Fierce Planet

Posted by jnfr at 09:00 AM | Comments (0)

January 04, 2008

Iowa Totals

Very revealing.

Total Voter Turnout (approximate) - 356,000

Percentage of total vote

24.5% Obama
20.5% Edwards
19.8% Clinton
11.4% Huckabee (R)

Posted by jnfr at 11:23 AM | Comments (0)

April 17, 2007

People Like Pelosi

Quite a lot, and quite consistently, and more than any other political leader at the moment. And they like her in spite of efforts on the right to stir up controversy over her visit to Syria.

Being a liberal isn't a death sentence in this country. Don't let the media tell you otherwise.

Posted by jnfr at 10:25 AM | Comments (0)

April 10, 2007

Pelosi Pushback

I've been too busy to write, but I'm still following some of the "controversy" over Pelosi's visit to Syria. Here are a couple of responses that really get to the heart of the issues, both courtesy of TPM.

Josh Micah Marshall is vlogging under the Veracifier title, and his work is some of the best vlogging I've seen so far, with good clear commentary, and graphics work that is interesting without being flashy. Plus, Josh is cute, and it always helps to be cute if you're doing TV.

Posted by jnfr at 08:31 AM | Comments (0)

April 06, 2007

IOKIYAR

It's Okay If You're a Republican.

It's still true. Greenwald lays out the story of Gingrich's trip to China, and asks where the outrage was then. Oh, yeah, Gingrich went to Israel too.

See! IOKIYAR.

Not quite sure what's up with CNN piling on Pelosi. I caught Malveaux almost shouting over the Syrian ambassador on Situation Room the other day, and it definitely raised my eyebrows. The lady's got a bug up her butt about Syria, and I have no idea why.

And this whole issue with the head scarf is so trumped up and ridiculous. The media is having a serious case of the vapors this week, even though from the actual news reports it sounds like Pelosi is being quite measured in her words, and hasn't contradicted official policy in any way. Not that you could tell that from listening to the talking heads in their distress at any supposed slight to President Pissypants.

The only discussion of the issue I've heard on cable that was remotely reality-based was last night on Hardball. That was a pleasant break.

UPDATE: Ah, the lovely folks at Talking Points Memo have put the Hardball footage up on YouTube. Here it is:

UPDATE: Hmmm... that bit got pulled quick. UPDATE to the UPDATE: And it's back. Mysterious.

Posted by jnfr at 11:47 AM | Comments (2)

April 04, 2007

Yes. This is Democracy in Action.

I don't always agree with Howard Kurtz, but I like this point he makes today. In discussing Bush's presser yesterday, and the "political dance" the two parties are engaged in, he writes:

Here's the part that bothers me. The president accuses the Democrats of being mainly interested in fighting "political battles" and engaging in a "political dance" (that seemed to be his metaphor du jour). Why is it not politics when he makes the case for a war in which he passionately believes--after years of using the war on terror as a partisan club--but it's politics when Democrats try to end a war they believe has been an abysmal failure? Isn't this precisely the kind of debate we should be having in a democracy?

And that's exactly right.

I listened to several news shows last night, and nearly all the reporters were quivering with anxiety over this "showdown" over funding for the Iraq occupation. But there's nothing dangerous or scary going on here. Our nation is not imperiled by an aggressive debate and confrontation over the great issue of our time.

Recent Congresses were dominated by Republicans and completely, happily subserviant to Presidential whim. Now we have a Congress with a mind of its own and — so far at least — the will to use it. This isn't a bad thing, it's a very very good thing. We can not only survive this confrontation, we will be better off because of it.

Posted by jnfr at 08:19 AM | Comments (0)

March 22, 2007

Elizabeth Edwards

Terrible news for the Edwards family, and all our best wishes go with them. But they are truly inspirational as a couple, aren't they? John Edwards is the candidate I've most strongly supported in this election so far*, and this only makes me love him more. But Elizabeth is every bit as impressive, and in a just world she could have been the candidate herself.

I've lost too many friends to cancer, but I also have many friends who have survived the disease and continue to live good, happy lives. May you do the same, Elizabeth. And thanks to both of you for your shining example of real progressive values.

