible I could learn something I didn’t know in the midst of this drivel, so I’ll keep reading.”

(Caruba also goes back and slams Alger Hiss, who was convicted of perjury before a grand jury but not of espionage, and Hiss spent the rest of his life into his 90s trying to clear his name, with his health failing and losing his eyesight in the process. Hiss did achieve a measure of recompense, actually outliving his tormentor Richard Nixon, who built his political career upon the Hiss case.)

Well, the kicker came for me with this paragraph:

“The fact is that Joe McCarthy was right, but by now his name has been turned into a dirty word by the same liberal, leftist propaganda machine (see?) that today is trying to convince Americans that the President ‘lied’ to them about Iraq. They had to wait until the FBI’s first director, J. Edgar Hoover, was dead before they dared to slander his reputation.”

After I read that paragraph, I threw the newspaper across the room (a juvenile thing to do, I’ll admit, but it properly conveyed my disgust).

This, of course, is a typical Repug tactic. Attack, attack, attack, attack…throw so many charges out there that they can’t all possibly be answered at once with a reasonable argument. As for Bush and Iraq, that has been thoroughly covered. As for J. Edgar Hoover (huh?), he was in the mobster Meyer Lansky’s hip pocket because of all of the gambling debts he ran up, as well as the fact that Lansky had in his possession some – shall we say, uncomplimentary? – photos of Hoover in drag (“The Secret File on J.Edgar Hoover” by Anthony Summers is a good read in this vein). As a result, organized crime had a heyday under Hoover’s watch. Also, Hoover fed McCarthy all kinds of lies and misinformation that McCarthy used to ruin innocent people.

(I should mention – and I talked with my uncle once about this, who is now in his 90s and hanging on – that, at the time a lot of these people either joined the Communist party or knew someone who did, and I’m talking about the era of the Great Depression, this country was flat on its back. Communism was doomed to fail, fortunately, but back then to people who had nothing, it may have held out some misguided promise of success. My point is that hindsight is always 20-20.)

There are two main reasons why the Repugs attack history this way and hope to get away with it 1) People have short attention spans, for legitimate reasons of having extremely full lives or because of sloth or carelessness, or 2) Individuals who were part of the era from, say, post World War II until the Reagan era began in 1981 (which historians will mark as the beginning of the end of this country one day when “the book” is written) are dying off, their stories are fading into memory (including John Henry Faulk, who had to sue and spent every dime that he had to see that the HUAC was abolished), and the media, collectively, is ignoring their stories and, as a result, our history, doing so to our great peril.

This is also the reason why the Repugs go on the warpath at times over college curricula, saying that it is “too liberal,” and some professors are that way also. Yes, that is the case in selected instances, but as usual (see the University of Michigan lawsuit in which Sandra Day O’Connor ruled in favor of the school), the Repugs try to turn the exception into the rule.

Well, I should ignore this lunatic Caruba, but I’m not going to. If you want to inform yourself and get a true sense of what went on during the period in which Joe McCarthy ran roughshod over people’s lives and ruined their careers, creating a climate of fear and paranoia during the Eisenhower “feel good” era (and yes…I know McCarthy got going under Truman), here are some links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

http://www.answers.com/topic/hollywood-ten

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/welch-mccarthy.html

Also, the films “The Way We Were,” Guilty By Suspicion,” and the public television miniseries “Concealed Enemies” are highly instructive concerning this period.

The Repugs want us to forget our history, our culture, and ultimately, our way of life so they can impose their rule for good and forget where we were and how we got here.

We must NEVER let that happen.

Empathy vs. Egomania

I'm just going to publish this excellent column from John Salveson, printed in today's Philadelphia Inquirer, it its entirety, since I believe it speaks eloquently for itself. Salveson is the local spokesman for the Survivors Network of Those Abused By Priests.

By now, you're probably familar with U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum's comments about the Roman Catholic clergy sex-abuse scandal:

"Priests, like all of us, are affected by culture. When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. While it is no excuse for this scandal, it is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm."

Santorum's remarks reflect a profound misunderstanding of this scandal. Those of us who were abused by a trusted, often loved, clergy member could describe in exacting detail the first time we were violated - but few of us knew or cared whether the assailant was a liberal or a conservative.

