PEEK

Buzz, perspectives, insight and news from AlterNet

In Trying to Prevent Gay Marriage, Texas May Have Accidently Abolished it for Everyone
Posted by Liz Langley, Liz Langley's Blog on November 18, 2009 at 8:11 PM.

When I was a kid in Catholic school, probably around 6th grade, I remember reading a short story about a little girl who studied the violin. The details are hazy but someone, I think her teacher, told her that another student was getting the gift of a new violin and that there were two to choose from but he didn't know which to pick. He asked the student to help him out by trying both and telling him which one was better.

After playing both the girl knew that the first violin was far and away the superior intstrument, but knowing she would soon be in a competition with the other student she said the second, lower-quality violin was better and that that one should be the gift.

The gift turned out to be for her. She ended up getting the bum deal she was trying to give someone else.

The nuns didn't use the word "karma" but that's what the story was about. Do unto others. Etcetera. You seldom see morality plays as swiftly and compactly played out in real life but when you do it's delicious.

And there may such an instance in store for Texas where, in trying to deprive some people of marriage ... the state may have abolished it for everyone.

A Texas lawyer and candidate for attorney general, Barbara Ann Radnofsky, has found a little screw-up in the legal wording of some 2005 anti-equality legislation that passed overwhelmingly in the state. Here's the skinny from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram:

The amendment, approved by the Texas Legislature and overwhelmingly ratified by Texas voters, declares that "marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman." But the trouble-making phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares: "This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage."

Radnofsky says the wording "eliminates marriage in Texas."

It may be waved away as a piffling error made by lawyers who are too highly paid to make such mistakes but I hope it stirs up a hornets nest of problems and that the people who voted for such childish, no-I-won't-share end up with their "sacred" unions treat as null-and-void, exactly as they'd like to do unto others.

Maybe we can get the girl in the story to play them the world's tiniest violin.

Buying Sarah Palin's Book Will Help Save Wolves?
Posted by Tana Ganeva, AlterNet on November 18, 2009 at 6:16 PM.

Sarah Palin's new book may serve a purpose beyond keeping the AP busy and relaunching the hilariously petty sniping between Palin and former McCain campaign aides: it can, counterintuitively, help Alaska's wolves. San Francisco's Green Apple books has announced that %100 of the proceeds from sales of Going Rogue will go to the Alaska Wildlife Federation.  From the bookstore's blog: 

With all due to respect to the Republicans who were as overjoyed as I was (for different reasons, of course) by Sarah Palin's nomination to the McCain ticket last year, Green Apple is donating 100% of the profits from sales of Sarah Palin's Going Rogue: An American Life to the Alaska Wildlife Alliance.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Senate Leader Announces Health-Care Bill
Posted by Adele Stan on November 18, 2009 at 4:12 PM.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that his Democratic caucus was ready to begin debate on a health-care bill that will be made public later this evening.

Reid told reporters that the bill contains a public option with an opt-out provisions whereby state legislatures could deny citizens participation in the plan.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill will cost $849 billion.

Reid made his announcement this evening surrounded by a group of senators, including Chris Dodd of Connecticut, who wrote the health-care legislation that came out of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee that was chaired by the late Ted Kennedy, for whom health-care reform was a life-long goal. Other senators, all Democrats, around the podium included Sen. Patty Murray, Wash.; Al Franken, Minn.; Chuck Schumer, N.Y.; Debbie Stabenow, Mich., and Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, Ill.

Absent from the scene were the Senate's most ardent pro-choice women senators, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein of California. Also absent was Sen. Jay Rockefeller, W.V., who opposed the Senate Finance Committee bill for its lack of a public option -- a situation Reid has attempted to remedy with this opt-out provision. Rockefeller is regarded as the Senate's health-care scholar.

Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, Mont., was notably absent, as well, though for family reasons. Dodd said that Baucus' mother was ill, and that accounted for his absence. The bill that Reid announced today melds Dodd's HELP Committee bill with the one crafted by Baucus' committee.

Reid promised that the bill would be available to the public online later this evening.

C-SPAN has the video here of Reid's press announcement.

Yes Men Strike Again, Launch New Coke Brand Bottled Water Called 'Deception' [with Video]
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on November 18, 2009 at 3:07 PM.

The notorious and hilarious pranksters, The Yes Men have done it again. This time their target was Coca-Cola. The company bottles Dasani water, which is basically just tap water that you pay a whole lot more for. The only difference really is that then you have a plastic bottle, which 80 percent of people toss in the garbage instead of a recycling bin.

While Pepsi, which uses tap water for its Aquafina bottled water, has now caved to pressure and labeled their water as "public water source" -- Coke still refuses. So, the Yes Men teamed up with pressure group Corporate Accountability International and launched a faux Coke campaign for a new bottled water called Deception. Genius!

You can watch the video below (or here). My favorite part is when they actually run into a real employee from Coke. And click here to read more about Coke's bad track record when it comes to bottled water.

Americans Want a Health Surtax on Wealthy
Posted by Daniela Perdomo, AlterNet on November 18, 2009 at 2:00 PM.

Although the House bill includes a surtax on the wealthy in order to help fund the proposed health care overhaul, the possibility of it being included in the final health care bill seems uncertain. As Majority Leader Reid prepares the Senate's bill, he ought pay attention to this newly released Associated Press poll which shows that 57% of Americans are in favor of a health surtax on the richest among us -- and only 37% are opposed.