*since Gore isn't running

UPDATE: I'm reading a number of comments here and there disparaging John and Elizabeth's decision to stay in the race. I think Jane Hamsher says it best, while referencing her own struggle with breast cancer.

I needed to know, for myself, that even though accomodations had to be made, I was still living my life on my terms. I fully understand why Elizabeth made the decision she did....

The willingness to fight, to not back down in the face of the disease, even when the stress level must be extraordinarily toxic, is worthy of tremendous admiration and certainly bodes well for her continued well being. For me personally, and for all women who face what she is facing, she is an extraordinary role model.

Posted by jnfr at 11:38 AM | Comments (2)

January 04, 2007

Happy Day

Posted by jnfr at 05:28 PM | Comments (0)

November 09, 2006

Isn't she lovely?

I totally ripped this picture off from somewhere, but doesn't our new Speaker look good?

Posted by jnfr at 08:57 AM | Comments (0)

October 24, 2006

2006 Election News

Candidates I don't support:

--AZ-Sen: Jon Kyl

--AZ-01: Rick Renzi

--AZ-05: J.D. Hayworth

--CA-04: John Doolittle

--CA-11: Richard Pombo

--CA-50: Brian Bilbray

--CO-04: Marilyn Musgrave

--CO-05: Doug Lamborn

--CO-07: Rick O'Donnell

--CT-04: Christopher Shays

--FL-13: Vernon Buchanan

--FL-16: Joe Negron

--FL-22: Clay Shaw

--ID-01: Bill Sali

--IL-06: Peter Roskam

--IL-10: Mark Kirk

--IL-14: Dennis Hastert

--IN-02: Chris Chocola

--IN-08: John Hostettler

--IA-01: Mike Whalen

--KS-02: Jim Ryun

--KY-03: Anne Northup

--KY-04: Geoff Davis

--MD-Sen: Michael Steele

--MN-01: Gil Gutknecht

--MN-06: Michele Bachmann

--MO-Sen: Jim Talent

--MT-Sen: Conrad Burns

--NV-03: Jon Porter

--NH-02: Charlie Bass

--NJ-07: Mike Ferguson

--NM-01: Heather Wilson

--NY-03: Peter King

--NY-20: John Sweeney

--NY-26: Tom Reynolds

--NY-29: Randy Kuhl

--NC-08: Robin Hayes

--NC-11: Charles Taylor

--OH-01: Steve Chabot

--OH-02: Jean Schmidt

--OH-15: Deborah Pryce

--OH-18: Joy Padgett

--PA-04: Melissa Hart

--PA-07: Curt Weldon

--PA-08: Mike Fitzpatrick

--PA-10: Don Sherwood

--RI-Sen: Lincoln Chafee

--TN-Sen: Bob Corker

--VA-Sen: George Allen

--VA-10: Frank Wolf

--WA-Sen: Mike McGavick

--WA-08: Dave Reichert

Posted by jnfr at 05:15 PM | Comments (0)

September 28, 2006

The Constitution is clear

Article 3, Section 9:

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

The actions of the President and the Congress are unconstitutional. It really is that simple.

Posted by jnfr at 03:48 PM | Comments (1)

January 31, 2006

Quoting a friend...

without permission!!

"And um, WHAT UNLAWFUL CONDUCT? Refusing to comply with an order from the fashion police?"

P.S. Could Kaine be any more boring?

P.P.S. Pelosi, on the other hand, continues to kick ass.

Posted by jnfr at 08:24 PM | Comments (0)

January 20, 2006

The incomparable Molly Ivins

I'd like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.

Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges....

What kind of courage does it take, for mercy's sake? The majority of the American people (55 percent) think the war in Iraq is a mistake and that we should get out. The majority (65 percent) of the American people want single-payer health care and are willing to pay more taxes to get it. The majority (86 percent) of the American people favor raising the minimum wage. The majority of the American people (60 percent) favor repealing Bush's tax cuts, or at least those that go only to the rich. The majority (66 percent) wants to reduce the deficit not by cutting domestic spending, but by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes.