We weren't considering the societal currents that led priests to force us into oral sex. We were terrified, violated and abandoned. And then, if we went to the church for help, we were lied to, berated and abandoned. Our church leaders chose, and mostly still choose, to protect the child rapists in their midst rather than helping the child victims.

Two reasons prompt this response to Santorum's comments. The first is a sincere desire to educate the senator and his colleagues about the truly important points of this issue. Toward that end, we invite him to attend a meeting of clergy sex-abuse survivors to learn about their experiences.

Second, we ask this powerful member of the Senate and staunch advocate for family values for help. We need him to assert his influence to hold church leaders accountable and to protect children.

For decades, thousands of children in America have been sexually abused by thousands of clergy of various denominations. Most of those who supervised these clergy knew they were abusing children but continued to move them from assignment to assignment to avoid scandal and liability. As a result, thousands more children were abused.

Despite all this, the federal government has made no attempt to understand how this could happen. I can't name a single member of the U.S. Senate or House who has taken any action on this issue. Sens. Edward Kennedy and John Kerry of Massachusetts were understandably upset by Santorum's slam at Boston's ethical culture. But they, too, have failed to take any action to hold the Catholic Church hierarchy accountable.

These are the requests that I and other members of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests make of Santorum and his colleagues:

Convene Senate hearings to find out how members of the clergy raped thousands of American children for decades, yet avoided prosecution, through the protection of their superiors.

Direct the Justice Department to investigate the criminal behavior of our country's religious institutions related to the sexual abuse of children.

Further direct the Justice Department to explore the use of federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act to prosecute those who conspired to leave children in harm's way and allowed sexual predators to have continued, unfettered access to fresh victims in new parishes and churches.

Survivors Network, a national advocacy and support organization, made similar requests to the Justice Department in November 2003. Santorum could initiate his work by finding out why no action was taken on our request.

Imagine what would happen in Congress if its members discovered that children were being systematically sexually abused in our public schools and that superintendents were moving the abusing teachers from school to school to shelter them. Imagine what would happen if such abuse and cover-up were uncovered at a national chain of day-care centers. Or the Little League.

Politicians would fall all over themselves to "do the right thing," expose the wrongdoing at public hearings and change the laws so that it never would happen again. But because the Roman Catholic Church is at the center of this scandal, this hasn't happened. Our elected officials in Washington have allowed the Catholic Church to operate above the law.

We are waiting for Santorum and his Washington colleagues to act. What will they do?

Stiff Wind In A House Of Cards

The Bucks County Courier Times led off its business section today with the headline, "Jobless claims down sharply," and the accompanying AP story references some institution called the "Conference Board" based in New York that came up with the related statistics, but as the story also mentions, "many analysts believe the expansion has begun slowing from last year's torrid pace in response to Federal Reserve hikes in U.S. interest rates."

Gee, sounds like, to me, we're still hoping and praying that the housing "bubble" doesn't burst from raising interest rates too much too soon. Also, now that China is off the dollar, we are definitely going to feel some pain in the way of paying more for their generally crappy products (though that SHOULD help us compete and save some jobs - we'll see).

Playing Catchup

(That would be me..)

Molly Ivins weighs in on the overall sorry state of things (sorry to be a downer, but this is chock full of important stuff).

The great Leonard Pitts, Jr. of the Miami Herald weighs in also on Colorado Repug wingnut Tom Tancredo (as I've said before, if this were Dean/Hillary/Kennedy/Kerry or another Dem, our corporate media would be working themselves into a frenzy by now, with the Repugs calling for censure).

E.J. Dionne has some cautionary words on Bushco Supreme Court nominee John Roberts (it would be nice if the Dems read what he has to say...we can only hope).

The Plot Thickens

(not very original, I know...)

More on Rove/Libby/Plame/Russert/Novak and a cast of thousands (or so it is starting to seem) from here (courtesy of Bloomberg News, The Smirking Chimp, and The Daily Kos).

Yuan To Feel Good About This

(Or, as I always say, no matter what kind of day you’re having or how hard it may be raining outside, it’s never an occasion to avoid a really bad play on words.)