The poll also found that respondents dislike other options that are publicly being discussed on the Hill, such as the so-called "Cadillac plans," that would tax insurers on high-value coverage plans. Higher taxes on insurance providers, pharmaceutical companies, and medical device manufacturers were not as popular either.

The surtax included in the House bill would levy a 5.4% income tax surcharge on individuals earning $500,000 a year and households raking in $1 million.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Inspiring, Kickass Drug Activist to Take on Chuck Schumer -- Meet Randy Credico
Posted by Jan Frel, AlterNet on November 18, 2009 at 1:18 PM.

A New York Times blog from this morning alerted me to a promising development, and gave me new respect for fellow Santa Monican Larry David:

"Randy Credico, 54, a stand-up comedian and drug law activist who was director of the fund for the past 12 years, has decided to step down from [the William Moses Kunstler Fund for Racial Justice. He plans to devote himself full-time to his United States Senate campaign, in which he intends to challenge Senator Charles E. Schumer for the Democratic nomination next September."

Mr. Credico said his campaign manager is a former comedy writer for “Saturday Night Live,” and then he began pouring forth with phone numbers of celebrities and comedians he said were endorsing him. I called only one: Larry David, at his office in Los Angeles. Mr. David would not reveal any details about the season finale of “Curb Your Enthusiasm” on HBO, but he did offer his support of Mr. Credico’s candidacy – in his own inimitable, free-associative, hilarious style – and praised his passion for fighting harsh drug laws.

“It’d be pretty interesting, Credico in the Senate — kind of like tying a bunch of cans to a dog and setting him loose in a china shop,” he said. “I don’t envy Schumer. Randy’s really going to get under his skin.”

When told that Mr. Credico plans on running the race sober, Mr. David said, “Listen, I can’t tell the difference whether Randy’s drunk or sober.”

Then Mr. David said, in an unprintable way, that Mr. Credico had a lot of guts.

“He’ll say absolutely anything that’s on his mind,” he said.

Hmm, just like Larry David, I observed.

“No, I only do it on TV,” Mr. David shot back. “I’m only Larry David on TV. Credico’s Larry David in real life.”... 

“My campaign slogan is going to be, ‘Which candidate would you rather smoke a joint with? Credico or Schumer?’” he said, while racing around the penthouse apartment of a friend and directing a small staff of young adults with laptops on how to get out word of his candidacy. He wore his usual jeans and sport jacket and smoked cigarettes and chugged Coke — the soft drink — directly from the 2-liter bottle. He had on hand two boxes of Cuban cigars that he claimed were a gift from former Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau.

Last year, Mr. Credico was arrested after interfering with police officers making a marijuana arrest on Gay Street.

Mr. Credico makes no pretense about his longtime battle with drugs and alcohol addiction. He said he has been free of drugs and alcohol for two months now and hopes to stay sober for the entire campaign.

Though sober, Mr. Credico does hope to appeal to the partying public.

It's worth going into that line about how Credico was arrested to understand him  -- the story behind it gives good insight into his real-world approach to activism, and puts on display a very direct theory of social change: Be the change. Tony Papa of the Drug Policy Alliance gives the fuller description in a June 2008 article:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Photos: Palin, Newsweek and Sexism
Posted by Media Matters, Media Matters for America on November 18, 2009 at 1:00 PM.

There are a lot of legitimate reasons to criticize Sarah Palin, her new book, and her policies, but you don't have to stoop to sexism to do it. Newsweek's November 23 issue, however, does just that by publishing on its cover a photo of Palin in short running shorts and a fitted top, leaning against the American flag. Making matters worse is the equally offensive headline Newsweek editors chose to run alongside the photo -- "How Do You Solve a Problem like Sarah?" -- presumably a reference to the Sound of Music song, "Maria," in which nuns fret about "how" to "solve a problem like Maria," a "girl" who "climbs trees" and whose "dress has a tear."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Wow, Turns Out Sarah Palin Really Is a Dumb Wingnut*
Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet on November 18, 2009 at 12:00 PM.

During the 2008 campaign, Sarah Palin earned some ignominy when Katie Couric asked her to name a publication she relied on for news and she couldn't name a single one.**

Apparently, she's not exactly shining on her publicity tour when "grilled" with soft-ball questions by friendly right-wing bloggers. John Cole (italics are his too):

This is great. Red State “interviews” Sarah Palin, although I’m not really sure you could call this an interview, because there are no real quotes, and it turns out she has been doing some book learning:

One of the criticisms leveled by the right when Palin was chosen as McCain’s nominee is that she had not shown she’d done the reading to lead, i.e. read the Hayek, Friedman, Goldwater, Bastiat, to form her thoughts. She admitted she is a gut level conservative, but also said that criticism comes mostly from “shallow people who have not delved into [her] record.”

I did not want to sound like Katie Couric and ask what she’s read, but I broached the subject and she went right into mentioning Thomas Sowell and Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism. She said she has read some of the foundational stuff, but she sees no need to focus on the old writings. She likes “the modern stuff too.” Her preference is policy and application, focusing on writers who are not just following up on foundational conservative ideas, but applying those ideas too.

I am a liberal moonbat, whose name nobody is kicking around for national office, and I've read Hayek, Friedman and Goldwater.

And... Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism? That a book like that informs the "intellect" of a person many think represents the future of the conservative movement -- the Great White Hope -- is enough to make you feel like beating your head against the desk.

