Not guilty? Kill him anyway, justices say

The state of Alabama was forced to halt an execution when another man confessed to killing the person the condemned man was set to die for.
Incredibly, the vote to halt the execution was not unanimous.

The Alabama Supreme Court postponed executing a man after an inmate claimed in an sworn statement to defense attorneys that he committed the murder that sent the condemned man to death row.
The justices in a 5-4 vote late Wednesday stopped the execution by injection of Thomas Arthur "pending further orders of this Court."

How could four state supreme court justices vote to continue an execution in the face of clear evidence that the condemned man may be innocent? That is just reprehensible!
Furthermore, how many other innocent people are on death row, or have already been executed, for crimes they did not commit?
The death penalty is a barbaric, immoral, unChristian practice that should be banned and replaced with a penalty of life without parole.

Glenn Greenwald smackdown

Glenn Greenwald, the fiery civil rights and constitutional law attorney who blogs at Salon.com has been a force to be reckoned with these past few years. His impassioned posts on torture policies, warrantless wiretapping and illicit hiring practices at the DOJ have won him a large audience in the liberal blogsphere and his books such as “Great American Hypocrites” have helped rally liberals together to oppose the radical authoritarian regime currently in charge of our government.
But recently, Greenwald’s passion for his causes have led him to become increasingly critical of the Democratic leadership in Congress (as well as anyone else who gets crossways to his views such as Barack Obama and Keith Olbermann).
Sounding more and more like Ralph Nader, Greenwald has recently taken to lambasting the Democratic leadership and declaring that things are no different now than when Republicans still had control of the Congress.
And now, with his most recent salvo, Greenwald has thrown down the gauntlet and is demanding that the Democrats be punished for failing to heed what he believes are the core principles of the party and our country. He wants to see the “Blue Dogs” in Congress defeated in the next election, even if it means replacing them with Republicans. Blue Dogs are Congress Critters who he deems to be too closely aligned to Republicans in general and the Bush administration in particular. He dismisses the implications of such actions by claiming that Democratic gains in the next election will be large enough to make up for any Blue Dog defeats, but if enough people get on board with his scheme then those big Democratic gains may never materialize in the first place.
Fortunately, Ed Kilgore has stepped up to the challenge of putting Greenwald in his place. He effectively smacks down Greenwald’s arguments and justifications and notes that Democratic unity in the Congress is already at a high point compared to previous eras.
Consider that Democrats recently celebrated the election of “Blue Dog” Democrats in special elections in Mississippi and Louisiana, and then reconsider Greenwald’s plan to have these same politicos defeated in the next election as a slap at the party for its supposed failure to toe the line on every liberal issue. Talk about shooting ourselves in the foot!
There are sometimes “Blue Dogs” who aren’t worth supporting, like Ralph Hall who represents Texas’ 4th District. It made little difference when Hall switched from Democrat to Republican a few years ago because he never voted with the Democrats anyway, even on the key issue of electing a Speaker of the House. But most “Blue Dogs” are not like that. Many tend to be more bipartisan and specialize in coalition building between parties. I really miss Charlie Stenholm, the former Congressman from the Texas Panhandle who lost his seat as a result of Tom DeLay’s re-redistricting shenanigans. Now, instead of a crusty, conservative Democrat and fiscal conservative representing that part of the state, we have a hard-core, rightwing, movement conservative Randy Neugebauer who takes his cues from folks like Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and Pat Robertson. And Greenwald wants to repeat that same scenario all across the country with this “Moneybomb” campaign that he and some folks at Firedoglake are promoting.
Phooey on that! Greenwald needs to go stick his head in a bucket of cold water until he returns to his senses. I was especially disappointed in his sulking, disingenous response to Kilgore in which he throws up a long list of strawmen arguments that were never raised in Kilgore’s article.
I don’t have a problem with having impassioned debates during the primary contests, but this idea of punishing the party during the general election is self-defeating and contrary to the things that Greenwald hopes to accomplish. I don’t want to see Greenwald lose his passion for the topics he holds dear. I agree with him on most, if not all, of his issues. But he needs to rethink this latest strategy he is pushing and recognize that it could ultimately drive him over the same cliff that Nader dove off of back in 2000.

Let’s Impeach the President

Neil Young has produced a documentary film of his 2006 tour with his old Crosby, Stills & Nash buddies that focuses on the angst that his politically-charged lyrics produced from some audiences.