Matt Singer, guest blogging for David Sirota, has a good post about China deciding to un-peg (word?) its currency against the dollar (let’s see what that does for our economy, though I think this is the economic equivalent of sending in some charwomen to clean up after the bombing of Dresden in WWII…think about it). He also slams “The Governator,” currently commanding a rip-roaring popularity rating of 34 percent in Kaa-Lee-Fuurr-Neee-Aahh.

(Knowing how badly he’s sliding, I wonder if Ahh-nold has been on the phone in negotiations with James Cameron for the next “Predator,” movie, where he has to fight a jungle beast that has mysteriously vanished but inexplicably turns up inside the remains of the Titanic? I can just imagine what kind of big summer movie “box office” that would do, and of course, Celine Dion would sing the movie’s “love theme.”)

So Much For Vigilance

This morning's CNN Quick Vote question was whether or not we needed to know more about Supreme Court nominee John Roberts before he was confirmed, and 35 percent of those polled actually said no.

(My message to the 35 percent...have another G/T, adjust your beach blankets, slap on some more SPF 40 and go back to sleep.)

And lest we forget, this is the quote and the author I'm referring to in the title.

Update1: P-U! Hey, you 35 percenters out there, can you say "quid pro quo"?

Update2: David Sirota - who else? - has a post on 7/22 describing how Roberts is a corporate shill (no surprise, I guess).

Thursday Roundup

Our prayers and hopes go out again to Londoners in the wake of more terrorist bombings. They taught the world a lesson in courage and determination during World War II, and it looks like they will be forced to again.

Speaking of pain and misery, apparently the leaders of Iraq are cozying up to Iran, as reported by Billmon and Arianna Huffington. Oh, that’s just great – our people are getting blown to bits so our “friends” in Iraq can cozy up to the enemy (actually, who is our friend and who is our enemy over there? Dubya, that’s one for you. Karl, Dick, Rummy, Condi…anyone?)

I’ve been saying for years that that whole damn area will go Muslim fundamentalist one day, and rest assured when I tell you that I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and even I saw this coming.

Stephen Crockett chimes in with an overview of this country’s descent into a plutocracy (the analysis is a bit simplistic, partly because it lets the Democrats and lazy, uninformed voters off the hook, but he’s essentially right), and Chris Floyd, in typical unsparing fashion, puts all of the pieces together in Bushco’s insidious scheme (including more new reeking, fetid stuff on John Roberts).

Speaking of Roberts, it looks like Bushco got a one-day reprieve in coverage over Karl Rove blowing of Valerie Plame’s identity (great digging on the Niger letter at Brandoland, BTW). A group of CIA agents testified yesterday that, by compromising her identity, the White House compromised also the identity of other operatives. Also, apparently there was some document that noted beyond any doubt (with an S next to her name) that her identity was secret (Update: this is what I'm referring to).

(I saw the story, but didn’t have time to link it…lots of other stuff going on that is hindering my blogging efforts, though I have been dumping tons of content here lately, so maybe it’s just as well for now.)

Atrios has a letter noting that Scumbag Santorum has refused to pay any tuition money to the Penn Hills School District for his children who attended the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School; worse, he may win the legal challenges and actually get away with it. Also, apparently Santorum’s wife was a lobbyist who made a ton of dough before she decided to be a “stay-at-home mom,” thus enabling the big-faced, white idiot to hammer working women. I almost don’t have the words to describe what I truly think of this person (however, the Dems better run on more that “Santorum fatigue” next year, because, unfortunately, too many people will have forgotten this stuff by then).

(Update: In another act of moral cowardice while everyone was preoccupied with the second near-attack on London, our august representatives in the U.S. House approved Patriot Act II.)

Good Job Hiding The Missing Digit

(Now you really didn’t think I was going to use “the tag line” did you?)

What an interesting life (though, with nine kids, it sounds like he was as prolific as a tribble:- ). It also sounds like “Star Trek” was just a part of his long story (and I salute his ability to father a child at 80!).

He had been sick for the last few years, so I’m glad he’s finally in a better place.

What...He Didn't Charge A Fee?

