Outside the Spectrum

   The president has indicated that he is willing to go to Congress (gasp!) to ask them to rewrite American Law to allow military tribunals to determine the fate of detainees. The Hamdan Ruling yesterday has forced his hand.

   Victor Davis Hanson has published his syndicated column maintaining that military tribunals are the best way to go.

   Of course, he can’t write about any issue regarding law or politics without taking some time to slap Europe around. It’s part of the conservative code: try to discredit the ACLU, the NAACP, Europe, college professors, liberals, and human rights groups.

   Hanson starts his writing with a series of one-sided arguments and begging the question. That is not honesty. He mentions that there are roughly 450 prisoners there, “many of them killers,” without adducing any evidence as to how many is “many” and how he knows some are killers. He can’t know because no evidence against these men has come to light in an impartial court. He’s taking the good word of the administration on this one, despite the fact that the vast majority of inmates were captured not by the US military but by Pakastani intelligence officials and Northern Alliance warlords back when there was a bounty for suspects.

   Even if we are to cede the point to Hanson that “many” are killers that still means that many aren’t. How are we to sort the wheat from the chaff, so to speak?

   He mentions that they are “treated as well as inmates in either Europe or the U.S.” That certainly begs the question. First of all, we know from government reports and Human Rights Watch that inmates have been abused at Guantanamo. Secondly, Guantanamo isn’t open to the Red Cross or the press in general. So Hanson is just going to trust the good word of the jailers that all those abuses are in the past now.

   International and U.S. law maintain that prison facilities must be open to the Red Cross, but Hanson doesn’t mention that.

   Hanson echoes the conservative cant that this is an “unprecedented post-modern war of few good choices in which the enemy does not wear uniforms, adhere to the Geneva Convention or distinguish civilians from soldiers.”

   This is Bill O’Reilly’s language. This is an ugly war so we have to be ugly to win it. We need a new Phoenix Program. This is the language of Senator Pat Roberts, Mr. “Rights won’t do us any good when we’re dead.” This is the language and the thinking, in fact, of the republican majority in control of Congress. This is the reasoning from the writers at the Weekly Standard, including Bill Kristol, who argue that the use of torture is necessary to win the War on Terror and the War in Iraq. This is the language of Laura Ingraham, of Michael Savage, of the entire right-wing establishment.

    Wrong. As Max Weber said, “from no ethics in the world can it be concluded when and to what extent the ethically good purpose ‘justifies’ the ethically dangerous means and ramifications.” Torture, indefinite detention, and the elimination of the fourth amendment are not moral and they never have been, and the “ethically good purpose” does not justify the “ethically dangerous means and ramifications.”

   But we have to break the law to pursue the bad guys, because, according the Hanson, it would be too troublesome to try them using standard or martial courts. He says, “By doing that we would be inviting thousands of lawyers and public defenders to argue, on behalf of their clients, that we are not in a real war but simply prosecuting common criminals. Numerous trials and appeals would likely follow.” See? Too much of a pain in the ass. And even then, “Europeans would still object, since the U.S. would be exposing foreign nationals to possible death penalty sentences.”

   They might object to the death penalty, but Victor painting the Europeans as impossible to please is extraordinarily cynical. Europe didn’t exactly level an embargo against the United States when we invaded Iraq ahead of any UN authorization, nor when it was revealed that hundreds of detainees had been abused and sometimes tortured. I suspect their criticism of US practices would be pretty muted if the US gave detainees a fair trial.

   So this provides an opening for Hanson to go on yet another anti-European diatribe. All those Europeans, all of those hundreds of millions of people, love to “vent their much larger love-hate frustrations with their protector and rival…By ankle-biting America on Guatanamo, the Europeans sound moral and tough while ignoring the real dangers…”

   Good Lord. Just listen to the man. First of all, he cynically asserts that Europeans aren’t really concerned with human rights. That’s just a vehicle for their emotional frustrations. And then he describes their criticism as “ankle-biting.”

   Hanson’s cultural arrogance is offensive, and I have written about it before. I still write about it because it is shared by all conservatives. I can’t turn one page of the latest National Review without stumbling across WFB saying the same things.

   Hanson doesn’t know anything about the secret, passionate feeling of Europeans. Notice how he doesn’t refute the human rights argument here: he just launches an ad hominem attack against the invisible intentions of his political target. Then he dismisses them as “ankle-biters.”

   I wonder what he might say if Europeans did the same thing, if Europeans dismissed his concern over security as a false front for America’s secret desire to rule the world.

   They might actually have some evidence to back up their claim. They might point out that Iraq never had anything to do with terrorists more so than Uzbekistan, and that there never were any WMDs. They might point out the fact that the American Provisional Authority eliminated tariffs in Iraq that allow US and transnational corporations to dump goods in Iraq. They might point out that we abandoned Afghanistan to insurgents to invade Iraq. They might point out that terrorist attacks worldwide have risen every year Bush has been in office. They might point out the fact that America turns a blind eye to the terrorism originating in Saudi Arabia because of our massive financial involvement there. So isn’t this War on Terror just a cover for imperial hegemony?

   Europeans aren’t alone in their condemnation of US detention policies, but Hanson might start sounding ridiculous if he said “So the Europeans are just jealous whiners. Oh yeah, and the Canadians, too. Central America…well, they’ve never liked us. South America? Jealous. Asia? All jealous. THE WORLD is jealous, just jealous of our enormous power.”

   They aren’t jealous, though, Victor. Europe isn’t jealous because they don’t spend nearly as much of their GDP on a massive military even in times of peace. They aren’t trying to replace America as a military superpower.