Update: in the comments, Anna writes, "C'mon Josh! The secret's been out for a long time." Absolutely true -- I should have said it's surprising that after that string of public humiliations during the campaign she didn't either, A) bone up, maybe read a few books without pictures, or B) figure out how to dodge those questions without coming off like such a teenager.

*Obviously it's sexist to say so.

** But we have to take her very, very seriously and it would be a grave error to underestimate her abilities.

Terrifying: Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly Freak Show Coming to Your Town
Posted by Tana Ganeva, AlterNet on November 18, 2009 at 11:21 AM.

Self-proclaimed rodeo clown Glenn Beck and really mean, yelly clown Bill O'Reilly are teaming up and coming to a town near you!

That is, if you're lucky enough to live near Westbury, New York, Tampa, Florida, North Charleston, South Carolina or Norfolk, Virginia. If you live in other places, here's what you'll miss when the "Bold and Fresh" tour, which is probably not intended to sound like an ad for douche, hits the road:

1. Hearing the truth, against your will. The promotional site threatens "Enough is enough -- it's time for the truth from somebody who'll give it to you straight, whether you like it or not."

2. Getting bitten by Bill O'Reilly. Here's the second threat of violence: "And you know how they say that some men's "bark" is worse than their "bite?" With Bill... yeah, not so much. As Bill puts it, "My teeth are in good shape."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

The Uninsured Are Twice as Likely to Die in the ER From a Traumatic Injury Than the Insured
Posted by mcjoan, Daily Kos on November 18, 2009 at 10:00 AM.

Why There Are More Than 1 Million Hungry Kids in the U.S.
Posted by Sarah Newman, Takepart on November 18, 2009 at 8:43 AM.

It's time to forget the inaccurate stereotypical image of America's hungry as long lines of mostly homeless men, winding down the block from a church's soup pantry entrance, waiting for their daily meal. The times have changed, drastically. The ongoing economic recession has slowly started to show limited signs of recovery on paper and on Wall Street, but these developments haven't reached millions of Americans. We live in an era with a 10 percent official national unemployment rate, coupled with rising costs of living and stagnant wages. Those shouldering the burden of this economic crisis are barely surviving. For many, they can't even afford basics for survival, such as food.

The Washington Post reported that the federal government's latest statistics show the number of Americans who are food insecure (they lack regular access to food) increased last year 49 million people and 17 million of them were children. More alarming is the increase in the number of children who were just plain hungry, which reached 1.1 million -- that's 21 percent of all households with children with low or very low (i.e. hungry) food security. Those waiting for a daily meal are people of all ages, races and geographic backgrounds.

Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack acknowledges that "poverty, unemployment, these are all factors," in the increase in hunger and food insecurity rates. The government report's author noted, though, "that most families in which food is scarce contain at least one adult with a full-time job, suggesting that the problem lies at least partly in wages, not just an absence of work."

This report begs the question: how are these people surviving? The federal government isn't able to fully fill this gap. Their anti-hunger programs such as food stamps, school lunches and/or WIC (Women, Infant and Children) only serve about 50 percent of those in need. This is where we all come into the picture. It turns out that last year, 4.8 million households used private food pantries, up from 3.9 million the previous year. Private food pantries rely on people like you and me to survive.

Feeding America, a leading hunger-relief organization, has had increased demand over the past year, coinciding with the report's findings. The organization, which has a network of 200 food banks, provided food to 25 million people last year. Most of these volunteer-run places are refuges to people who would otherwise go hungry. With the increased demand, more support is needed. Wherever you live in the U.S., whether it's a big city, small town or suburban community, there are hungry people who need your help. This is a problem that can be solved but it requires all of our participation as a volunteer, donor and/or advocate. Let's make sure that all of America is fed today.

Video: Rep. Stupak: We Had an Agreement Until 'the Extremes Took Over'
Posted by Adele Stan, AlterNet on November 18, 2009 at 7:37 AM.

SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO

After threatening to scuttle the House version of health-care reform legislation last week by refusing to accept a compromise on anti-abortion language the bill, Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., is positioning himself to be the savior of health-care reform as the Senate takes up its bill -- even agreeing to support language that would require insurance companies not to drop abortion coverage from policies paid for with private dollars.

Appearing on MSNBC's Hardball last night, Stupak claimed to have had an agreement with House leaders, on the night before the Saturday vote, "to put part of my amendment" into bill. Then, he said, "the extremes took over," forcing the need for his amendment, which would make it virtually impossible for insurance companies to offer, through a federally administered insurance exchange, health insurance policies that provide abortion coverage to anybody receiving a subsidy -- even if the purchaser pays for the policy that part of the coverage entirely out of her own pocket.

Who might these "extremes" be, Congressman Stupak? The Catholic bishops, per chance?

David Rogers of Politico reported yesterday that ahead of the vote, Speaker Nancy Pelosi received a call from Rome; on the line was Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the retired former archbishop of Washington, D.C., whom Pelosi, a Roman Catholic herself, knows. Neither will discuss the substance of the call. But we do know that anti-choice Democrats refused to sign off on the compromise because representatives of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops would not grant their blessing on the compromise.

(Of course, without naming them, it's more likely that Stupak is speaking of pro-choice members.)

Nontheless, Stupak, in his interview last night with Hardball host Chris Matthews, seemed to be trying to recast himself as a moderate by painting other anti-choice legislators as extremists. When Matthews asked which anti-choicers on the Senate side Stupak might be working with on abortion language, he pressed Stupak for names. Maybe Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, or Ben Nelson of Nebraska?