It wasn't hard to find unhappy fans at a handful of shows, most obviously in Atlanta. Many streamed out, or stayed to offer hand signals. Some had inexplicably expected a greatest-hits show. Young said he was blown away watching families fight, the children wanting to stay while their parents were eager to leave.

How dense does one have to be to go to a Neil Young concert after he has just released an album called “Living With War” featuring the single “Let’s Impeach the President” and be surprised that it contains an overtly political message?

Good news for Mark Begich

A federal grand jury has just indicted U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska. Stevens is the senior Republican in the Senate and this will unquestionably be a blow to the GOP's chances of holding this seat in November.
Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, Steven's Democratic opponent, already had a good shot at the seat before this latest turn of events. I'm sure they are celebrating right now.
At least Stevens still has time to put in for a pardon from President Bush.

Domestic terrorist attacks

A man walked into a Unitarian Church in Tennessee over the weekend and opened fire with a shotgun, killing two people and critically wounding five others. His motivation? He hates Liberals.
The church that the man attacked was well know for supporting liberal causes and welcoming all people into membership including gays and lesbians. So that apparently made them a target for this wingnut to take out his frustration over not being able to find a job in Bush’s economy.
David Neiwert at Firedoglake notes that killing liberals has been a common theme on the fringes of the far right for a long time, so we should not be surprised when some Ditto-head finally loses it and acts out on all the pent-up hatred promoted daily by the Limbaughs, Hannitys, Coulters, Savages, O’Reillys, ad infinitum.
Does this qualify as a terrorist attack? Most terrorist attacks in this country are not committed by Muslims, as many believe, but by rightwing nutjobs like Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City) and Eric Rudolph (Olympic bomber).
All of this begs the question -- Why do the wingnuts hate America?

Texas Progressive Alliance roundup 7/28

It's Monday and it's time once again for another Texas Progressive Alliance roundup. Here are the blog highlights for the week of July 28:

TXsharon challenges you to view these pictures of Domestic Drilling Armageddon in the Barnett Shale and still support the Drill and Burn Domestic Drilling agenda.

U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez' Republican challenger for the 23rd Congressional seat is taken to task by Mike Thomas of Rhetoric & Rhythm for shirking his responsiblity on a critical hospital expansion vote before the Bexar County Commissioner's Court.

WCNews at Eye On Williamson posts on the GOP's "latest" energy plan in Carter, Oil, & Hair Of The Dog.

Neil at Texas Liberal asks what would be the impact if Polar Bears could vote.

Off the Kuff looks at a Texas Monthly overview of the effects of the Presidential race on downballot elections in Texas and offers his criticism of it.

Guest Columnist JR Behrman at Texas Kaos has a few strong words about Energy Policy: Democrats Routed. He also has a Texas Plan.

Julie Pippert of the MOMocrats asks the Obama campaign to explain its absence in Texas after they announced the roll-out of their Spanish-Language ads as an outreach to Hispanic voters, then discusses a Senate proposal that would require 50% of US cars to have a flexible fuel system by 2012, and finally the MOMocrats share the draft of their position paper to be submitted to the Democratic National Committee for inclusion in the party platform.

McBlogger had a great time in the subprime panel at Netroots Nation. So good in fact that he decided to offer some of his own solutions since the panelists, including the dimwitted Rep. Brad Miller, decided to offer nothing of substance.

XicanoPwr reports on the latest poll by the Pew Hispanic Center on the Latino vote. Latino polling shows that 66% of Latino registered voters will support Obama.

Burnt Orange Report points out that Ag Commissioner Todd Staples finally comes around to what Democrat (and future Ag Commissioner) Hank Gilbert has been saying all along- Texan's are being overcharged at the gas pump due to lack of state inspections.

BossKitty at TruthHugger dreams about the "Count Down To Accountability - Bush, Cheney Indictments"

refinish69 from Doing My Part For The Left invites everyone to meet Annette Taddeo- A True Progressive Democrat.

jobsanger writes about how after years of the Bush Presidency even our cloest traditional ally no longer trusts us in Brits Don't Trust Bush On Torture.

Obama and the down-ballot races in Texas are the focus of two articles by R.G. Ratcliffe of the Houston Chronicle. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs summarizes, and finds some to agree with and some not.