   Victor finally surmounts Mt. Arrogance and accuses the Europeans of living in a “dream world,” safely protected by big, strong America. Because we all know Great Britain has never had to deal with Irish terrorists. France never suffered from Algerian-sponsored terror. Italy never endured terror attacks from a massive variety of sources in the late twentieth century. No European planes were ever hijacked by “islamofascists.”

   Of course, in the real world, Europe has had to deal with terrorism for generations. In fact, Europe has far, far more experience with terrorism than the United States. They don’t live in a “dream world.” In fact, it would be fair to say we might learn something from their tactics, their mistakes and successes, if we truly seek to understand terrorism and the best ways to eliminate it.

   But Victor, though a historian by trade, has a stunningly feeble grasp of history. That, or, more likely, he actively seeks to ignore history when it suits his purposes.

   Europe has always been a bone in the craw of conservatives, what with its social programs setting a bad example for Americans and its politicians frequently criticizing the worst of American policy. Conservatives like Hanson won’t convince any intelligent people to dismiss Europe when it’s the policies of the United States that are flawed.


  

   The Supreme Court has ruled that the military tribunals the administration was seeking to use to process terror suspects do not comply with the Geneva Conventions or US law. If the administration wants to try suspects it must at least be in a military court with a jury, apparently.

   I am a little abashed at this ruling. I remember recommending military tribunals as a solution to the problem of indefinite detainment of prisoners without trial. I didn’t consider it an ideal solution, but I thought it was something the administration would have to go a long with at a minimum.

   The Supreme Court ruled 5-3 (Roberts abstaining) that US law and the Geneva Conventions stipulate that detainees are entitled to a full court process.

   The right was furious with this ruling. Laura Ingraham raged against “softheaded” justices like Stevens who ruled in the majority. Trent Lott called the ruling “ridiculous and outrageous,” before mentioning that he hadn’t read it.

   As the court ruled, and as Glenn Greenwald has pointed out, the president could still go to congress to get it to abridge the law to allow him the use military tribunals.

   Last Sunday Palestinian militants raided an Israeli Army checkpoint, killed a couple of soldiers, and kidnapped one. On Monday Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, promised a punitive strike if the soldier wasn’t freed.

   Israel responded by sending its army into Gaza City and the West Bank a few days ago, almost completely destroying the Gaza City power plant and sweeping through the city looking for the lost soldier. Now few of the 1.3 million Gaza residents have power. The water pumps lack power and now many don’t have a water supply. Hospitals and clinics now lack power. Medicines in refrigerators have gone bad. Israel also bombed several bridges and completely surrounded the city, with Prime Minister Olmert saying “From now, according to instructions given by myself and the defense minister, Gaza is sealed off by sea and land. No one goes out and no one comes in.”

   Israeli defense forces sent bulldozers and tanks into the West Bank, destroying homes and shops. Some children were shot in the legs in the course of anti-terror operations by Israel’s special forces.

   Israel also arrested 64 members of Palestine’s Hamas government yesterday.

   All of this, ladies and gentlemen, to recover one young soldier who is a hostage. Does this make sense to you? If some militant organization in San Diego kidnapped a US serviceman from the San Diego Naval Station or Miramar would the National Guard surround San Diego, imprison everyone in the city, bomb the power plant, and then send tanks, bulldozers, and Navy SEALs rampaging around the city, crippling children with errant gunfire and setting fire to small businesses? As the people without power or water in the imprisoned city suffered do you think there would be some criticism of the military forces?

   The actions of the IDF are simply that of collective punishment, what Israel has been doing for generations. Cut off water and power to the city, imprison the populace, send troops and tanks across the region (with the inevitable fatalities, accidental shootings, people dying from lack of power in the hospitals, etc.), then watch the 1.3 million people suffer.

   My Chicago Tribune, which is Dead to Me, had nothing to say about the ridiculously draconian Israeli response. Shame on them. But, then again, they have no shame. That’s why they’re Dead to Me. Human Rights Watch, however, has voiced concerns identical to mine.

  

   So we have White House procurement chief David Safavian pleading guilty…

   Orrin Hatch took to the offensive today, saying that the most important thing the government should be doing right now is…(drum roll, please)…banning flag burning. Oh, yes, I agree. Now that Congress voted a pay raise for itself while voting down an increase in the minimum wage, we can move on to the real issues.

   Congress held a hearing yesterday to air its grievances against the Bush Administration  regarding his use of signing statements, an issue I have covered before. Michelle Boardman, deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, maintained that it is President Bush’s duty to ensure that Congress does not pass an unconstitutional law.

   This is the administration’s view in plain language. Please tell me where in the constitution the president has the right to unilaterally determine what laws are constitutional or not.

   As I wrote a day or two ago, the Supreme Court is the authority that may overturn laws it deems constitutional, not the president. This is civics 101. This is such a basic concept that high school students understand it. It takes an administration with a stunning amount of gall to come before Congress and tell it that the president has the right to ignore laws he deems inappropriate.

   Once again, as with the NSA wiretapping scandal and many others, the administration looks Congress in the eye, pees on the Constitution, and dares it do something about it.

   The administration has also been busy slapping the New York Times, which ran a story a few days ago concerning the CIA and Treasury department’s covert operation to monitor bank transactions. The administration was, of course, furious at the disclosure.

   The program centers around a “messaging service” called Swift, which transmits communications between thousands of banks worldwide. The crux of the controversy about this program is that because Swift is “based overseas and has offices in the United States, it is governed by European and American laws,” according to the Times. The administration has used broad subpoenas instead of specific court orders to acquire massive amounts of information. This has led to critics voicing concern over the lack of due process.

   Of course, the lack of due process in anything this president’s administration does has never troubled republicans and right-wing people in this country. As Glenn Greenwald has put it (as cogently as usual), “What the Times revealed is the lack of oversight and checks on these intelligence-gathering activities, not the existence of the activities themselves, which were already well known.” It had already been made public that the administration was searching Swift for suspicious transactions. What the Times adduced that it was doing so in a broad and legally suspicious way.