The majority (77 percent) thinks we should do "whatever it takes" to protect the environment. The majority (87 percent) thinks big oil companies are gouging consumers and would support a windfall profits tax. That is the center, you fools. WHO ARE YOU AFRAID OF? ...

Do not sit there cowering and pretending the only way to win is as Republican-lite. If the Washington-based party can't get up and fight, we'll find someone who can.

Posted by jnfr at 02:51 PM | Comments (1)

September 03, 2005

Ideology of this administration

UPDATE: Bill Frist is determined to move ahead on a vote to repeal the estate tax, which would have the effect of reducing charitable donations by up to $25 billion. A terrible thing to do at a time like this.

Posted by jnfr at 10:03 AM | Comments (0)

September 02, 2005

Gaahh.

Is everyone as sick as I am of hearing Bush say "working hard" and "making good progress"? I swear that's all we've heard out of that man's mouth for the past couple of years, while things go down the toilet. He so needs a new script.

Posted by jnfr at 06:15 PM | Comments (1)

Where's Cheney?

I haven't seen or heard anything from Cheney in ages. Do you think he's still alive?

Posted by jnfr at 12:03 PM | Comments (0)

August 02, 2005

Hackett — Today's the day!

My attention this week has mostly been following the Hackett/Schmidt special election in Ohio's second district. I've seen Hackett on TV and heard him on the radio several times, and I really like the guy. He's a real straight talker, doesn't back down from his positions, and seems to respond very well to the boost he's been getting from the netroots and all the money we've sent his way. That's he's gotten within the margin of error in a deeply Republican district is like a small miracle in this difficult times.

Today is the election, Swing State Project is the blog to follow.

UPDATE: From Swing State, here's their post following the results. So far, so good.

UPDATE: Well, I would have much preferred winning, but it sure was close. Given the results of the Conyers report on the 2004 election, however, my own concerns are much like Billmon's:

After Florida 2000, Ohio 2004, and everything that's come light since then about the Rovian death grip on power, it doesn't seem too tinfoilish to wonder whether the GOP's approach to close elections in Ohio isn't the same as the party's approach to close votes on the House floor -- in which the count is held open until the leadership gets the result it wanted.

Posted by jnfr at 07:07 AM | Comments (0)

July 13, 2005

I'm curious

Does anyone out there know where and how Karl Rove got the nickname "Turd Blossom"?

EDIT: Never mind! Just caught Jon Stewart from last night, and he says "Turd Blossom" was bestowed by the President. Figures.

Posted by jnfr at 10:15 AM | Comments (1)

June 11, 2005

Cheerful news

Amid all the bad news from Iraq and the economy, one piece of really good news reached me today. Apparently the media are starting to notice that Bush is a very unpopular President, and most people dislike nearly all of his programs. Now that's being reality-based! Way to go, MSM.

Posted by jnfr at 10:10 AM | Comments (0)

May 30, 2005

Memorial Day

The War Prayer

by Mark Twain

It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing and sputtering; on every hand and far down the receding and fading spreads of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory which stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts and which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country and invoked the God of Battles, beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpouring of fervid eloquence which moved every listener.

It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt upon its righteousness straightway got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal safety's sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came — next day the battalions would leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their faces alight with material dreams-visions of a stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender! — then home from the war, bronzed heros, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag or, failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous invocation — "God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest, Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!"

Then came the "long" prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was that an ever-merciful and benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young soldiers and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in His mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them to crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable honor and glory.

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher's side and stood there, waiting.

With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued his moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent appeal,"Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord our God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!"

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside — which the startled minister did — and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said

"I come from the Throne — bearing a message from Almighty God!" The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. "He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd and grant it if such shall be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import — that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of — except he pause and think.

"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two — one uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of His Who heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this — keep it in mind. If you beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon some neighbor's crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

"You have heard your servant's prayer — the uttered part of it. I am commissioned by God to put into words the other part of it — that part which the pastor, and also you in your hearts, fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard these words: 'Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient. The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory — must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God the Father fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle — be Thou near them! With them, in spirit, we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it — for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

(After a pause) "Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits."

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.

Posted by jnfr at 12:00 PM | Comments (0)

March 02, 2005

What happens when the right wing wins?