Mean Rachel writes an open letter to Rep. Elliot Naishtat, encouraging him to consider joining the technology age and starting an inexpensive, easy-to-use website tailor-made for state legislators with Wired for Change's DLCCWeb, a Netroots exhibitor.

nytexan at BlueBloggin keeps an eye on Mitch McConnell, the GOP king of distortion and extortion. McConnell plans to block legislation that can impact Americans now and push for a bill whose product will not be seen for 10 years; McConnell Extorts Senate For Off Shore Drilling. McConnell never fails to please Bush and his corporate buddies.

WhosPlayin looks at a new USGS petroleum estimate for the Arctic Circle, and notes that only a small portion of ANWR is estimated to be productive, and that the study doesn't address economic feasibility. (Includes Map)

Vince from Capitol Annex tells us that, while indicted former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Sugar Land) won't accept a presidential pardon, he'd love one from Texas Governor Rick Perry.

CouldBeTrue from South Texas Chisme gets upset with crappy newspaper article.

Obama smeared over phony troop snub

I got this email the other day forwarded to me by my brother-in-law who is in the Army National Guard. It describes a visit by Barack Obama to a military base in Afghanistan where he supposedly does not take the time to shake hands and visit with the soldiers.
I can understand why something like this would upset him. The only thing is I don’t believe it is true. Here is the bulk of the email:

As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on his visit to 'The War Zone'. I wanted to share with you what happened. He got off the plan and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here at Bagram. As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and didn't say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to thank them for their service. So really he was just here to make a showing for the American's back home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you. I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States . I just don't understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country.
If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you all to know what kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see in the news is all fake.

In service,
xxxxxxxx
Battle Captain
TF Wasatch
American Soldier

I took the name off so as not to disparage anyone. The person who wrote this didn’t necessarily make it all up. From their perspective, it may have been accurate as far as what they saw. But they clearly didn’t see the whole picture.
Since this email has come out it has gone viral on the Internet and now it turns out not to have been true afterall as I suspected.

Army officials refute claim of Barack Obama snub in Afghanistan
By James Gordon Meek
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
Updated Friday, July 25th 2008, 10:05 AM
WASHINGTON - The latest chain e-mail smear against Barack Obama: He "blew off" troops at an Afghan base to shoot hoops for a publicity photo.
The letter was apparently written by a Utah Army National Guard intelligence officer in a linguist unit at Bagram Airfield who claimed the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee was rude to G.I.s.
"As the soldiers where [sic] lined up to shake his hand he blew them off," wrote the Task Force Wasatch "battle captain."
But angry Army brass debunked the Obama-bashing soldier's allegations, which went viral Thursday over the Web and on military blogs such as Blackfive.
The e-mail claims Obama repeatedly shunned soldiers on his way to the Clamshell - a recreation tent - to "take his publicity pictures playing basketball."
"These comments are inappropriate and factually incorrect," said Bagram spokeswoman Army Lt. Col. Rumi Nielson-Green, who added that such political commentary is barred for uniformed personnel.
Obama didn't play basketball at Bagram or visit the Clamshell, she said. Home-state troops were invited to meet him, but his arrival was kept secret for security reasons.
"We were a bit delayed ... as he took time to shake hands, speak to troops and pose for photographs," Nielson-Green said.
E-mails to the officer who made the charges and a call to his wife were not returned.

It didn’t make sense that any politician worth their weight in salt would be so politically obtuse as to “blow off the troops” during a campaign stop at a military base. And certainly not a politician of the caliber of Barack Obama. It’s nonsense. Would John McCain blow off a bunch of union workers during a visit to a factory so he can hobnob with the fat cat CEO? Of course not. And Obama isn’t snubbing our troops during his tour of the Middle East.
There are going to be a good number of people who are going to vote against Obama regardless, but if they want to have a reason for voting against him they should look for something legitimate, like a disagreement over a policy issue, and not something bogus and exaggerated like this.