   But the usual suspects were out in force throwing the word “treason” around at anything that even looked like the New York Times. Brit Hume was flat-out snarling. Bill Kristol was advocating criminal prosecution of the Times. Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY) also leveled the treason charge at the Times. Senator Pat Roberts, a man who is Dead to Me, cynically asked Bush’s intelligence agencies to assess whether Bush’s program had been harmed by the disclosure Bush called “disgraceful.”

   Glenn cites the Boston Globe for its revealing article about how this administration’s efforts to monitor financial transactions, incuding Swift transactions, have been published and well known.

   I can’t help but wonder if the right is really angry over the disclosure of this program because they erroneously think it might hurt terror prosecutions or if they are instead angry because it has revealed yet another instance of the administration seizing heretofore unseen powers in its effort to prosecute suspected terrorists.

   And, finally, a tip o’ the hat to Papa Bear Bill O’Reilly, who finds new ways to say something completely indefensible every day of his God forsaken life. This one simply takes the cake. In fact, it is so completely reprehensible, it is such an unambiguous sign of the love of fascism inherent in Bill (and his cohorts in FOX News and right-wing media) that it deserves a truly special award. I am announcing that the first Bitterharvest Facist Adulator Award shall go to none other than Bill O’Reilly. God bless you, Bill.

   By the way, check out Sweet Jesus, I Hate Bill O’Reilly. Simply hilarious.

   When you elected retarded sons of privilege to the presidency, you get presidents like George W. Bush. Remind me again, is this the president that’s supposed to be leading us to solving our problems, or is he just a shill for corporate America?

   I’m sorry, Lush, but this is too good. How’s that erectile dysfunction going? You know, for years liberals have been saying that Lush’s “feminazi” and similar comments had some kind of deep, abiding sexual problem behind them. Now we know.

   Sorry, Lush. Couldn’t resist, dude. Bad news is the whole episode might result in a second-degree misdemeanor charge. I doubt they will press charges, though, and even if they do what’s the penalty, a $50 fine?

   Although the subject is old, the Democratic Policy Committee held a hearing on the weapons of mass destruction issue. Seeing as the Senate Intelligence Committee has stalled the second phase of the report indefinitely, maybe these kinds of hearings are important. Memorable line: “Three words: the Vice-President.”    Crooks and Liars has some video, God bless them, and a new, spiffy format for their website.

   Another Crooks and Liars video of a truly golden moment: “Fightin’” Joe Biden saying that he simply will not respond to the assertions of the Vice-President because “He has no credibility.” Wow. The senator simply dismisses the Vice-President.

   Russ, my presidential candidate of choice, was at his best with Tim Russert recently.

  
   The debate continues about the Iraq War on Capital Hill. The war has dragged on for three years. Now a majority of people want to withdraw, but republicans dismiss this as a “cut and run” strategy. Remind me again, republicans, who is paying for this war, you or us?

   More info on global warming, as if 900+ peer-reviewed scientific studies isn’t enough: this time from the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

   Regarding the NSA wiretapping scandal, there have been several not-so-momentous developments, which Glenn Greenwald covers well. I highly recommend you visit his website.

   The pace of these developments is akin to the pace of watching grass grow. The president has admitted to violating FISA and ordering thousands of wiretaps without warrants, maintaining that FISA is unconstitutional. Of course, he has no more authority to rule a law unconstitutional than I do: that is the job of the courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court, if they choose to do so. If memory serves, what usually happens when a person breaks a law in this country is that person is arrested, brought up on charges, maybe released on bail, and then the court date is set to examine and judge the claims of the defendant as to whether or not their lawbreaking was justified. Of course, if that person happens to be the president of the United States, that person is apparently above the process of the law.

   Way back in March of 2004 NBC discovered that the president and the National Security Council had nixed multiple Pentagon plans to attack Abu Musab Zarqawi because “the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.” Allegations of the president playing politics with the War on Terror, sadly enough, are hardly new. Although this is old news, I think we need to be reminded of this as Congress debates the war in terms of 9/11, as the Justice Department brings a case against Jose Padilla (an American citizen) 3.5 years after they detained him without charges, right before the Supreme Court was set to rule on his detentions by all indications, against the administration.

  

    I have covered Paul Pillar here before, but he has come out recently and been more blunt in his criticism of the administration’s use of intelligence before the Iraq War (though Pillar is analytical and somewhat circumspect, as always).

    Ron Suskind’s new book alleges that, when President Bush was briefed about the August 2001 warning of the pending al Qaeda attack, his response was “All right. You’ve covered your ass, now.” Wow. Much cynicism from el Presidente, eh? The problem, of course, was that the president didn’t cover our ass.

    Turdblossom’s words continue to amaze me. I am reminded of when Sec. Rumsfeld dismissed Western Europe as “Old Europe” and some infuriated French diplomat took the US ambassador aside and said “Zees ees a little cheeky for a zhecretary of defense, ees eet not?” Granted, Rove is an advisor, but he’s also a public servant on the payroll of the US taxpayer. Mr. President? Could you reign in that arrogant SOB please?

    One of the most unheralded and yet disturbing votes in the Senate in recent memory.

    Juan Cole writes an amusing and indignant repudiation of the administration’s comparisons of the Iraq War and World War II.

    Sometimes I’m not sure if Cheney lies constantly or if he simply has no real grasp on reality.

    Few “journalists” who write for real, mainstream publications inspire as much irritation in me as Joe Klein. In fact, from here on out he will be known as Joe “Effing” Klein.

    I never thought I would cite Andrew Sullivan, but when in comes to torture his heart is in the right place.