You get a place that ranks near the bottom on measures of social health and stability, and near the top in measures of the toxic, unhealthy aspects of industrial life. At least that's the case in Texas, home of George W. Bush and Tom Delay the Exterminator. A new report, titled "Texas on the Brink", has found that:

Texas ranks first in the percentage of uninsured children, first in toxic and cancerous emissions and second in teenage pregnancies. It lags far behind in high-school graduation rates, consumer credit scores and percentage of the population with health insurance.

The reason? According to state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, it's due to Texas's "inadequate, outdated and terribly regressive tax system".

He blamed rigid ideology on tax issues for the state's standings. Texas ranks 49th in revenue and spending, according to the Census Bureau. "When leaders value a pledge of 'no new taxes' above all else, they abandon the mantle of leadership," Shapleigh said.

Since most corporations don't care to locate in toxic environments full of uneducated workers, and the dominance of Republicans in Texas means that the tax structure is unlikely to change, it's hard to see how Texas is going to dig itself out of this hole.

Posted by jnfr at 10:08 AM | Comments (0)

February 17, 2005

Deja vu all over again

Well, Bush is nothing if not audacious! So I shouldn't be surprised that he's decided to appoint John Negroponte as director of national intelligence. But somehow I still am. He'll fit right in with an administration committed to torture and the abuse of civil rights, though, so I can see why Bush likes him.

Posted by jnfr at 08:21 AM | Comments (0)

February 15, 2005

As long as we're budget-cutting

How about cutting a program that literally doesn't work?

The entire idea of missile defense is nothing but a boondoggle, pure corporate welfare. We can't afford to let the Red Ink Republicans waste our money this way. Write your Congresspeople and tell them about it.

Posted by jnfr at 02:32 PM | Comments (0)

January 07, 2005

This is exactly right

Josh Marshall quotes a reader on Social Security.

There are $1.8 trilliion in U.S. Treasury securities in the U.S. Social Security Trust Fund. It is imperative that the Democrats ask Bush whether he intends to honor that obligations and force him to make a public proclamation of his steadfast commitment to do so. The Democrats must take the lead in committing themselves to honor those obligations.

Democrats should seize this opportunity at once, and every one of them stand forth and guarantee they will honor those financial commitments, and will not vote for any bill that puts those commitments at risk. That's the least they owe those of us who paid for the damn things, and it would be a smart political move to boot.

Posted by jnfr at 08:57 AM | Comments (0)

January 06, 2005

Republicans flip flop on ethics, again

In the end, they decided to lower ethical standards anyway. Just not in the way they first proposed.

You can't wash the sleaze out of the sleazy, it seems.

Posted by jnfr at 05:47 PM | Comments (0)

A bad combination

Oliver Willis had the best post of the day yesterday, when he showed us the very bad combination of these two stories:

Bush Rejects Bad News

There is rising concern amongst senior officials that President Bush does not grasp the increasingly grim reality of the security situation in Iraq because he refuses to listen to that type of information. Our sources say that attempts to brief Bush on various grim realities have been personally rebuffed by the President, who actually says that he does not want to hear “bad news.”

Rather, Bush makes clear that all he wants are progress reports, where they exist, and those facts which seem to support his declared mission in Iraq...building democracy. “That's all he wants to hear about,” we have been told. So “in” are the latest totals on school openings, and “out” are reports from senior US military commanders (and those intelligence experts still on the job) that they see an insurgency becoming increasingly effective, and their projection that “it will just get worse.”

And this one:

U.S. reserves nearly 'broken,' says chief

The U.S. Army Reserve, tapped heavily to provide soldiers for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is “degenerating into a ‘broken’ force” due to dysfunctional military policies, the Army Reserve’s chief said in a memo made public Wednesday.

This is a dangerous situation, and it doesn't look like this administration is even willing to notice.

Posted by jnfr at 08:13 AM | Comments (0)

January 04, 2005

Krugman on Social Security and the trust fund

In today's New York Times, Paul Krugman describes exactly what I'm talking about in the post below.