"Well," Stupak replied, "if you're gonna get the extremes on both sides, then you can't find common ground; I agree with you. You really have to try to find people much like myself, who are the moderates, who will actually try to work with leadership."

But Stupak also struck a note of bitterness, complaining that pro-choice Democrats had kept him from offereing anti-choice amendments to legislation other than heath-care reform, and balking at his opponents' complaints about his amendment.

"You know, we had a fair-and-square vote; we won -- 55 percent of the representatives said we should not have public funds paying for abortion, so you win on the floor, now suddenly they want us to come back and compromise."

VIDEO AFTER THE JUMP

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Yet More Mind-Bending Racism From the Right-Wing Media
Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly on November 18, 2009 at 6:00 AM.

THE ENDURING KNOW-NOTHING STRAIN.... Washington Times editor Wesley Pruden trashed President Obama in his column today, which wouldn't ordinarily be especially interesting. The right-wing writer, however, touched on a specific kind of attack that illustrates a larger trend.

In this case, Pruden is all worked up because the president bowed before the Japanese Emperor. Pruden believes Obama doesn't understand "American history" because "the essence of America is that all men stand equal and are entitled to look even a king, maybe particularly a king, straight in the eye."

That's nice rhetoric, which would be more compelling were it not for the various photos of Presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, and H.W. Bush bowing before foreign leaders during their respective tenures. I've looked for related columns of Pruden trashing these Republican presidents for forgetting "the essence of America," but can't seem to find any.

But the key to the column is the wrap-up:

...Mr. Obama, unlike his predecessors, likely knows no better, and many of those around him, true children of the grungy '60s, are contemptuous of custom. Cutting America down to size is what attracts them to "hope" for "change." It's no fault of the president that he has no natural instinct or blood impulse for what the America of "the 57 states" is about. He was sired by a Kenyan father, born to a mother attracted to men of the Third World and reared by grandparents in Hawaii, a paradise far from the American mainstream.

This is obviously some pretty offensive nonsense from a shameless hack, but it also speaks to a Know-Nothing strain that lingers in American politics.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Right-Wing American Family Association Misfires in the War on Christmas
Posted by Amanda Terkel on November 18, 2009 at 4:29 AM.

It’s not even Thanksgiving, but the American Family Association (AFA) has already taken up arms in the War on Christmas. On Nov. 11, the right-wing organization announced that it was urging its followers to boycott Gap Inc. (Gap, Banana Republic, and Old Navy) from now until Christmas Day because the company refuses to say the word “Christmas”:

For years, Gap has refused to use the word Christmas in its television commercials, newspaper ads and in-store promotions, despite tens of thousands of consumer requests to recognize Christmas and in spite of repeated requests from AFA to do the same.

Last year, Gap issued this politically-correct statement to Christmas shoppers: “Gap recognizes that many traditions are celebrated throughout this season and we feel it is important to display holiday signage that is inclusive to everyone.”

Christmas is special because of Jesus. It’s not just a “winter holiday.” For millions of Americans the giving and receiving of gifts is in honor of the One who gave Himself. For the Gap to pretend that isn’t the foundation of the Christmas season is political correctness at best and religious bigotry at worst. The Gap is censoring the word Christmas, pure and simple.

AFA’s first shot in the war is a misfire, as Dan Neil of the LA Times points out today. In one of the first lines of Gap’s new holiday ad, the actors yell, “Go Christmas!” (as well as “Go Hanukkah! Go Kwanzaa! Go Solstice!”) Watch it:

ThinkProgress also checked out the websites of Gap, Banana Republic, and Old Navy and quickly found several items that feature Christmas items including several Christmas books, a pair of boxer shorts that says “Christmas” in several languages and pajama pants that also have “Christmas” written on them.

“The big loser here is the AFA,” writes Neil. “The annual War-on-Christmas drumbeat is absolutely not about defending the sacredness of Christmas. It is instead — transparently — marketing, a ratings gambit for Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, and for the AFA, the centerpiece of its annual fundraising. This year, thanks to Gap, the AFA fumbled its boycott ball and in the process managed to look both intolerant and out of touch.”

Why Eric Holder is an Alarming Pick for AG
Posted by John Nichols, The Nation on November 18, 2008 at 7:35 PM.

Quick! Name the veteran Department of Justice insider who, shortly after the USA Patriot Act was signed into law as the Bush administration was proposing to further erode barriers to governmental abuses, said that dissenters should not be tolerated?

Who invoked September 11, explicitly referencing "the World Trade Center aflame," in calling for the firing of any "petty bureaucrat" who might suggest that proper procedures be followed and that the separation of powers be respected?

John Ashcroft? No.

Alberto Gonzales? No.

It was Eric Holder, the man who has reportedly been selected by President-elect Barack Obama to serve as the next Attorney General of the United States.

Appearing on CNN in June, 2002, the former Clinton administration Justice Department aide sounded as if he had just stepped out of the Bush camp: "We're dealing with a different world now. Everybody should remember those pictures that we saw on September the 11th. The World Trade Centers aflame, the pictures of the Pentagon, and any time some petty bureaucrat decides that his or her little piece of turf is being invaded, get rid of that person. Those are the kinds of things we have to do."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens Loses Re-Election Bid
Posted by Staff, AlterNet on November 18, 2008 at 6:10 PM.

The AP reports:

Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens has lost his bid for a seventh term.

The longest-serving Republican in the history of the Senate trailed Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich by 3,724 votes after Tuesday’s count.