    Bill Kristol is urging the president to do follow in the footsteps of his father and pardon Libby. I am not surprised that the man who defended the use of torture is urging this action. Blatant lawlessness in the highest reaches of government, in recent decades, has been simply rampant. The question is increasingly becoming this: what are we going to do about it?

   Karl, Karl, Karl. Rove recently leveled some charges at the liberal blogosphere, labeling them an avenue “to mobilize hate and anger” at conservatives and democrats who stray too far from the one, true path. Oh, yes, they are also “very out-of-the-mainstream.”

   Same old talking points. It makes sense, seeing as he’s the one who writes them.

   I question whether I should contradict these points, but, what the Hell, what is this blog for if not to counter the malevolent influence of Karl Rove?

   First of all, there is a lot of anger on liberal blogs. People have good reason to be angry with a government that explodes the national debt, sinks the country into a disastrous war, violates international law, and passes ceaseless tax cuts for Thurston Howell and his idiot sons while allowing companies to pump poisons into the land, water, and air. Did you here that, nowadays, there’s so much mercury in tuna that Consumer Reports recommends that pregnant women never eat it?

   Secondly, talk about the pot calling the kettle black! Have you ever read right-wing blogs? Jesus H Christ, those psychos are twenty minutes and a six-pack away from stoning media show hosts and hanging democrats.

   Thirdly, who the Hell is out of the mainstream? A majority of people in this country favor raising taxes to provide healthcare for all Americans and enacting a universal health care system. The majority support cuts in military spending, a balanced budget, and increased spending for education and veteran’s benefits. These are all things that Rove and his ilk have opposed for years.

   This truth is that whatever Karl Rove says, you can be sure the truth is almost diametrically opposite. His administration and the republican-controlled congress have approval rating in the thirties. A majority of people think the president is dishonest. A majority of people think the country is on the wrong track. They are the ones who are no longer in the mainstream. In fact, they never have been in the mainstream. A majority of the people who sent them to office were painfully ignorant about the positions and performance of this administration.

   Rove already knows all of this because few human beings on Earth understand polls or political manipulation better than Karl. Karl just says what he says because he’s a proven liar who has made a career out of banking on the ignorance and fear of Americans.

   A certain senator who is dead to me, but who still, for some reason, occupies the position of Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, recently said on national television that he didn’t  insert an amnesty clause into pending FISA legislation.

   He was contradicted by a Washington Post story, and I assumed, without mentioning his television appearance, that he lied, because at this point the Washington Post has far more credibility than he ever will.

   I was right. He did lie, as Glenn Greenwald highlights, and God bless you Mr. Greenwald for keeping the spotlight on this vile little chapter in our history.

   This senator is a big believer in retroactive action. He wanted to impeach Bill Clinton after Clinton left office over Clinton’s last minute pardons. Now that a republican is in the White House, however, he is far less concerned with ethics in the Executive Branch.

   Jack Cafferty said it, and I said it, and I will say it again. Worm. You are a sniveling, craven worm, senator, and your efforts to retroactively legalize illegal behavior will be written on your grave, even if I have to do it myself.

   Tony Snow recently mocked Jimmy Carter because he used to “sneak off and fish on the weekends,” while our current president, of course, only sneaks off to visit Iraq. Snow is a shameless shill: this president has set a modern record for most vacation days taken by a president, even more than the previous record holder, Ronald Reagan. Carter actually set a modern record for least vacation days taken by a president. Thinkprogress has the story.
   Bog Geiger has a good piece on Michelle Malkin’s latest lie. As Geiger said, “One of the best things about being a part of the progressive media is that if you don’t have time to personally slap down a lying piece of right-wing garbage, one of your talented colleagues will pick up the ball.” With that in mind, a tip o’ the hat to Geiger. And another one to Taylor Marsh, for her reporting. And finally, a big “screw you” to Hot Air, the conservative blogger who backed Malkin up and edited film to commit fraud. As Taylor says, “If you were employed by any reputable organization you would be first suspended for your actions, then upon investigation you would be fired for purposefully and willfully manufacturing a story out of tape, by cropping and editing portions out so that the final product fit your version and vision of some truth that doesn't exist in reality.”

   And…did I hear that correctly? Ken Mehlman called Afghanistan a “failed state?” He said republicans have been corrupted by “greed and cynicism?” Ken? Is that really you?

   Finally, spare me the celebration over Rove’s avoidance of charges. The media has glossed over Rove’s and the Administration’s lies about this affair.

   AOL News, showing no concern for the truth whatsoever, has put Michael Moore in the company of Ann Coulter and Howard Stern: “They’re all known for saying anything.” Unbelievable. Why don’t the good people at AOL line up the worst statements of Ann Coulter and Michael Moore and see if there is any parity whatsoever.

   There are inflationary pressures at work because of the high cost of gasoline. I, and many Americans, are concerned about inflation eating away at our economic growth.

   Talker’s Magazine has come out with its latest rankings of the radio talkers in America. I overheard Ed Schultz saying he was in at #10…but this list puts him at #13. Either way, Ed trails only Randi Rhodes according to Talker’s list. Admittedly, Talker’s list uses some very subjective categories to establish its rankings (“courage, effort, impact” as well as “ratings, recognition,” and “revenue”).

   Sadly, Limbaugh and Hannity still hold the #1 and #2 slots for audience. Talker’s puts Michael Savage in the #4 slot, Laura Ingraham at #7, and Neal Boortz at #9.

   I’m surprised at Randi’s ranking. She is an entertaining and talented speaker. Amusingly, her talk is essentially long rants against the Bush Administration.