Let’s see now...regarding this story, maybe the boy could have made it out, but Rosenhaus could have accidentally slipped back in and sunk to the bottom without saving himself, or maybe he could have slipped on the phone that he’d dropped and fallen and cracked his head open, or maybe he could have fractured his wrist in the process of administering CPR and not realized it until after the boy had recovered…the mind boggles with possibilities.

(Yes, I know I shouldn’t say this because I mention on this site that I don’t advocate violence.)

See, you have to know why we in the Philadelphia area despise this guy. He basically sought out Terrell Owens, who is hardly a wallflower to begin with (though Owens showed a ton of guts in the Super Bowl) and brainwashed him into holding out for more money from the Eagles (with Owens’ typically understated comparison of himself to Jesus…oh brother!).

Rosenhaus, Scott Boras...put all of these scummy sports agent characters on a slow boat to China without oars. Or water.

Birds, Bees, and Bush

(In the title, I’m referring to Dubya and his administration, by the way....long one coming up.)

I’ve been trying to post something about this for the last couple of weeks, but I’ve gotten interrupted for various reasons. Well, here goes.

There have been a few stories coming out lately about how bad the “abstinence only” policy of the Bush Administration is for the reproductive and overall sexual health of teenagers in particular (as well as women in general). Nicholas Kristof, in a recent New York Times article (which I’ll get to shortly) referred to the policy as “a scandal”.

Sheryl McCarthy of Newsday also reported this on July 15th…

Abstinence-only sex education for teenagers took another hit last week when a prominent group of pediatricians came out in support of giving teens access to birth control.

In an article in the July journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the organization's committee on adolescence concludes that while pediatricians should encourage adolescents to postpone early sexual activity, they should also make sure youths have access to contraceptives, including emergency contraception.

The recommendation flies in the face of the abstinence-only approach being pushed by the Bush administration and religious groups. And dramatically, the article abandoned the academy's former policy that called abstinence counseling "an important role for all pediatricians.

Why?

"Because there isn't any evidence that that message is effective," said Dr. Scott Spear, associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and chairman of the national medical committee of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

"As scientists, we're saying we don't want politics to trump what's healthy and safe for young people."

The academy's report is one more in a series of studies that have concluded that the just-say-no approach has no proven record of reducing sexual activity or pregnancy among teenagers.

And this one comes directly from the doctors who treat young people.

Yet the Bush administration is relentlessly pushing on with its efforts to make sure that the abstinence-only message is the only kind of sex education available to young people.

In 2001, a few years after the push to expand such programs began, the federal government spent $80 million on abstinence-only programs. It will spend $167 million in this fiscal year.

"We've got more than 10 years of federal financing to the tune of $700 million for abstinence-only, and no science shows that it's effective," Spear told me.

While no one, including myself, wants to encourage sexual activity among teenagers, the abstinence-only policy is flawed because it chooses idealism over helping young people with the lives they actually lead.

The academy found that 45 percent of high school girls and 48 percent of high school boys have already had sexual intercourse. And while the teenage pregnancy rate has been dropping in recent years, the main cause has not been increased celibacy, but the use of more effective birth control, according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute.

The problem with abstinence-only is not that it promotes abstinence, but that it's anti-birth-control. A Columbia University study in 2000 found that while adolescent pledges to remain virgins until marriage delayed the age of first intercourse briefly, when the pledgers did have sex they were less likely than non-pledgers to use birth control.

A congressional study done last year found that abstinence-only programs were rife with misinformation: teaching students that condoms don't help prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and that legal abortions lead to sterility and to premature births. They also promote sexual stereotypes about boys and girls.

Frankly, I'm less worried about the fact that a 17-year-old girl has sex with her boyfriend than I am about whether she has thought the decision through carefully, has chosen a caring partner, and is using a dependable form of birth control.

The problem with the Bush administration's approach is that it's practicing faith-based medicine, and one of the results is that 900,000 teenagers still get pregnant every year.

Groups such as the academy need to keep telling the truth until the message sticks, and until science and sound social policy begin to trump politics.