That’s an insurmountable lead with only about 2,500 overseas ballots left to be counted.

Click here for more details.

Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales Indicted By Grand Jury
Posted by Faiz Shakir, Think Progress on November 18, 2008 at 4:41 PM.

A South Texas grand jury has returned multi-count indictments against Vice President Dick Cheney and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on charges related to the alleged abuse of prisoners in Willacy County's federal detention centers: 

The indictment accuses Cheney and Gonzales of engaging in organized criminal activity. It criticizes Cheney's investment in the Vanguard Group, which holds interests in the private prison companies running the federal detention centers. It accuses Cheney of a conflict of interest and "at least misdemeanor assaults" on detainees by working through the prison companies.

Gonzales is accused of using his position while in office to stop an investigation into abuses at the federal detention centers.

Why Are Democratic Leaders at War With 'the Left'?
Posted by David Sirota, Open Left on November 18, 2008 at 3:03 PM.

Seems to me that House and Senate leaders have declared an all-out war on "the Left." In fact, "seems" is the wrong word. It doesn't "seem" like that. They are actually saying it explicitly. Here's this excerpt from the Washington Post (h/t FDL):

Asked what it would mean if Lieberman kept his chairmanship, one Senate Democratic aide said bluntly: "The left has been foiled again. They can rant and rage but they still do not put the fear into folks to actually change their votes."

Here's the Hill newspaper today:

Democratic leader says party won't turn left

By Mike Soraghan

As the House prepares to elect its leaders, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is challenging the idea that the expanded Democratic majority and its leaders will make a hard left turn.

To show that these aren't errant, uncommon statements, make sure to read Glenn Greenwald's review of how this hatred for "the Left" now reaches all the way to the top of the new Obama administration through Rahm Emanuel.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Anti-Choice Advocates Oppose Measures That Actually Decrease the Abortion Rate?
Posted by Jill Filipovic, Feministe on November 18, 2008 at 2:02 PM.

Some individual pro-lifers have finally gotten on board with proven, long-standing pro-choice tactics to decrease the abortion rate, and anti-choice leaders are not happy.

Frustrated by the failure to overturn Roe v. Wade, a growing number of antiabortion pastors, conservative academics and activists are setting aside efforts to outlaw abortion and instead are focusing on building social programs and developing other assistance for pregnant women to reduce the number of abortions.

Some of the activists are actually working with abortion rights advocates to push for legislation in Congress that would provide pregnant women with health care, child care and money for education — services that could encourage them to continue their pregnancies.

That makes sense. According to National Right to Life, 23 percent of women terminate pregnancies primarily because they can’t afford a baby. An addition 19 percent terminate because they have other children/family responsibilities. In a Guttmacher study (pdf), 73 percent of women listed “can’t afford a baby right now” as one of their reasons for having an abortion (the wide difference between the numbers comes because the Guttmacher study allowed women select multiple reasons for why they were terminating; the study quoted on the National Right to Life site had women pick one reason). The highest abortion rates occur in countries where birth control access is highly limited; worldwide, socioeconomic reasons are a leading factor in women choosing abortion. Low rates of abortion strongly correlate with universal health care, widely available contraception, and gender egalitarianism. There is little correlation between the legal status of abortion and the incidence of abortion — that is, there’s no evidence that countries where abortion is illegal have lower abortion rates than countries where it is legal. Case in point:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Bush White House Flat Out Lies: 'We Did Not Torture'
Posted by Ali Frick, Think Progress on November 18, 2008 at 2:01 PM.

The Bush administration repeatedly insists that it does not practice torture: "We do not torture," President Bush declared in 2005. The U.S. "is not torturing any detainees," White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said last April. Dismissing a Red Cross report describing interrogation techniques that were "tantamount to torture," Bush proclaimed last year, "Haven't seen it, we don't torture."

Today, Perino took the Bush administration's torture denials to a new level when she insisted that it had never engaged in torture:

PERINO: This president has said that we did interrogate terrorists, and we did so to protect the country from possible imminent terrorist attack. We did not torture.

Watch it:

It is simply a lie to say that the United States "did not torture." Even setting aside the infamous Abu Ghraib incidents, Bush's own CIA director Michael Hayden confirmed that his agency had subjected at least three detainees to waterboarding. And as Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has explained, waterboarding is clearly torture:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Eric Holder to Be Obama's New Sheriff?
Posted by Staff, Huffington Post on November 18, 2008 at 1:04 PM.

"President-elect Obama has decided to tap Eric Holder as his attorney general, putting the veteran Washington lawyer in place to become the first African-American to head the Justice Department, according to two legal sources close to the presidential transition," Newsweek's Michael Isikoff reports.

Holder, who served as deputy attorney general during the Clinton administration, still has to undergo a formal "vetting" review by the Obama transition team before the selection is final and is publicly announced, said one of the sources, who asked not to be identified talking about the transition process. But in the discussions over the past few days, Obama offered Holder the job and he accepted, the source said. The announcement is not likely until after Obama announces his choices to lead the Treasury and State departments.

Holder, 57, has been on Obama's "short list" for attorney general from the outset. A partner at the D.C. law firm of Covington & Burling, Holder served as co-chief (along with Caroline Kennedy) of Obama's vice-presidential selection process. He also actively campaigned for Obama throughout the year and grew personally close to the president-elect. Holder has not returned a call seeking comment; the Obama transition team did not respond to e-mail messages.