   I find it disturbing that they rank Michael Savage so highly. His more “colorful” moments have been well-covered by mediamatters.org. You actually only have to listen to him for an hour or so to hear him say something indefensible. I actually read his latest effort at writing, The Political Zoo. I have to say I appreciated the full-page drawings at the front of every two-page section and the 14-point font. It gives you an idea of the reading level of his audience.

   You have to admire a guy who has the brass to castigate Bono for doing charity work for a generation, mainly to benefit Africans, although Savage is not alone. The knock of Bono (from Savage) is that he doesn’t donate his own money to Africa and his millions aren’t taxed by Ireland as the revenue of Irish musicians is exempt from Irish taxes.

   Well, well. Look who’s suddenly  pro taxes all of a sudden! First of all, Bono donates massive amounts of his time traveling the world, convincing world leaders and corporations to give to charity. He gives when he could be spending that time sleeping or performing more concerts to make more money for himself, you dumbass. Secondly, Bono doesn’t write tax law in Ireland. If Savage has a problem with Irish tax law he should criticize the people who wrote the law.

   But, oh, according to Savage Bono is still a hypocrite because he doesn’t give his own ill-gotten tax dollars. But wait…what’s this? Bono is the “founder, spokesman and chief benefactor of DATA, a nonprofit, debt-relief advocacy group,” Time magazine relates. Oh, yeah, and he gave money here, too.

   One of the many problems with Savage, besides being a hirsute little troll whose guttural ramblings on the radio sound like the rants of a drunk and unemployed dockworker, is that he’s a liar. Time magazine, dumbass.

   Attention Deficit comes in at #7, a blow to truth and intelligent discourse. Mediamatters has some of her lowlights. I remember this one vividly. Her smears are well documented, as are her bizarre non sequiturs, which I have written about periodically. Talk radio still has a long way to go.

   So the news today is that Karl Rove won’t be charged for anything associated with the Valerie Plame Affair. Joe Wilson’s attorney released a letter to the press essentially threatening a civil lawsuit, something John Dean said Joe Wilson should pursue a year ago, as I recall.

   International condemnation has followed the comments of Graffy and Harris that I excoriated yesterday. The State Department spokesman was forced to flatly repudiate the comments of those two.

   You can make them apologize but that doesn’t mean they’re sorry. Graffy and Harris’ remarks reflect the opinions of the administration.

   Michelle Malkin mocks the suicides at Guatanamo Bay today. I might be angry but I have come to expect this kind of arrogance, hatred, and bigotry from Malkin.

   NBC continues to invite Ann Coulter as a guest on its shows. The so-called mainstream media apparently is willing to give anyone a platform on its programming as long as they have an audience…unless, of course, that person voices views that are critical of corporate power and American media coverage.  In which case, they will be shunned like a leper. I can’t recall the last time that Noam Chomsky got a spot on Hardball or The Today Show, even thought the New York Times regularly praises his writing like this: “Judged in terms of the power, range, novelty and influence of his thought, Noam Chomsky is arguably the most important intellectual alive.”

   But no need to host him on a major TV network. We would rather hear George Will deny global warming or Ann Coulter slander widows. We would rather hear Chris Matthews kissing Tom DeLay’s ass.

  
  

   Elliott Abrams has a protégé in the State Department, picking up where he left off in the eighties.

   Remind me how people like this get appointed the State Department. Oh, yes, the President is George W. Bush. I forgot for a second.

   Detainees are held indefinitely, without charges or trials, for years. Some sink into despair and commit the ultimate act of desperation. Then Colleen Graffy shits on their grave and calls it “a good PR move.”

   Rear Admiral Harris, commander of the camp, saw it as “an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us.”

   I have few words to describe this.

   George Will is once again attacking the concept of global warming. Noam Chomsky once called Will a “lunatic,” and I am reminded of that label here.

   Mary Matalin, one of Dick Cheney’s former mercenaries, defended Ann Coulter’s remarks. Of course, I expect little of Matalin, but this is truly sick.

   There are multiple news reports of US plans to build permanent bases in Iraq to host 50,000 or so US troops there for a long time. What does the long-term cost of this Iraq War look like now?

  

   There is much bad news coming from the Middle East today. Israeli artillery fire struck a beach in the Gaza Strip, killing seven people and injuring dozens of others. The Israeli government apologized and promised to look into the incident. The Israeli military was apparently trying to shell a neighborhood where rocket attacks had been coming from.

   Evidently an apology was not enough for the Palestinians. Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, called the artillery attack a “massacre” and called on the international community to intervene. Israel also destroyed a car and three people in it earlier. Israel says the three were returning from firing a rocket into Israel, but Palestinian Security forces maintained this was not the case.

   This latest round of violence began to escalate after the assassination of Abu Samhadana. Israeli Defense Forces used an air strike to kill him and three others in a “training camp for militia members” near Rafah in the Gaza Strip on Thursday. Samhadana was supposed to lead a new Palestinian security force, but his appointment was blocked by Abbas.

   Israel justified its attack by charging Samhadana with heading the PRC “terror organization.” The Popular Resistance Committees, or PRC, frequently use really ineffective rocket attacks to terrorize Israel, only to draw punishing return fire from the IDF.

   These tensions between Israel and Palestine are concurrent with tensions between Fatah (and its leader Mahmoud Abbas) and Hamas (led by prime minister Ismail Haniya), the political party categorized as a terrorist organizations by most Western accounts. Hamas is formally dedicated to the destruction of Israel, although that may change. Read this from an interview between Ismail Haniya and an Aljazeera reporter:

Would there be peace between Israel and a prospective Palestinian state on the entirety of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem?
 
Yes, there can be peace, but let me ask you a question: Is Israel ready to give up all the territories occupied in 1967 even in return for full peace with the Palestinians?