Kelly Mangan also wrote this in January…

In George W. Bush's first budget to Congress (April 9, 2001), he scrapped the provision that required insurance companies to cover contraceptives for 9 million federal employees (something House democrats later reinstated). Bush insisted that this measure was meant to save money, but if were we really concerned with saving money, perhaps he should have spent less on tax cuts to the rich instead of axing programs that benefit women.

Also on April 9, Bush blocked U.S. grants to family-planning groups that provide contraceptive and abortion services/counseling overseas. While the president has certainly done his part to limit the knowledge and options of women abroad, the focus of Bush's war on women is at home.

And…

On March 1, 2002, Bush appointed Tom Coburn and Joe McIlhaney to lead the President's Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS. Both Coburn and McIlhaney have spoken out against condom use, and have worked to push abstinence as the only means to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS (Source: Planned Parenthood web site).

(My note here…Coburn, unfortunately, was elected by the voters of Oklahoma to the U.S. Senate last year after he said that “same-sex marriage is a bigger threat to our country than terrorism,” and also after he said that he would check the Constitution to see if it represents, “the moral code that I follow.” Stand up and take another bow, you red state numbskulls!)

Bush nominated Justice Janice Rogers Brown for U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Brown upheld the right of Catholic hospitals to refuse employees' health coverage to include birth control.

Dr. David Hager--whom Bush appointed to the FDA's Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs--refuses to prescribe contraception to unmarried women in his gynecological practice. Bush also appointed Dr. Joseph Stanford to the same committee. In his family practice, Dr. Sanford refuses to prescribe birth control at all (Source: National Women’s Law Center press release, July 2001).

At the 2002 U.N. Population Conference, Assistant Secretary of State Arthur Dewey- another right-wing Bush appointee- promised that the U.S. would block any U.N. policies that contain the words "reproductive health" or "consistent condom use." Delegates from all over the world said America's position at this conference put women's health at risk, and even the delegate from Iran said that the U.S. Government had been overrun by religious extremists.

Oh, great (or, as Kos would say, "pot, meet kettle...").

Bush also appointed acting FDA Commissioner Lester Crawford and Acting Drug Chief Stephen Galson, who decided not to approve the Morning-After Pill for over-the-counter sales. And just incase Crawford and Galson didn't realize how they were supposed to decide, it was clearly outlined in a Jan. 14 letter to President Bush from 49 conservative state legislators. The letter demanded that President Bush stop the FDA from deciding in favor of Morning-After Pill over-the-counter.

Here’s more from Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times in February…

To get federal funds (for sex education), abstinence-only programs are typically barred by law from discussing condoms or other forms of contraception – except to describe how they can fail. So kids in these programs go all through high school without learning anything but abstinence, even though more than 60 percent of American teenagers have sex before they’re 18.

And…

Other developed countries focus much more on contraception. The upshot is that while teenagers in the U.S. have about as much sexual activity as teenagers in Canada or Europe, American girls are four times as likely as German girls to become pregnant, almost five times as likely as French girls to have a baby, and more than seven times as likely as Dutch girls to have an abortion. Young Americans are five times as likely to have H.I.V. as young Germans, and teenagers’ gonorrhea rate is 70 times higher in the U.S. than in the Netherlands or France…

In contrast, there’s plenty of evidence that abstinence-plus programs – which encourage abstinence but also teach contraception – delay sex and increase the use of contraception. So, at a time when we’re cutting school and health programs, why should we pour additional tax money into abstinence-only initiatives, which are likely to lead to more pregnancies, more abortions, and more kids with AIDS?

Now that’s a scandal.

Mangan finished her January column with this…

Over the past four years, we have seen that progress on women's issues is obstructed at every turn by the Bush administration-he and other Republicans have done everything in their power to take away women's contraceptive, abortion, childcare, and healthcare options. But women, united, have the power to change this.

Not just women, but everyone. Especially now, since Bush has nominated Roberts for the Supreme Court, whose hostility towards issues of women’s reproductive health has been well documented.

I think we can all agree that we want everyone – girls, boys, men, women – to have the best information on this subject at their disposal that we can provide. We also want to get this notion that “oral sex isn’t really sex” (practiced by Clinton before he was forced to “see the light,” unfortunately) out of their heads for good. The stakes are just too high for us not to do that.