The American Lawyer looks at Obama and Holder's relationship:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Bush Lays More Landmines for Obama
Posted by dday, Hullabaloo on November 18, 2008 at 12:07 PM.

Yesterday I mentioned all the internal challenges that President-elect Obama will be facing. Today's Washington Post reveals how Bush is trying to institutionalize those challenges.

Just weeks before leaving office, the Interior Department's top lawyer has shifted half a dozen key deputies -- including two former political appointees who have been involved in controversial environmental decisions -- into senior civil service posts.

The transfer of political appointees into permanent federal positions, called "burrowing" by career officials, creates security for those employees, and at least initially will deprive the incoming Obama administration of the chance to install its preferred appointees in some key jobs.

I hope nobody thinks that this is about stopping Obama appointments. This is about getting civil service protections for hardcore conservative loyalists. In past transitions, this has been done to protect new rules or regulations that the outgoing President would like to see maintained, and that's true here as well. Recent rule changes in the Bureau of Land Management and the Fish and Wildlife Service will be harder to reverse with a champion inside the agency. But I hardly think it ends there. The same with all those career Justice Department officials whose political ideology was a factor in their hiring. And burrowing all of these officials at once will ultimately make it harder to root out the partisan career personnel who were hired into the civil service in the first place.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Has Newsweek Gone Mad? New Article Gives Voice to Antichrist Whack Jobs
Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly on November 18, 2008 at 10:53 AM.

When bizarre, fringe publications speculate openly about who may or may not be the Antichrist, it's easy to dismiss. When Newsweek publishes a 600-word piece on those who wonder about Obama being the Antichrist, one really has to wonder what on earth the editors were thinking.

On Nov. 5, Todd Strandberg was at his desk, fielding E-mails from around the world. As the editor and founder of RaptureReady.com, his job is to track current events and link them to biblical prophecy in hopes of maintaining his status as "the eBay of prophecy," the best source online for predictions and calculations concerning the end of the world. Already Barack Obama had drawn the attention of apocalypse watchers after an anonymous e-mail circulated among conservative Christians in October implying that he was the Antichrist. Former "Saturday Night Live" ingenue Victoria Jackson fueled the fire when, according to news reports, she wrote on her Web site that Obama "bears traits that resemble the anti-Christ." Now Strandberg was receiving up-to-the-minute news from his constituents in Illinois. One of the winning lottery numbers in the president-elect's home state was 666 -- which, as everyone knows, is the sign of the Beast (also known as the Antichrist). "It is very eerie, and I take it for a sign as to who he really is," wrote one of Strandberg's correspondents.

First, from a theological perspective, the whole thing about "666" being a "mark of the beast" is inherently suspect, and dismissed as nonsense by most scholars. Second, and more importantly, what is the purpose of Newsweek running a story about those who wonder if Obama is the Antichrist?

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

GOP Remains Indecisive About Ted Stevens
Posted by Faiz Shakir, Think Progress on November 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM.

In their GOP conference meeting today, Senate Republicans punted “on the thorniest question -- whether to formally expel Sen. Ted Stevens from their ranks.” Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) had planned to offer a resolution that read:

Resolved that Sen. Ted Stevens not be invited to future Republican Conferences, and that committee assignments shall not be assigned him by the Republican Conference.

“After talking with many of my colleagues, it’s clear there are sufficient votes to pass the resolution regarding Senator Stevens,” DeMint said in a statement released shortly after the 9:30 conference meeting began. But the GOP delayed the vote on Stevens today, pending the resolution of the Alaska recount.

It's Official: Lieberman Won
Posted by Jane Hamsher, Firedoglake on November 18, 2008 at 9:20 AM.

Reid, backed in solidarity by members of the Democratic Senate Caucus including Boxer, Schumer, Patty Murray and others just held a press conference:

We had a historic caucus in the old senate chamber.  We had a very nice discussion.  And it's very clear that the vast majority of the Democratic caucus wants to keep Sen Lieberman as chairman of this committee, member  of the Armed Services committee and that was done, it's all over with.

Joe Lieberman is a Democrat, he's part of this caucus.

[...]

We accepted the statement made by one of the more senior member of the senate that this is not a time for retribution, it's a time for moving forward on the problems of this country.The great depression may be in the history annals a worse time economically in the history of our country but we don't know yet.  We have all kinds of problems we need to move forward on.  We need to be unified.  We need to be unified as Democrats, we need to be unified as a Senate, and that's what this meeting which we just completed is all about, moving forward and handling the problems of this country to the best of our ability.  And that's what we're going to do.

Harry wouldn't let Lieberman step forward and talk.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Arianna Huffington Guest Hosts the Rachel Maddow Show
Posted by Staff, Huffington Post on November 18, 2008 at 9:14 AM.

Monday night, Arianna sat in for Rachel on the Rachel Maddow show.

She asked Google CEO Eric Schmidt about whether Obama will be America's first Internet president and how he can use the Internet to promote a more open and transparent government that will lead to a more engaged electorate. Scroll down for more interviews from the show.

Bill Maher, comedian and host of Real Time with Bill Maher

Nate Silver, of FiveThirtyEight.com

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

GOP Legacies: Bush, McCain, Stevens
Posted by Steven Reynolds, The All Spin Zone on November 18, 2008 at 4:11 AM.

This isn’t about the legislative accomplishments of these three GOP posterboys for corruption and ineptitude, but about what future generations will make of them. Even Chester A. Arthur had schools named after him. They could ironically rename K Street for McCain, or rename earmarks as “Stevenses?” Bush, of course, will get a Hurricane.