   Hamas’ leader seems willing to accept Israel’s existence in exchange for a return to the “Green Line” of the 1967 borders.

   Fatah and Hamas have been engaging in an arms race and their members have clashed several times in the past few months. The United States has helped to get military supplies to Fatah with the help of Egypt and Jordan.

   Meanwhile, Israel moves ahead with its peace plan, unilaterally building its wall across much of Palestinian land and claiming that there are no partners to negotiate with, which, as one Al-Ahram writer wrote, “…when Israel claims that there is no Palestinian partner for peace it is, in a certain sense, telling the truth. Certainly there is no Palestinian partner willing to accede to Israel's annexing of large segments of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and give up the right of return of millions of Palestinian refugees.”

   Al-Ahram also covers a list of Iraq War incidents not investigated or even covered up by the US military.

  

   Glen Beck, for reasons inexplicable to decent Americans a host at CNN, dropped the H-bomb on Al Gore.

   Why not. Ann Coulter gets time with Matt Lauer, Glen Beck gets hired at CNN. What to you have to say to be shunned by “mainstream” media?

   I previously remarked on Arlen Specter’s decision to forget about subpoenaing the telecom company executives. I mentioned that he was caving into pressure from the other conservative members on his committee. He said he didn’t think he had the votes…but then again, he didn’t even schedule a vote to make senators go on the record as voting yes or no on the proposition.

   Arlen has sunk to a new low. He has floated a new bill that would make consulting the FISA Court an option, not a necessity…and grant blanket amnesty for those who authorized warrantless illegal wiretapping under presidential authority.

   Welcome to the Dead to Me List, you fucking worm. I have nothing further to say about that whining, flip-flopping, craven, mulish little shit of a senator anymore.

   Glenn Greenwald does, however, and you should read his post today. So does Jack Cafferty.

  

   There is a memorable line Driftglass wrote several months ago where he stingingly mocks a conservative writer as being in the “carefully, climate-controlled conservative greenhouse where shambling GOP obsequi-bots with marginal typing skills are cultivated like rare blood-orchids.”

   This description, frankly, applies to almost anyone who draws a paycheck at the National Review, The Weekly Standard, The American Spectator, or any of the lesser known think tanks, blogs, and periodicals. For example, check out this example from the National Review. Ipso Loquitor, my friends.

   Ann Coulter (why do I have to even comment on this lunatic?) is making the rounds to pimp her new book. Thinkprogress has her on NBC. It is an unambiguous sign of the depravity of our culture that Ann Coulter can be found anywhere on TV. Need I resurrect some choice Coulter quotes? I hope not.

   So how’s Iraq doing? See for yourself. Are here, too.

   While the senate debating the marriage amendment is getting all the headlines, She Does Respond is planning on killing the estate tax, or at least massively reducing it. Sneaky, sneaky Fristy. I like the “Paris Hilton” thing. I tire of republicans rebranding things they don’t like as part of their war on language and truth, like the estate tax is really the “death tax” because everybody that dies pays the tax…or maybe only .3%. Whatever. Close enough.

   The right has a problem with honesty and the English language, and not just as it relates to taxes. Press Secretary Snow equated the Same-Sex Marriage Amendment to “civil rights.” In fact, it is the opposite of civil rights. Civil rights legislation was an effort to include minorities and protect them with equal rights, not discriminate against minorities, in this case homosexuals.

   They just can’t own up and say this amendment is an effort to discriminate against gays by not allowing them to marry. No, it’s an effort to “defend” “traditional” marriages, kind of like slavery was an effort to “defend” the “traditional” institutions of property and citizenship from those uppity niggers.

   They can’t follow their reasoning to its inevitable conclusion, to say that homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed to marry because they are sinful and wrong and should be marginalized. Gays should be happy they’re tolerated, apparently, without demanding that their marriages be recognized.

   A lot of democrats and talkers on the left similarly oppose the amendment with truthful but mealy-mouthed language, whining “isn’t there something better congress could be doing?” Of course there is, but even the democrats that I’ve heard don’t have the courage to stand up and say the amendment is wrong on principle. No, they talk about how few states even recognize gay marriage anyway, and they passed a law a while ago outlawing the practice, etc.

   They can read the polls. The polls show that most people are in favor of gay rights, but not necessarily gay marriage. The polls also show that most people don’t think it’s a real big priority. So the democrats attack it from that angle. Safe, very safe, but not honest.

   How does Mary Cheney feel about all of this, I wonder? Sure, the GOP isn’t hunting homosexuals with dogs…yet. But it’s their agenda to outlaw gay marriage. It’s their agenda to enact sodomy laws in conservative states and make sure homosexuality isn’t accepted as “an alternative lifestyle,” as the Republican Party platform states in Texas and North Carolina.
   The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that state sodomy laws were unconstitutional back in 2003. The three dissenters were the justices that conservatives idolize, the justices that provided the model for Bush when he nominated Roberts and Alito: Scalia, Rehnquist, and Thomas.

   Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas still have sodomy laws on the books that exclusively target homosexuals. Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia all still have sodomy laws on the books that effect homosexuals and heterosexuals. I suppose I don’t need to tell you that those states are all GOP strongholds.

   Read the writing on the wall, Mary. The only people standing between you and a jail cell are democrats and those “liberal” justices your party hates. I mean that literally.

  


  

  

   John Bolton is the most incompetent ambassador to the U.N. that I can ever remember. I’ve mentioned him several times before on my blog, and, regrettably, I must mention him again. He recently threatened the U.N. with retaliation when the #2 official at the U.N. dared to criticize the “unchecked UN-bashing” in the United States, complaining that it is even making it hard for the U.N. to refurbish its headquarters, and pointing out that the only government not fully supporting the project is the United States.