Joe Barton may retire

Congressman Joe Barton may retire in 2010, according to this post by one of his former primary opponents. (H/T to Brains and Eggs)
This delights me to no end. There is probably no one in Congress who I despise more than “Smokey” Joe Barton, mainly because of my personal connection to him. He was my Congressman when I was at Texas A&M and the last reminder of the huge mistake I made in 1984, the first year I was old enough to vote. That year I was completely enamored with Uncle Ronnie and his “Morning in America” tripe. And so I cast my first-ever vote for “the Gipper” and then proceeded to vote a nearly straight Republican ticket which meant that I voted for both Phil Gramm for U.S. Senate and Joe Barton for Congress. Reagan and Gramm are both gone now, but Barton has endured all these years, finally rising far above his level of compentence to become chairman of the House Energy Committee.
Fortunately, the Democratic tidal wave of 2006 brought that travesty to an end and stripped Barton of his chairmanship. Now it seems that his all-but-certain minority status for the forseeable future plus some unfortunate health problems are leading him to consider retirement in 2010 (and no doubt entry into a lucrative lobbying career for the energy industry that he has catered to all these years.)
Barton was always a reliable rubber-stamp for the “movement conservative” causes and has most recently used his senior status on the Energy panel to throw roadblocks up on efforts to address Global Warming issues.
Barton’s retirement will finally relieve my conscience for the huge mistake I made two dozen years ago, but it probably won’t result in better representation in Congress since Barton’s district is heavily Republican and will likely elect someone equally as wingnutty to his seat - just with less seniority.

Obama nails a 3-pointer

You know things are going well for the Obama campaign when you get photo-ops like this one:



He gets it on the first try. How cool is that?

Update
I think he nailed this one too.

Lyle Larson shirks his responsibility

The Bexar County Commissioners Court had to make a big decision last week on providing additional funding for the University Health System in San Antonio. UHS is the only civilian Level I trauma center for Bexar County and the surrounding communities. It handles 65 percent of all the trauma cases in the area - about 70,000 per year - in an ER that was designed to handle about half that number.
There is no question that an expansion of the hospital is long overdue and the longer we wait the more expensive it will be. Last week, the commissioners court approved a $900 million expansion project for UHS that will require an 8 percent property tax increase (about $19 per $100,000 valuation).
The plan was approved on a 4-1 vote with Commissioner Larson voting against. Was Larson’s “No” vote a principled stand against a project he does not support? Not exactly. Larson told the Express-News:

“I'm 100 percent behind the expansion of the health system. I just differ in one way, and that's how we pay for it.”

How does Larson think we should pay for it? He doesn’t say. He just wants to throw the whole issue into the voters’ laps and have them vote on it in a referendum.
But this would be grossly irresponsible. Not only would it waste time and make the project more expensive in the long run, but it would be disingenuous. This is not some whimsical pursuit like a publicly-funded sports arena that should get voter approval first. This is a vital public necessity. A “No” vote would not be acceptable. And yet, when it comes down to making that decision, Larson wants to shift responsibility on to the largely uninformed and ignorant masses. Isn’t that why he was elected in the first place? To make sure he is well informed and make key decisions that are in the best interest of all of us? Why even have elected representatives if we are going to hold referendums on every major issue?
If Larson wants to shirk his responsibility as a county commissioner on this vitally important issue, why should he be promoted to higher office as a U.S. Congressman? Larson is the Republican nominee for the 23rd District of Texas challenging incumbent Democrat Ciro Rodriguez.
In an editorial after the vote, the Express-News said the four members of the Commissioners Court who supported the UHS expansion project will be held responsible by voters in the near future. But it is Lyle Larson who should be held responsible for his spineless and weasel-like actions on the commissioners court.

Pardon me

As Ann notes today, we should not be surprised by the presidential pardons that Bush is bound to dole out before the end of his term.
To date, he has been exceedingly stingy with his power to commute sentences, handing out about one pardon for every 10 that Reagan granted during his eight years in office. But he still has time. Clinton waited until the final three months of his second term to pass out nearly half the pardons he issued (slightly more than Reagan did in total).
The New York Times noted that felons are currently seeking pardons in record numbers. Some of the prominent people seeking pardons from Bush include billionaire junk bond king Michael Milken and former U.S. Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham. Other prominent pleas come from former Louisiana Gov. Edwin Edwards, American Taliban John Walker Lindh (fat chance!) and Olympic sprinter Marion Jones who was nailed for doping recently.
Could Bush issue some blanket pardons to folks like Karl Rove, Tom DeLay and Dick Cheney, the way his father did for Casper Weinberger? Perhaps Scooter Libby will get the full pardon he still lacks. The possibilities are limitless.

2008 Movies

This is turning out to be quite a big year for “must-see” movies in my opinion. There seems to be a plethora of geek-centric movies coming out this year compared to the relatively thin offerings in 2007.
My list of “Must See” and “Must Own” films (not always the same) is getting rather lengthy compared to last year.
So far, I’ve seen three films in the theater this year, the kid-friendly “Horton Hears a Who” and “Kung Fu Panda” and “Iron Man” which I managed to see one week when my wife and kids were out of town.
But the number of movies that I want to see “eventually” is piling up and quite a few are already on my list for eventual inclusion in my video library.