What will the legacies be for three of the most powerful Republicans over the last dozen years or so? That’s pretty easy to figure out, surely. Bush will be remembered for torture and spying on his own citizens, for perverting our system of justice and for getting us into a war on false pretenses. Heck, Bush is himself looking for even more ways he can ruin the country before he can leave office. McCain will be remembered for campaign finance reform that is already obsolete, and for the rash and reckless campaign he ran this year. Stevens, of course, will be remembered for the extreme positions he held, for his corruption, and for signing a hat. But I’m talking of neither corruption nor accomplishments here. I’m wondering what public structures will be named for them.

Bush? So far he’s got a school named for him in Stockton, CA, and a road in Waco, TX, according to the Seattle Times. That’s it. That’s how I predict it will remain. In California they failed to name a sewage plant for him, maybe figuring the plant was too valued by the community to take that name. But you can all suggest other honors for Mr. Bush. A hurricane in his name would be nice. That’s too easy. Please, one of you give a shot at this one.

Ted Stevens is easier, I suppose. Jim DeMint of the Repubs has already called for Stevens to resign, whether he wins against Begich or not. Maybe we could name a fish statue after him. The guy has become pathetic. Though he knows that his conviction means he automatically loses his license to practice law, Stevens and his team are going to fight that action. Hey, maybe the Republicans will oust him from the Party altogether, and that action will be named something like “getting Stevensed.” It would be an exciting action, the Republicans actually recognizing the corrupt practices of one of their own, so such a naming would likely go down in history.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Academic Study: Franken Likely to Win Minnesota Senate Race
Posted by Sam Stein, Huffington Post on November 18, 2008 at 4:07 AM.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

GOP Civil War: Huckabee Goes on the War Path
Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly on November 18, 2008 at 4:06 AM.

After relative silence for the past several months, former Arkansas governor and presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee is releasing his new book, "Do The Right Thing: Inside the Movement That's Bringing Common Sense Back to America." Time's Michael Scherer got an advance look, and notes, "[I]n terms of payback, it will not disappoint."

Based on Scherer's report, some familiar Huckabee rivals are painted in a negative light, most notably Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson. Huckabee also reportedly lambastes the libertarian wing of the GOP, a long-time source of frustration for him.

But it's Huckabee's criticism of some religious right leaders that stood out for me.

He calls out Pat Robertson, the Virginia-based televangelist, and Dr. Bob Jones III, chancellor of Bob Jones University in South Carolina, for endorsing Rudy Giuliani and Romney, respectively. He also has words for the Texas-based Rev. John Hagee, who endorsed the more moderate John McCain in the primaries, as someone who was drawn to the eventual Republican nominee because of the lure of power. Huckabee speaks to Hagee by phone before the McCain endorsement, while the former Arkansas governor is preparing for a spot on Saturday Night Live. "I asked if he had prayed about this and believed this was what the Lord wanted him to do," Huckabee writes of his conversation with Hagee. "I didn't get a straight answer." Months later, McCain rejected Hagee's endorsement because of controversial remarks the pastor had made about biblical interpretations.

I can understand Huckabee expecting to pick up Hagee's support during the GOP primaries; Huckabee was the right-wing evangelical candidate of choice.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Many Predict that Lieberman Will Keep His Chairmanship
Posted by Matt Corley, Think Progress on November 18, 2008 at 4:03 AM.

Roll Call reports that when Senate Democrats meet today to discuss Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) future, the Democratic leadership is "expected to propose that he keep his gavel at the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee but lose his Environment and Public Works subcommittee chairmanship." The paper describes the proposal as only a "slap on the wrist" for Lieberman since Lieberman "may not lose much" if his subcommittee chairmanship is stripped:

Taking the subcommittee on global warming away from Lieberman may be seen as a stinging rebuke, given that he used the panel to push himself to the forefront of the climate change debate in the Senate earlier this year. However, Environment and Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) plans to deal with climate change legislation at the full committee level next year, which means Lieberman may not lose much even if his colleagues vote to strip him of that plum assignment.

Kos calls the plan "not acceptable," quipping that "given the Senate Democrats' history of capitulations, expect Lieberman to come out of that meeting as majority leader." CNN’s Dana Bash reports that Lieberman "is not happy about" the plan, but will accept it.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Republican Soul-Searching in Five Minutes
Posted by Matt Stoller, Open Left on November 18, 2008 at 4:02 AM.

After the election, I was half-interested in the discussions around the Republican party.  Should they become moderate?  Will they become more conservative?  How will they use the internet?  Blah blah blah.  There's a lot to learn about politics from the Republicans and the details of how they reform, but the general gist of the matter seems pretty clear.

The GOP is going to do is futz around for awhile with the fake moderate versus conservative argument and then eventually find a way to tap into the newly emergent overt racism.  It may happen in 2010, and it's impossible to predict whether the issues will be framed around 'law and order' as the millions of unemployed young people inevitably do what young people do when they are bored and disempowered in a recession, or some sort of stabbed in the back narrative around Iraq or Afghanistan, or some new set of issues focused on the fallout from this very scary financial crisis.  Whatever happens the party will reorganize on the internet and that's going to seem really cool and innovative and counter-intuitive except that it will be perfectly normal for a political party to reorganize using a culture's mainstream medium for organizing, which is the internet.  The right already did it once, with Drudge and the Free Republic in the 1990s.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Yes on 8 Spending Forces Layoffs at Focus on the Family
Posted by Lisa Derrick, Firedoglake on November 18, 2008 at 4:01 AM.