A Voice Of Reason Speaks

I think Joe Conason’s latest is an intelligent version of the dreck Steve Chapman wrote a couple of weeks ago. Conason addresses the situation with Judith Miller, which he smartly recognizes as different from that of Time reporter Matthew Cooper (a distinction that numbskull Chapman didn’t make).

I have to admit that I’m coming to recognize the differences in the Miller and Cooper cases also, partly because of Conason’s column (re: the Valerie Plame matter, of course – by the way, I caught a pix of her in Time, and she’s a hottie, which I guess isn’t surprising since she’s married to a high-profile, “balls to the wall” dude like Joe Wilson).

After reading an interview with Miller’s editor at the New York Times (Bill Keller, I think – appeared on Atrios), he said something along the lines of “I wish Fitzgerald would just end this now and let Judy out,” and I’m thinking, oh great – then it really would be all for nothing if Fitzgerald picked up his marbles and called it a day without sending up Rove and other Bushco crooks, just so Judy Miller could get out of eating prison food and watching rap videos in her minimum security slam in Alexandria, VA. I’m slowly coming around to see Joe Conason’s point on this, though I still think Miller’s shilling for Bushco on Iraq War II and slamming of John Kerry are separate matters and should be treated that way.

I think Miller is on shaky ground in this, but I’m starting to come around to Cooper’s position, especially since the guy has to face “drawn swords” all over the place from Fitzgerald, Pearlstine (Time’s editor), and others. Cooper is trying to do the right thing, and it’s becoming more clear that Miller is trying to be some sort of “freedom of the press” heroine, shielding people who don’t deserve it.

Update: William Safire, though a respected columnist, is still a conservative shill, and the fact that he supports Miller also is making me rethink my position along Joe Conason's lines even more.

Who's Gonna "Shoot" J.R.?

(Sorry for the dated '80s reference.)

We'll find out more about this guy John Roberts in the coming hours and days, of course, but I look at it this way: he must have done a circle jerk with James Dobson or one of these characters at some point, or he never would have made it this far.

I have two quick notes. The first is that (and I hate to admit this) Bushco foxed the punditry again (not hard to do, really), probably by floating disinformation about Edith Brown Clement (Ruthie Ginsberg may get lonely at times...oh well). The second is that Santorum has gone on record as saying that this guy is "brilliant," which is a really scary red flag. USA Today also reported this morning that Roberts argued against Roe v. Wade. Oh, fun...

This is about what we could have expected from Bushco, really. No compromise, no middle ground...nothing. Still, though, I think Harry Reid played it the right way by sounding conciliatory, for now.

Update: According to David Sirota's blog, Roberts was also a Bushco "shock troop" (my quote) during the 2000 Florida recount fiasco. This is starting to reek more and more...

A Slap In The Face

(I've been trying to find some story or come up with some commentary to lighten things up a bit around here, after the posts on the NRA, Santorum, Westmoreland and Eric Rudolph, but I'll have to keep looking.)

"Job cuts are a good start..."

If that line had been buried somewhere in the story, that would have been bad enough. BUT THIS WAS THE HEADLINE!

Oh, and we're supposed to feel GLAD that ONLY 14,000 people were let go by Hewlett Packard instead of 25,000, which was projected by industry analysts! And, as far as this bought-and-paid-for media clown Paul R. LaMonica is concerned, the WORST PART was that - omigosh! - the SHARE PRICE WENT DOWN!!

This "story" (which probably came word for word from a company press release) is revolting and sickening. Yes, I realize the CNN/Money audience is composed of people trying to figure out where to invest their dough, which is the American way and completely legal and encouraged, but somehow I don't think that audience is composed totally of the same heartless swine as LaMonica.

If you're reading this, please do me a favor. Contact CNN and demand that LaMonica is fired (and I assure you, I don't make that statement lightly). Then he'll come to appreciate a "good start" for himself!

P.S. - If you know someone at Hewlett Packard who was affected by this abomination, please post a comment or send me an Email (link in the very bottom right corner of page), and I'll feature it. I'm a tiny little guppy in the blogosphere, but I'll do what I can.

Big Faced, White Idiot Time!