There are only two things that could endanger Social Security's ability to pay benefits before the trust fund runs out. One would be a fiscal crisis that led the U.S. to default on all its debts. The other would be legislation specifically repudiating the general fund's debts to retirees.

That is, we can't have a Social Security crisis without a general fiscal crisis - unless Congress declares that debts to foreign bondholders must be honored, but that promises to older Americans, who have spent most of their working lives paying extra payroll taxes to build up the trust fund, don't count.

He promises to write more specifically about privatization in the coming weeks.

Posted by jnfr at 11:12 AM | Comments (0)

Bush plans to cut social security benefits

At last details of Bush's plan for social security are out, and they are grim details indeed for older people like myself. A story in today's Washington Post reports that Bush's plan would cut SS benefits by one-third, primarily by changing the formula used to calculate them. The plan assumes that younger people might eventually make up some of the lost benefits through savings accounts, but of course nothing about that is guaranteed, and in fact the theory behind private accounts is very unsound. Max has more on the privatization issue here and here.

Bush and his cronies have worked hard to convince people that Social Security is in grave danger, when in fact it is not in grave danger at all. While it may eventually need some tweaking (and that need may be 40 or 50 years off), the primary danger facing Social Security is that our lawmakers will break their word, and use the SS surplus to help pay down the criminal levels of general fund debt created by the Bush tax cuts and the red-ink Republicans' inability to hold their wild spending in line.

The SS surplus was painstakingly built up as a hedge against the baby boomers' retirement needs. That money has come from the wages of working people like you and me, and those of us now reaching our 50s must fight to keep the red-ink Republicans from stealing what we so carefully tucked away. I'm surely not the only person who will need SS to stave off poverty once I retire. If we let the red-ink Republicans start whittling away at our retirement funds, life will only get that much harder for us later on — something the Republicans couldn't care less about. They've never liked Social Security, or any other social safety net for that matter, and this is just one more attempt to break the back of progressive programs that benefit someone other than the wealthy.

Posted by jnfr at 10:15 AM | Comments (0)

January 03, 2005

Republicans embrace ethics?

What fun! Suddenly they decide that DeLay needs a spanking after all!

WASHINGTON - House Republicans suddenly reversed course Monday, deciding to retain a tough standard for lawmaker discipline and reinstate a rule that would force Majority Leader Tom DeLay to step aside if indicted by a Texas grand jury.

Wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall inside the Republican caucus?

UPDATE: Apparently DeLay himself requested they rescind the change, since the Republicans' lack of ethics was turning into a strong political issue for Democrats (duh!).

Those attending the Republican meeting, which was held on the day before the opening of the 109th Congress on Tuesday, said Republicans unanimously agreed to restore the old rule after Mr. DeLay told them that the move would clear the air and deny Democrats a potent political issue....

Some Republicans who originally opposed the rules change enthusiastically greeted the decision not to go through with it.

"It allows the Republicans to focus on the issues, the agenda that is before us and not to have Tom DeLay be the issue," Representative Zach Wamp, Republican of Tennessee, said. "I feel like we have just taken a shower."

Posted by jnfr at 06:53 PM | Comments (0)

January 02, 2005

Republicans shun ethics

Posted by jnfr at 09:34 PM | Comments (0)

Bush busy dumping the grown-ups

Sydney Blumenthal had a remarkable article in the Guardian last week, outlining more of how Bush/Cheney and the neo-cons are busy consolidating power and tossing out the last remnants of Bush Sr.'s old guard realists. They're all about the ideological purity in the White House these days, and they live in a fantasy world.

A few choice 'grafs:

The transition to President Bush's second term, filled with backstage betrayals, plots and pathologies, would make for an excellent chapter of I, Claudius. To begin with, Bush has unceremoniously and without public acknowledgement dumped Brent Scowcroft, his father's closest associate and friend, as chairman of the foreign intelligence advisory board. The elder Bush's national security adviser was the last remnant of traditional Republican realism permitted to exist within the administration.

At the same time the vice president, Dick Cheney, has imposed his authority over secretary of state designate Condoleezza Rice, in order to blackball Arnold Kanter, former under secretary of state to James Baker and partner in the Scowcroft Group, as a candidate for deputy secretary of state.