Starting with my Must Own list I have:

Horton Hears a Who
Kung Fu Panda
Iron Man
Wall-E
Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull
The Dark Knight
Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian
Nim’s Island
Speed Racer
and Hell Boy II: The Golden Army (which I will probably get as a package with Hell Boy I)

And then there are the films that I want to see that I may or may not eventually buy copies of including:

Hancock
The Spiderwick Chronicles
Journey to the Center of the Earth
The Incredible Hulk
Dave

Then there are the movies that have not been released yet which I will probably add to my collection eventually:

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Star Trek
James Bond No. 22
The X-Files Movie

Other films currently out or set to come out in 2008 that have caught my interest include:

“Wanted” - a Matrix-like action film with Angelina Jolie
“The Happening” - M. Night Shalmayan’s latest spooky film
“The Lovely Bones” - It doesn’t sound like a movie I would want to see, but since Peter Jackson (i.e. Lord of the Rings) is the director I am automatically interested nevertheless.
“Where the Wild Things Are” - based on the classic children’s book. If it is as good as Polar Express it will end up on my Must Own list as well.
“Valkyrie” - About the attempt to assassinate Hitler during WWII starring Tom Cruise.
“The Changeling” - Another film I’m not sure about but Clint Eastwood is directing which raises the interest level.
“The Curious Case of Ben Button” - Based on an F. Scott Fitzgerald story about a man who lives life in reverse and starring Brad Pitt.
“The Day the Earth Stood Still” - A remake of the sci-fi classic with Kenau Reeves in the lead role.
“Angels and Demons” - Apparently a prequel to The DaVinci Code with Ron Howard directing and Tom Hanks starring again.
“Frost/Nixon” - Another Ron Howard project about a post-Watergate interview of Nixon by David Frost.
“Shantaram” - I don’t know anything about this film except that it stars Johnny Depp.

It ain’t gonna be close

Michael Grunwald at Time finally spells out what should be obvious to every astute political observer in the country right now - John McCain is toast.
This election is not going to be close no matter how many headlines from now until November try to play up the race as a horserace going down to the wire.

John McCain might seem like a long shot. He's the Republican nominee at a time when the two-term Republican President is wildly unpopular and Republicans are losing elections in perennially Republican districts and the party base isn't exactly drooling over him. He supported the president's unpopular efforts to transform Iraq and revamp Social Security; he was against the Bush tax cuts before he was for them. He's a 71-year-old Washington hand in a change election. And his 46-year-old opponent is a lot better at raising money, delivering speeches, drawing crowds and registering new voters.

Oh, let's just admit it: John McCain is a long shot. He's got a heroic personal story, and being white has never hurt a presidential candidate, but on paper 2008 just doesn't look like his year. And considering what's happening off paper, it might be time to ask the question the horse-race-loving media are never supposed to ask: Is McCain a no-shot?

Yes, he is a no-shot. Any Republican candidate this year would be a no-shot. The best Republicans can do this year is whine about how Obama has “flip-flopped” on a few issues (but nowhere close to the number of issues McCain has flip-flopped on) and point out his supposed inexperience. But in a change election, “experience” is not always a positive factor and stubbornly refusing to change positions when circumstances warrant it is precisely what got us into our current jams both foreign and domestic.

I can’t imagine even the most hard-core Republican can watch the new McCain ad that tries to blame Obama for the run-up in gas prices and not snicker or roll their eyes. They are desperate to the point of self-parody.

As Grunwald concludes, it is really quite simple at this point to predict the election outcome in November:

The media will try to preserve the illusion of a toss-up; you'll keep seeing "Obama Leads, But Voters Have Concerns" headlines. But when Democrats are winning blood-red congressional districts in Mississippi and Louisiana, when the Republican president is down to 28 percent, when the economy is tanking and world affairs keep breaking Obama's way, it shouldn't be heresy to recognize that McCain needs an improbable series of breaks. Analysts get paid to analyze, and cable news has airtime to fill, so pundits have an incentive to make politics seem complicated. In the end, though, it's usually pretty simple. Everyone seems to agree that 2008 is a change election. Which of these guys looks like change?

Back to work

OK, I’m back and I’m swamped at work.
In the meantime, here is an interesting article about how the roots of today’s politics were mostly planted in 1978, not 1968 as some have claimed.