   I tire of this rage-filled recess appointment excuse for an ambassador tossing threats around in the U.N., bullying other nations, and in general being as undiplomatic a diplomat as has ever represented the United States. I would also like to remind readers that he had the full support of the republican caucus.

   Senator Inhofe has finally reared his ugly head. I have opined vociferously in the past about the quality of senators sent to Washington from the states of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska, and just two days ago I was wondering when Inhofe would join Coburn, Cornyn, Roberts, Brownback, and Hagel. Inhofe’s opinion of homosexuality is not subtle, ladies and gentleman. He clearly thinks homosexuality is some kind of disgrace.

   David Corn cites a piece by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities that shows the cost of the estate tax cuts, if made permanent. The answer: over $300 billion through 2016 and almost $800 billion through 2021. But, sure, we don’t need that money. We’re just ass-over-teakettle in debt.

   It’s official: the GOP has retained the Dukester’s seat. I was listening to Ed Schultz today and I have never heard him this angry.

    Easy, democrats, easy. David Corn, Arianna Huffington, and Schultz are all wailing that the culture of corruption line doesn’t work. Abandon the plan! Run for the escape pods!

   Not so fast. Republicans outnumbered democrats by 14% in the district, and they outspent democrats by 2-to-1: $10 million to $5 million. In exchange for that, Bilbray took the seat by about 5% of the vote.

   So they outspent democrats 2-to-1 and, in exchange, lost about 9% of their edge.

   Take my word for it, if republicans lose 9% of their electoral edge come November Nancy Pelosi will be the next speaker. Not all democrats will be running in districts where the last republican House member recently went to jail, but neither will they be outspent 2-to-1 in a district where democrats are 14% less of the electorate.

   Rick Jacobs writes a piece on this here. Bilbray will face another election in November.

   Still, I sympathize with Schultz’s anger. The DNC should have hammered money into this race. This race is a bellwether, like Paul Hackett’s race for Ohio’s 2nd district, but more so: the outgoing representative in Hackett’s race wasn’t convicted of bribery. Democrats should have won it to show the media and the country that the culture of corruption line works.   Subtleties like what percentage you lost by are lost on most people in America. The right will heckle others in the country for months with the outcome of this race, without mentioning the variables.

    We’re talking about Brain Bilbray here: a former lobbyist, and advocate of the Bajagua Project LLC while he was in office. He took campaign donations from the firm and, in return, crafted a bill to force the State Department to renegotiate with Mexico to allow for one of the firm’s projects. When he left the House he went to lobby for, among others, the Bajagua Project. Busby should have beaten him like a rented mule with those facts.

   Big news today in the War on Terror: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the AL Qaeda leader in Iraq, is dead.

   Although it may be unseemly to rejoice in the death of any human being, I would like to congratulate the US military and intelligence people on a job well done.

   More good news from Iraq: they have finally filled the last and most important vacancies in their government.

   Arlen Specter recently sent a, shall we say, “pointed” letter to VP Cheney yesterday, criticizing him for trying to interfere with his investigation of telecommunications companies by contacting members of the Judiciary Committee and lobbying them to oppose any hearings.

   He also criticizes the administration’s secretive behavior over the past couple of years in general. Unfortunately, he indicates that he will delay hearings as part of some compromise deal with the White House as he’s not sure if he has the votes on the committee to proceed with a closed hearing on the NSA’s domestic program.

   Mission accomplished, Cheney. I have long criticized Specter for accommodating the White House in blocking or delaying investigations into its illegal NSA program, but if he’s telling the truth it is the members of his committee (the republican members, that is) who are obstructing justice this time.

   So I would like to name them here: Orrin Hatch of Utah, Charles Grassley of Iowa, John Kyl of Arizona, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John Cornyn of Texas, Sam Brownback of Kansas, and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma.
    
   I would say “for shame,” but these men have no shame. I have come to expect nothing from Hatch, DeWine, Sessions, Cornyn, Brownback, and Coburn, and I am beginning to expect nothing from Grassley, Kyl, and Graham.

If there is a God, he’s laughing his ass off right now.

Today the senate began debate on a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, an empty effort to pander to the GOP base so pointless (except to score political points in some arcane political calculus) that the New York Times wrote this listless review of the debate.

It is as if the newspaper of record were shrugging its shoulders and sighing, as if to say, “Our democracy has degenerated into bad theater put on for ignorant fundamentalists. We, as always, will report on this long, depressing event.”

Bob Geiger writes a great essay on McCain here at Alternet.

   So it would take $23 billion a year to fight AIDS in Africa. So far the world has pledged $8 billion.
Making up the difference would be difficult for Africa, as many African nationals have a GDP of only around $10 billion a year.

   The developed nations of the world, however, could make up the difference more easily. The US spends $100 billion a year in Iraq alone and four or five times that every year on its military alone.  

   AIDS in Africa kills 2 million people every year at its current rate. Most countries in the southern reaches of Africa have adult infection rates anywhere from 20-35 percent.

   Pakistan’s mammoth earthquake last October that killed 87,000 or more led to over $5 billion in international aid. However, Saudi Arabia sent more aid than the United States.

   US aid helped the image of the US after the Asian tsunami of 2004. One might think that US foreign policy experts would be more generous, if for no other reason than public relations.

   When Condi Rice and Stephen Hadley are running your foreign policy, you get stupidity and selfishness like this. Although maybe I am being unfair. Maybe I should be saying that when Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld are running your foreign policy…

   Because they are. Don Rumsfeld’s department gets $439 billion a year in funding, plus “emergency” funding that puts the total above $500 billion. The second-highest funded department in the president’s cabinet (more than the State Department) is the Department of Veteran’s Affairs (at $68 billion a year).