"Words like 'incoherent' come to mind," one top state department official told me about Rice's effort to organise her office. She is unable to assert herself against Cheney, her wobbliness a sign that the state department will mostly be sidelined as a power centre for the next four years....

Meanwhile, key senior state department professionals, such as Marc Grossman, assistant secretary of state for European affairs, have abruptly resigned. According to colleagues who have chosen to remain (at least for now), they foresee the damage that will be done as Rice is charged with whipping the state department into line with the White House and Pentagon neocons. Rice has pleaded with Armitage to stay on, but "he colourfully said he would not", a state department official told me. Rice's radio silence when her former mentor, Scowcroft, was defenestrated was taken by the state department professionals as a sign of things to come.

Bush has long resented his father's alter ego. Scowcroft privately rebuked him for his Iraq follies more than a year ago - an incident that has not previously been reported. Bush "did not receive it well", said a friend of Scowcroft....

The rejection of Kanter is a compound rejection of Scowcroft and of James Baker - the tough, results-oriented operator who as White House chief of staff saved the Reagan presidency from its ideologues, managed the elder Bush's campaign in 1988, and was summoned in 2000 to rescue Junior in Florida. In his 1995 memoir, Baker observed that the administration's "overriding strategic concern in the [first] Gulf war was to avoid what we often referred to as the Lebanonisation of Iraq, which we believed would create a geopolitical nightmare."

In private, Baker is scathing about the current occupant of the White House. Now the one indispensable creator of the Bush family political fortunes is repudiated.

Republican elders who warned of endless war are purged. Those who advised Bush that Saddam was building nuclear weapons, that with a light military force the operation would be a "cakewalk", and that capturing Baghdad was "mission accomplished", are rewarded....

More details in the full article.

Posted by jnfr at 03:06 PM | Comments (0)

December 03, 2004

It's very kind

and a pleasant shock to find that those on the right care so much about the integrity of the United Nations.

Posted by jnfr at 06:24 PM | Comments (0)

November 29, 2004

Heartbreaking

Bush won. Get over it.

Ever since George Bush was re-elected, conservatives have been telling liberals to "get over it." Excuse me? "Get over it?" This wasn't a baseball game. This wasn't the Super Bowl. We're not sobbing in our beers because the Steelers whipped the Packers.

We're at war. People's lives are at stake. Every day, families are being destroyed, both here and in Iraq. To treat this election so dismissively is an insult to them and to the soldiers who gave life and limb in this war.

Posted by jnfr at 08:59 AM | Comments (0)

Supreme Court declines to rule

The Supreme Court has declined to hear challenges to the Massachusetts gay marriage ruling. The Massachusetts Supreme Court had ruled last year that gays should have an equal right to marry under state law, and this is the second time the high court has refused to intervene.

Opponents of same sex marriage had asked the court to intervene against what they call "judicial activism", or the practice of courts ruling on which laws are constitutional. Of course, the Supreme Court considers judicial review a basic right of the courts, so you can imagine they'd be unwilling to rule otherwise. But it seems they're not willing to go out on a limb and rule in favor of the Mass. court either.

Marbury vs. Madison: "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each." 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

Posted by jnfr at 08:47 AM | Comments (0)

November 24, 2004

Native lands

David Neiwert is worth reading no matter what he's writing about. His regular blog, Orcinus, is the best site on the web for keeping in touch with the activities of home-grown American hate groups and various groundswells of racism and terror in the U.S.

He has a piece up this week at The American Street, which addresses a different subject, one I haven't read about before: various attempts to reclaim land from Indian tribes in the western U.S., land given in treaties long ago and since grabbed away at every chance. These are things I figured were settled long ago, but apparently there are quite a few people in this country who don't like having theoretically sovereign Indian tribes in this country. His writing on this rings clear, as all his writing does, and it's a subject that matters. Thanks, David.

Posted by jnfr at 01:26 PM | Comments (0)

November 23, 2004

Bush in a nutshell

Whose library is it, anyway? Junior can't defer to anyone. His Christian spirit in action, I guess.

Posted by jnfr at 08:12 AM | Comments (2)

November 22, 2004

Did Bush lie?