Everyone seems to be telling us that if you want to understand 2008, you have to look back 40 years to 1968. "It's the year that changed everything," wrote Newsweek last November. Seen through tie-dye-tinted glasses, Iraq is the new Vietnam, Barack Obama is the new Bobby Kennedy, and bloggers are the new student activists.
But are we commemorating the right year? If we really want a time that defined the way we live now, we should look back not to the romance and trauma of the '60s but to the gloriously tacky '70s, to the year that made modern America -- 1978. Look beyond the year's bad disco and worse clothes; if you peer deeply into the polyester soul of 1978, you can see the beginnings of the world we live in today.

My biggest problem with the article is this concluding line.... “But from politics to technology, from civil rights to foreign policy, 1978 marked the start of the age we live in. Thank God, disco didn't survive.”
Disco didn’t survive?? I’m sorry to burst that bubble, but “disco” didn’t die. It mutated, evolved and now dominates today’s musical landscape. You can call it Hip-Hop, Electronica, Eurobeat, Synthpop, Diva Rock or what have you, but it is all just dance music and it is everywhere.

On Vacation

I will be on vacation all this next week and may not have access to a computer. So posting might be very sparse. In the meantime, everybody play nice while I'm gone and have fun!

McCain throws Gramm under the bus - again

“You’re all a bunch of whiners!” says Phil Gramm, former U.S. Senator from Texas and John McCain’s top economic advisor.
The economic hard times are all in your head. The country is in a “mental recession” and you are all a “nation of whiners.”
That Phil Gramm is quite the character, isn’t he? Now it looks like McCain wants to distance himself from Gramm once again. It wasn’t that long ago that McCain was disavowing Gramm over his ties to the home loan mortgage industry as a big time lobbyist for UBS.
But they must have patched things up, because there was Gramm again stumping for McCain and meeting with the big shots at the Wall Street Journal on his behalf. But wait, McCain protests. Gramm doesn’t speak for me, he insists.
Right.
You whiner.



Update
I have to feel kind of sorry for some of my conservative friends who are now forced to try and defend Gramm's statement.
But maybe if he can whether this onslaught, McCain might consider that Gramm would make the ideal match for him as his vice president.
McCain-Gramm! That has a nice ring to it doesn't it? That's a winning ticket for sure!
And I know just what their campaign slogan could be:
"You're all a bunch of whiners! Now, get off of my lawn!"

Some perspective on FISA

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or FISA was passed by Congress in 1978 in response to abuses by the Nixon administration in the use of wiretapping technology. Nixon had used wiretapping to keep tabs not just on foreign and domestic terrorists, but also on his domestic political adversaries.
FISA essentially set up a secret court system to oversee future wiretapping by intelligence agencies to prevent these kinds of abuses from happening again.
But because it was written in 1978, before the advent of cell phones, e-mail, and much more, it is now horribly out of date. It was in bad need of updating prior to 9/11. Afterwards, the Bush administration used the fact that the law was outdated as an excuse for tossing it aside and going forward with a modern surveillance program outside the realm of the FISA courts. This was wrong.
But the question now is how wrong was it? If they had ditched the FISA courts so they could go back to Nixon-style monitoring of their political adversaries, I would say that it was a very serious and possibly impeachable offense. However, if they simply did what they said they did and ditched FISA so they could more aggressively pursue foreign terror suspects in the aftermath of an attack on our country, then I think we would be hard-pressed to make the case that they deserve criminal punishment for those actions today.
The caterwauling I’m hearing about warrantless wiretapping threatening our Fourth Amendment rights against illegal search and seizure makes no sense to me. I have never had a problem with the government using wiretaps to keep track of criminal suspects and the fact that they needed to expand that effort in response to 9/11 seems like common sense to me. What I have always insisted, however, is that we have a check in place (i.e. the FISA court) to oversee these intelligence activities and make sure that they are not be abused ala Nixon.
It seems to me that the FISA bill that Obama supported satisfied that concern. The fact that it also provides things that President Bush wanted doesn’t make it automatically bad. I’m sure there are parts of the bill that are not ideal and should be changed. But we can’t get everything we want now with a Republican president and a 50-50 Senate. So we have to compromise because that is the way that government works. And the option of falling back on the outdated 1978 FISA law was a non sequitur and would have made Democrats look weak on terrorism right before the general election.
I think it is pretty clear that laws were broken by the administration after 9/11. But that could be like trying to fine somebody for speeding when he was trying to drive his sick wife to the hospital. The general public isn’t going to go along with it unless you have evidence that they were abusing the wiretapping program.
The fact that there are people who are now using this issue to say that they will not support Obama is appalling. They need to get some perspective.