It's been a little while since we took a shot at Rick "Man on Dog" Santorum, so I thought we were due again (thanks, Atrios).

As inconceivable as it is that Santorum says and believes this stuff, I should point out that a political analyst somewhere said that what he is in fact doing is drawing the battle lines for the next election and trying to energize his conservative base. I don't want to imagine for a second what goes on in the minds of people who actually support this cretin, though.

Take Your Gun Party Somewhere Else!

Since I don’t live in Columbus, OH, I don’t have the same familiarity with the issue of gun violence in that city that the people living there do. I just know that, in PA, the cities of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh tried to pass assault weapons bans, and our august state legislators basically passed a law that said that those cities weren’t allowed to do that and couldn’t attempt to do so again (tells you just how powerful the NRA is in my state).

Well, Columbus just passed an assault weapons ban (here is some background), and as surely as the Pope is German, the NRA cancelled their 2007 convention that they had planned for that city. This topic is the subject of today's CNN Quick Vote, with about 45 percent saying the NRA did the right thing, and about 55 percent saying they didn't.

I went to the NRA’s site to read their spin on this (predictable, I know, but I needed to get a better understanding), and of all their typical propaganda mentioned in their “news release,” this paragraph stuck out:

Speaking at a press conference at the Greater Columbus Convention Center, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre stated that the NRA would return to Columbus when the Legislature enacts a preemption law that would override the Columbus ban.

Surprising that they would do this? No, since as I said above, this is their typical tactic. It’s just that I am continually amazed at the sheer, unmitigated gall of many conservative groups (and some liberal ones on occasion) when they make it sound so matter of fact that they intend to hammer people into submission to get what they want.

The NRA fights everything. What’s the problem with “one gun a month”? Anybody? What’s the problem with a ban on Teflon-coated bullets? As Ted Kennedy once asked, “Do deer wear bulletproof vests?” Making purchases illegal at gun shows without a background check? What’s the matter – reek too much of common sense?

Everybody knows our cops out there are outgunned. Most police are good, but all of them deserve a fighting chance.

The entire pro-gun vs. gun control argument should be framed in terms of what makes the most sense for the cops, but largely because of the NRA, that never happens. Also, I don’t know any product manufacturer anywhere that has immunity from prosecution for the product they manufacture, but that’s what the gun lobby has.

There’s a lot more that can be said about this issue on one side and the other, but I’m going to leave it for now after I say this. I’ve had the privilege to work with people who are members of the NRA, and they are extremely responsible individuals who practice gun safety and teach respect for guns to others. I have absolutely no problem with these people. Also, if someone legally owns a firearm, that is their property and no one should be allowed to take it from them unless it is used in the commission of a crime.

The problem I have is with the NRA’s leadership – you know, including Chuck “Pry This Weapon Out Of My Cold, Dead Hands” Heston…this bunch of lunatics that positively insisted on holding their 1999 convention in Denver, CO just says after the last victim of the nearby Columbine massacre was buried. They’re stone nuts!

(Here's an update - for that stupid remark about Porsches and sniper rifles at the end of the story, Chuck Cunningham should be made to awaken to the sound of gunshots in the middle of the night.)

The Meaning Of The Word "If"

Oh, so now Dubya says heads will roll in Bushco “if a crime has been committed" (hmmm...).

Under that logic, let’s consider this. The Enron scandal broke around February-March of 2002, right? So it is now July 2005, and Ken Lay, former chief executive and chairman, STILL has not come to trial (though that is scheduled to take place next January). So does Dubya mean that we could be looking at the possibility of THREE YEARS worth of investigations of Rove, “Scooter” Libby, Cheney et al before a verdict would be rendered in a potential criminal trial (which, in all likelihood, would not take place until after this crew is mercifully out of office anyway)?

Putting aside the fact that this is an unbelievable flip flop by Smirk (which he got caught in because, when he made his original statement about people being let go from the Plame mess, he probably didn’t expect it to amount to much), it also points out a basic fact of Bushco life, and that is that Rove runs everything, and he quite simply is not going to go anywhere unless he is manacled and let out of the White House by U.S. marshals (and wouldn’t we all LOVE to see that!).