Maybe he was just confused. Word is he wasn't very lucid back then. From an NBC Nightly news interview with Billy Graham:

That's something the current president says he did during a now-famous talk with Billy Graham, at a time when drinking and carousing threatened to lead George W. Bush astray. It’s an encounter that gets an interesting reaction when Rev. Graham is asked about it now.

"I've heard others say that, and people have written it, but I cannot say that," he says. "I was with him and I used to teach the Bible at Kennebunkport to the Bush family when he was a younger man, but I never feel that I in any way turned his life around."

Posted by jnfr at 07:13 PM | Comments (0)

55 per cent

That's Bush's current approval rating according to CNN/Gallup/USA Today. I thought he hadn't been above 50% in at least a year.

So what's up with that? It's certainly not because he's solved the deficit problem (he hasn't) or because the war in Iraq is going well (it's not). He couldn't even get intelligence reform passed when his party controls both houses of Congress! Indeed the American people must be a little bit delusional. "We voted him back in, therefore he must be doing a good job." Definitely not reality-based.

Posted by jnfr at 05:23 PM | Comments (1)

November 21, 2004

The Colorado success story

Both Colorado Luis and Western Democrat point us to an article in the Washington Post on why Democrats made such good progress in my very purple home state of Colorado this year. Then add their own thoughts on the subject, which are well worth reading.

I think the future of success for Democrats will be found in the Rocky Mountain states, which are already purple and trending bluer all the time. But the kind of pragmatic, solution-oriented work the Dems did in Colorado this year has to be key.

The fact that local Republicans suffer the same divisions we're seeing in the national Repubs gave the Dems an opportunity as well. While the state is struggling with fiscal problems, the Republicans were busying cozying up to the religious right, who then refused to support their Senate candidate because he wasn't of sufficiently pure moral character.

Anyway, it's really nice to see some good Western bloggers around to tackle these issues.

Posted by jnfr at 01:16 PM | Comments (0)

November 19, 2004

Our values

I'm with Oliver Willis on this:

He has more on his Brand Democrat page.

Posted by jnfr at 10:58 AM | Comments (0)

November 17, 2004

DeLay

I'm not particularly concerned with how the Republicans choose their leadership. These past few years they have proved over and over again that they care nothing for honor, and everything for power. It's no surprise whatever that they are happy to be led by a possible criminal, and to change their own honorable rules so that he can lead them. After all, he insured the addition of several Republican seats in the House with his probably illegal off-year Texas redistricting plan. I'm not surprised that they want to reward him in his hour of need. But it's never fun to watch your opponents sink to such a low level.

If you're interested in learning more about his background, Mother Jones has a thorough review.

Posted by jnfr at 06:21 PM | Comments (0)

Apologies accepted

Citizens of the world respond to Sorry everybody.

Posted by jnfr at 04:45 PM | Comments (0)

November 15, 2004

About the Democratic Party

I don't talk party politics much. I'm not a member of the Democratic Party, and can't remember the last time I was a part of any organized party at all. But for now the only opposition we really have against Bush and his administration are the Democrats. So here is the only thing I have to say to them, copied from a private post I made elsewhere this evening.

The Dems need to stop worrying about winning and start thinking about telling the truth. The truth and nothing but the truth, told as cleanly and clearly as possible, over and over again. There's more at stake here than winning an election. We're losing our soul.

Posted by jnfr at 09:35 PM | Comments (0)

November 11, 2004

About those tanks

It's been confirmed that the tanks which encountered a peace demonstration were not sent to intimidate, but were rather on their way to a Veteran's Day parade. Stand down, homies!

Posted by jnfr at 03:58 PM | Comments (0)

Tanks in the streets

Apparently someone deployed tanks to an anti-war demonstration in Los Angeles yesterday. Nothing violent came from it; the tanks left after a few minutes. But WTF? There's video of the encounter available if you can't believe it.

Posted by jnfr at 07:37 AM | Comments (0)

November 10, 2004

So much for state's rights

Not that this administration has shown much concern for state's rights anyway, but they have asked the Supreme Court to strike down Oregon's right-to-die law, which allows terminally ill patients to request lethal doses of painkillers.