Losing perspective

There have been so many issues for people to get outraged about during the past dozen years that it is hard to keep track of them all. Warrantless wiretapping is just one of them.
Ideally, I’d love to see the Bush administration and their telecom cronies get nailed for their clearly illegal wiretapping program post-9/11. But the reality is that there are not enough votes in the Congress to see that happen.
So it looks like we will end up with a bill overhauling eavesdropping regulations that lets the telecom companies off the hook.
The best thing to do in this case then is to push for the best deal we can get and then move on.
Unfortunately, there are some on the left who aren’t satisfied with that bit of reality. They are prepared to throw a huge hissy fit when they don’t get their way as if this issue - telecom immunity - was the end all most important thing in the universe.
Hogwash!
Let me put this bluntly. I don’t give a damn about telecom immunity or warrantless wiretapping if fixing it in any way hurts Democrats’ chances of winning back the White House in November. It will be small consolation indeed to have the FISA bill defeated and the telecoms tied up in court for the next decade if it also means we get four more years of Republican misrule.
But what I am seeing right now is groups of people on the left (and some on the right) preparing to throw a big stink bomb
into the race if all their demands aren’t met in full. Others are even encouraging folks to withhold funding from Obama’s campaign in protest of his nominal support for the FISA overhaul legislation.
That is so fundamentally stupid that I can’t believe politically astute people would even be considering it. Karl Rove couldn’t have dreamed up a better scheme for throwing a monkey wrench into the election prospects of Democrats this year.
You can protest the FISA bill all you want, but I think folks like Glenn Greenwald and Christy Hardin Smith have been going overboard lately with their claims that our very Constitution is hanging in the balance.
Yes, it will be irritating if some folks get away with breaking the law. But the reality is that it happens everyday and our country is still surviving.
We’ve got a big mess to clean up after a dozen years of Republican shenanigans and we are going to have to take things one step at a time. Step One is putting a Democrat in the White House! Everything else is superfluous in the long run.

Left and Right misconceptions

My conservative friend jimmyK left a lengthy comment in the previous thread that I think merits an in depth response.

Don't you reckon' Clear Channel knows how to spend their money better than you do?

No, I would not make that assumption. Companies make bad decisions all the time and I think paying Rush Lamebrain $400 gazillion in the middle of a recession when they are struggling for ad revenues may prove to be unwise.
Heck, Jay Leno only makes $25 million a year compared to the $38 million Clear Channel will be stuck paying Rush.

You know why conservatives whom you call stupid listen to Rush, they are all at work and only have radios to listen too. Liberals on the other hand have nearly all of T.V. stations, and most all the newspapers...

You harbor a lot of stereotypical misconceptions about “conservatives” and “liberals.” It is not accurate to claim that all working class folks are conservatives any more than it is to say that all university professors are liberals (How do you account for university professors-turned-politicians such as Phil Gramm, Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich?)
If liberals dominate the TV stations and newspapers then why is it so difficult to get a liberal viewpoint on TV? The networks fill their news shows with conservatives, a few moderates and apolitical reporters. They hardly ever have an outspoken liberal on the air. Keith Olbermann is currently the sole exception to that rule. Otherwise you have to go to Comedy Central to find a liberal viewpoint that isn’t “balanced” out with 2/3rds dosage of conservatism.
As for newspapers, are you referring to our own local daily, the San Antonio Express-News that never fails to endorse the full slate of Republicans in every election? I wish that liberals had more control of the media, but unfortunately that is a myth spurred on by multi-million dollar propagandists like Rush Limbaugh who dominate our airwaves.

Working class people today are suffering greatly as a direct result of the flawed policies and misrule of Republicans for the past eight years. Under George W. Bush we saw our balanced budgets vanish and replaced with record high deficits as a result of fiscally irresponsible tax giveaways to the uber-rich. Meanwhile, promises that these tax cuts would stimulate the economy have proven to be a big joke as the economy has ranged from deep recession to weak recovery and now back to deep recession again.
The only hope the GOP has to stay in power now is to use propagandists like Rush Limbaugh to brainwash enough people into voting against their economic interests and keep the current bunch of crooks and swindlers in power.

...where people who are not working can watch and read, draw welfare and set on their asses and hope to get the democrats to give them more money with the working peoples taxes.