   The Department of Defense is our foreign policy. Thus we send the marines to help in Indonesia, where its earthquake has killed 6,500 people. When you invest half a trillion dollars a year in your military its understandable that you might want to make it a multi-purpose instrument. So we can use marines and airmen where aid workers should be.  
  
    

  

   So the news floated past me last month and I didn’t blog about it, but the US has been covertly supporting warlords in Somalia as they wage war against Islamic groups for control of the capital.

   This stinks of Cold War thinking, of Eliott Abrams’ hand in foreign policy, although he’s in charge of policy at the NSC for the Middle East. I know there are many like-minded people around him at the NSC.

   That’s one thing I like about Dubya: he doesn’t beat around the bush, pardon the pun. He just flat-out rehires Abrams and puts him on the NSC. There’s no real subtlety there. You can get a good idea of the administration’s direction knowing that a convicted felon is running the Middle East department at the National Security Council.

   I’ve been waiting for Preznit Drinky to go all Reagan on our asses and fund terrorists and death squads for five years now. He’s done everything else: explode the deficit with massive military expenditures? Check. Fearmonger the public into supporting his belligerent foreign policy? Check. Loot the treasury for the benefit of his corporate masters? Check. Rape the environment and muzzle the EPA? Check. Lie constantly and seemingly without control? Check. Violate US and international law and then wave a contemptuous hand at protestors? Check.

   Where are the death squads, Drinky? Your CIA has “disappeared” what, 90 people? A hundred? Reagan would not approve.

   Perhaps these Somali warlords are just the tip of the iceberg. Perhaps the CIA has been funding the janjaweed militia, or guerrillas in West Africa. Hey, Elliott! What are doing in Washington, for God’s sake? Isn’t this your area of expertise?

   The military massacre in Haditha has been getting a lot of press lately, although I have the feeling that this is just tabloid news in another form.

   24 civilians were killed in the massacre, if it was indeed a massacre (the investigations are still pending, to be fair), but that is a small number compared to the 100,000 civlians who have perished in the occupation so far. Something like 12,000 civilians die in Iraq every year.

   Haditha certainly is yet another PR disaster for the military, if that matters at this point in history. This is something that Thomas Friedman points out in his editorial today in the New York Times.

   Friedman also asserts that the insurgency was in its “last throes,” as Cheney put it, but that the nature of the insurgency has changed into that of the anarchy of competing militias.

   Friedman is an irritating pundit. The Sunni insurgency has not disappeared, Mr. Friedman, nor have sectarian militias just joined the violence in the last year. The level of violence in Iraq has gone nowhere in three years. By no convoluted logic is it possible to justify Cheney’s lie.

   Friedman insists on setting deadlines to force intransigent factions in Iraq to compromise without the luxury of knowing an eternal US presence will guarantee the country will not descend into total chaos while somehow simultaneously pointing out that the factions in Iraq don’t care what happens to Iraq.

   Nowhere is the will of the Iraqi people mentioned in Friedman’s work. I can only assume that Friedman thinks the Iraqi people, like their leaders, don’t know what’s best for themselves.

   Ahh, the sorrows of empire. It is difficult to bring civilization to the little brown people, is it not?

   US forces should leave Iraq because the people of Iraq don’t want them there, and Iraq is their country. This argument supercedes America’s desire to baby sit and shape Iraq’s government until it is in a form to our liking.

   Friedman, and our administration, has always been of the mind that an Iraqi democracy would be a great example to it neighbors. Administration supporters still argue that this goal was worth $320 billion dollars, 2,500 American lives, the violation of international law and the opprobrium of the world.

   Nevermind that no one can predict what Iraq’s democracy will look like in ten years, or how much longer the chaos will last, or what concrete changes in the region will follow the establishment of an Iraqi democracy. What if Iraq’s democracy devolves into a clone of Egypt’s “democracy?” What if civil war continues for decades, spawning violence and terrorism in the region, as it did in Guatemala after the CIA overthrew its government in 1954?

   They just don’t know. They didn’t even have any remotely accurate idea of how much Iraq would cost or how long it would take. They actually punished officials who were most accurate in their predictions: Paul Krugman, in a neighboring column, highlights the fate of Larry Lindsey, the administration economist who pointed out that the Iraq War would probably cost far more than official estimates (though even his estimates were low). He was promptly fired.

   Not only does the administration not know, but they can’t be trusted to tell the public the truth even if they did know.

   Republicans will still argue that the War must be won, which is ridiculously false. No one knows what it will take to win the war, or if an Iraqi democracy will last or mean anything on a regional scale. They are asserting certainty about a subject in which there is absolutely no certainty, but instead of telling the truth they have made the Iraq War an article of faith that must be believed in, because they consistently refuse to admit error, acknowledge the truth, or honestly debate ideas. Dissent is considered treason or cowardice.

   But it is your taxpayer dollars they are spending in Iraq, and your sons and daughters they are putting in harms way for geopolitical strategies so poorly thought out they would have given Johnson pause. They don’t have a right to do anything the American people don’t want them to do.

   Of course, it is difficult for the American people to make informed decisions when their leaders are constantly lying to them. Some democratic oversight in Congress will go a long way to improving this situation.

   Republicans are running to their base this summer, proposing the red meat cultural conservative positions that they always do in election years. They are wise to do so, as they have already lost the center of the country, and their base is largely composed of people easily swayed by jingoism. They warn their base, ominously, that democrats in control of congress will launch investigations. Oh no!

   Most voters want investigations, and most experts are warning the public of the dangerous expansion of federal power and secrecy that has taken place over the last five years. Republicans’ success this Fall will not be a measure of the effectiveness of their leadership, but instead of the ignorance and apathy of the public. Newt Gingrich proposed a motto for the democrats this Fall that is very appropriate:

   Had enough?