Posted by jnfr at 06:05 PM | Comments (0)

November 09, 2004

Get ready for 2006

It's time to focus on the next round of Senate elections. In these, more Republican seats are up for grabs than Democratic seats. Johnny Z has some analysis of the races. Anyone know of other people watching this already?

I've found a different list and some other info at blogcritics.

And some more at Modern Vertebrate.

Posted by jnfr at 11:18 AM | Comments (1)

Time to open your checkbooks... again

I think James Wolcott has it right. One big success for liberals this year was that we found a way to tap into a huge pool of small to medium donations. We were able to support the Kerry campaign financially in a way that we really didn't do for Gore. But even though the election is over, there's lots of good progressive work being done by other groups, and there are new campaigns ahead.

Get out your checkbook and credit cards and donate today! Wolcott has some suggestions about useful places to put your cash.

Posted by jnfr at 10:47 AM | Comments (0)

Kerry "fired up"

and plans to work hard in the Senate to combat Bush's agenda. I like the sound of that.

Posted by jnfr at 08:42 AM | Comments (0)

November 08, 2004

Red states = welfare states?

Over at Angry Bear, the Angry Bear himself lays out the statistics which show that red states can't support themselves very well. In fact, the blue states are the generous givers of money while the red states, mostly, suck it up. Isn't it time we put an end to this welfare relationship?

Posted by jnfr at 01:02 PM | Comments (0)

"An Election That Will Live in Infamy"

Even some conservatives realize that re-electing Bush was a disastrous move.

Posted by jnfr at 09:58 AM | Comments (0)

November 07, 2004

I actually live in a purple state

As I've said before, I live in Colorado. Colorado is considered a "red state", which is a term I don't care for much. Lots of liberals live and vote in red states. Quite a few conservatives live and vote in blue states. In fact, I think it's more accurate to say that most of America is different shades of purple, and it would be wiser to realize that while there may be red and blue people in this country, most of us live near some of each. Even the supposedly "solid red" south has large swaths of liberal voters, and a lot of purple too. The only parts of the west that are bright red are places mostly inhabited by cows.

I love that map. I've looked at it over and over. The purpleness of Colorado explains why we elected one of only two new Democratic senators this year (Salazar's very moderate, it's true; he's a good fit for Colorado). We also approved progressive funding for schools, mass transit, and renewable energy, and returned control of our state senate and legislature to the Democrats for the first time in 50 years.

There are many other visual ways of looking at the election data, and they show the red state/blue state scheme is completely inadequate. Don't let the MSM* fool you into simplicity. Be purple!

*MainStream Media

Posted by jnfr at 05:37 PM | Comments (0)

I'm blue too (and I live in a red state)

Many thanks to Kevin Drum for pointing me to Michael Kinsley's latest column, in which he mentions the unmentionable: that conservatives in this country are at least as arrogant and elitist as liberals are. And Kinsley managed to say it while making me laugh, too, which isn't easy these days.

Posted by jnfr at 02:16 PM | Comments (0)

EJ Dionne is angry

His column on the election hits all the right notes, IMO.

Let's be honest: We are aghast at the success of a campaign based on vicious personal attacks, the exploitation of strong religious feelings and an effort to create the appearance of strong leadership that would do Hollywood proud. We are alarmed that so many of our fellow citizens could look the other way and not hold Bush accountable for utter incompetence in Iraq and for untruths spoken in defense of the war. We are amazed that a majority was not concerned about heaping a huge debt burden on our children just to give large tax breaks to the rich.

And we are disgusted that an effort consciously designed to divide the country did exactly that -- and won.

Read the whole thing.

Posted by jnfr at 09:21 AM | Comments (0)

Sorry everybody

We tried.

Posted by jnfr at 09:09 AM | Comments (0)

November 06, 2004

It wasn't because of gay marriage

A lot of people on the left are arguing that Gavin Newsom and other proponents of gay marriage caused the Democrats to lose the election, because of the incentive that gave for a large turnout of evangelical voters. But over in Slate, Paul Freedman doesn't believe that is true, and he back it up with some pretty convincing election statistics.

Posted by jnfr at 10:20 AM | Comments (0)