Once again, you have misconceptions about the nature of welfare, which mainly goes to support children and the elderly, while ignoring the real scandal of corporate welfare and the billions that gets squandered in no-bid, sweetheart contracts overseen by Republican operatives funneling money to their friends and supporters. The Enrons and Halliburtons have been making out like bandits these past dozen years while Rush and Hannity distract you with bogus stories about welfare cheats. You are like someone who is obsessed with finding change under the seat cushions while lending out your credit card to a gang of mall-roaming teenagers.

Obamanation, seems to be losing some of its steam. Looks like just another liberal trying to pull the wool over his own supporters eyes. Mr. Flip/Flop.

Obama is just getting started with the general election after a long drawn-out primary race. Meanwhile, McCain has had a three-month head start and is still just spinning his wheels. Down in the polls, last week he did another overhaul of his campaign staff.
And don’t even try to start this “Flip/Flop” garbage when I know damn well that you can’t even list three things that Obama has legitimately changed his position on. (Hint: Iraq ain’t one of them).
But as Ann noted above McCain has flip-flopped so much lately he is at risk of breaking a hip. He has changed his positions on tax cuts, immigration reform, drilling moratoriums, Social Security privatization, and on and on.
In fact, one of the only things he has been consistent on is global warming and that is what has him in the most hot water right now with the wingnut crowd. They WANT him to flip-flop even MORE!

Your guy looks really scary, he is a liar to start with, he flip flops, he now throws moveon.org under the bus. Who is next ? He is dissed his own grandmother, that is weird. This guy will be a disaster for this country and John McCain would not be much better.

Like that classic Public Enemy song says, “Don’t Believe the Hype!” And that goes for both sides. Obama is not the annointed one or whatever such nonsense. Sure he is just a politicians, but at least he is not advocating the failed policies that have gotten us into the mess we are in today. A disaster for this country, you say? What do you call what we have now?? The Bush/GOP rule of the past eight years has been an unmitigated disaster from the beginning.
You are not giving Obama a fair shake. He may not be the greatest president we have ever had, but he certainly won’t be the worst like we currently have now.

Bad deals and bad ideas

In the news today I see that San Antonio-based Clear Channel Communications is betting that people will stay stupid well into the future.
They have renewed their radio contract with rightwing blowhard Rush Limbaugh through the year 2016.
I have to admit that it is probably a pretty good bet that people will still be stupid enough to listen to Rush eight years from now. But I’m not sure that it is a good bet for Clear Channel to pay Limbaugh an estimated $38 million a year for the next eight years. As the NYT points out today, that is more than twice what the highest paid network news anchor makes and it is $13 million more than Jay Leno, the highest rated TV entertainer, makes.

In other news, I see that some liberal activists who are agitated over the FISA issue are now threatening to withhold their financial support for Barack Obama until he “lives up to his promise to deliver "change we can believe in. "”
This is the kind of thing that really upsets me. People who should know better allow themselves to get all worked up over some issue and then use it to tear down the candidate who best supports their overall interests.
I’m sorry, but as bad as warrantless wiretapping may be, it is not important enough to justify risking four more years of Republican misrule in Washington. Or a chance for John McCain to pick the next two or more Supreme Court justices.
It is fine if you want to lobby your candidate over an issue such as this, but when you start talking about withholding money or withholding votes, you have crossed a line into “shoot yourself in the foot” territory.

Cornyn’s sockpuppet exposed

Congratulations to Matt Glazer for some online sleuthing that exposed a top Cornyn staffer’s sockpuppet machinations.
David Beckwith, a longtime GOP political operative whose roots go back to his work for former Vice President Dan Quayle, was using the pseudonymn “Buck Smith” to leave comments over at Burnt Orange Report.
The TV news in Austin even picked up the story:



Matt used to be in San Antonio and I met him a few years ago at the 2005 Alamo City Blogger BBQ.

We make Mormons look Liberal

It is depressing to see that according to this graph Texas is even more socially and economically conservative than Utah.

Big, Really Bad, John

John Cornyn’s promotional video for the Texas Republican State Convention was so horrifically bad that it is beyond parody. However, I still like Rick Noriega’s response above because it acts as a corrective to the most egregious lies in the piece.

In the meantime, I’m happy to note that Cornyn has lost the endorsement of the Texas Medical Association over his vote against a badly needed bill that would have kept doctors from losing Medicare payments. My only question is why the TMA ever endorsed Cornyn in the first place?