James Dobson's Focus on the Family, which supported California's Proposition 8 to the tune of  $539,000 in cash and another $83,000 worth of non-monetary support,  is poised to announce major layoffs to its Colorado Springs-based ministry and media empire today, according to the Colorado Springs Independent.  The group was the seventh largest donor supporting the initiatve to eliminate same-sex marriages. Focus on the Family boardmember Elsa Prince donated an additional $450,000 to Yes on 8.

These layoffs, which come just two months after the organization’s announcement of dismissals--and weeks after the Focus on the Family's major infusion into the Yes on 8 campaign--reveal Focus on the Family's misguided focus.

It all boils down to the bottom line with Focus on the Family, which seems to be Mammon, not Mom and Dad and Buddy and Sis. Along with promoting socially conservative, fundamentalist issues such opposition to abortion and gay rights, and supporting abstinence-only education (ask Gov GILF how well that worked for Bristol and Levi), the evangelical Christian ministry is a purveyor of Christian books, CDs and DVDs.

James Dobson  has never drawn a salary from the organization, but uses it to promote his related books and publications, yielding him royalties only for sales through other venues.  As Wal-Mart and other online retailers have cut into its product market, Focus announced in September were going to lay off 46 employees from its distribution department.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Giuliani Takes Money From Casino Kingpins, "Human Cockfighters"
Posted by GottaLaff , Brave New Films on November 18, 2007 at 3:16 PM.

This post, written by GottaLaff, originally appeared on Cliff Schecter’s Brave New Films Blog

Rudy Giuliani has the most interesting donors. I wonder if Judiamiable appreciates them as much as Tender Heart Rudy does.

The Republican presidential hopeful anted up more than $122,000 last summer alone for jets traceable to casino kingpin Sheldon Adelson, whose Las Vegas Sands empire has made him the third-richest American, a Daily News review of campaign records shows.

"You have to follow the money and ask, 'Why is Sheldon Adelson partnering with Rudy Giuliani?'" asked Stacey Cargill, an anti-gambling and Republican Party activist in Iowa [...] Cargill, who views even legal gambling as a magnet for crime and vice, said, "If Rudy Giuliani wants to be the crimefighting candidate, why is he partnering with a large and growing gambling empire?"

Fellow Republicans Mitt Romney and John McCain use corporate aircraft to varying degrees, as does Democrat John Edwards, records show.

Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama accept no corporate aircraft, choosing instead to rent planes at full market cost to avoid the appearance of a conflict.

Some even rub elbows with the common folk: Democrats Christopher Dodd and Dennis Kucinich were spotted flying commercial to last week's Las Vegas debate.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Ron Paul Supporters Caught Using Their Own Candidate Inspired Currency
Posted by Steven Reynolds, The All Spin Zone on November 18, 2007 at 2:43 PM.

This post, written by Steven Reynolds, originally appaeared on The All Spin Spin Zone

Ron Paul currency has been sold, and used in an underground economy. Did nobody tell them that is a crime? Or maybe it is central to the beliefs of some of Ron Paul's supporters that breaking the law is OK.

Well, someone's already put him on a platinum coin that sells for one thousand dollars. Alas, the people who did so were the National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve Act, and the coins have been used as tender in an underground economy. So, in a sense, Ron Paul's face is illegal. From the Washington Post:

The ardent supporters of Rep. Ron Paul, the iconoclastic Texas libertarian whose campaign for the presidency is threatening to upend the battle for the Republican nomination, got word yesterday of a new source of outrage and motivation: reports of a federal raid on a company that was selling thousands of coins marked with the craggy visage of their hero.

Federal agents on Thursday raided the Evansville, Ind., headquarters of the National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve Act and Internal Revenue Code (Norfed), an organization of "sound money" advocates that for the past decade has been selling a private currency it calls "Liberty Dollars." The company says it has put into circulation more than $20 million in Liberty Dollars, coins and paper certificates it contends are backed by silver and gold stored in Idaho, are far more reliable than a U.S. dollar and are accepted for use by a nationwide underground economy.

Norfed officials said yesterday that the six-hour raid occurred just as its six employees were mailing out the first batch of 60,000 "Ron Paul Dollars," copper coins sold for $1 to honor the candidate, who is a longtime advocate of abolishing the Federal Reserve. The group says it has shipped out about 10,000 silver Ron Paul Dollars that sold for $20 and about 3,500 of the copper $1 coins. But it said the agents seized more than 50,000 of the copper coins -- more than two tons' worth -- plus smaller amounts of the silver coins and gold and platinum Ron Paul Dollars, which sell for $1,000 and $2,000.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Gingrich, DeLay crew were "a group of weirdos"
Posted by Joshua Holland on November 18, 2006 at 1:20 PM.

The corollary to Digby's "Clinton Rules" must be the "Gingrich Rules." It's fine to report how utterly bat-shit crazy the bat-shit craziest Republicans are, but wait until they're safely out of office before you do it (lest they accuse you of liberal bias).

Here's a fine example from CBS's Dick Meyer:

This is a story I should have written 12 years ago when the "Contract with America" Republicans captured the House in 1994. I apologize.

Really, it's just a simple thesis: The men who ran the Republican Party in the House of Representatives for the past 12 years were a group of weirdos. Together, they comprised one of the oddest legislative power cliques in our history. And for 12 years, the media didn't call a duck a duck, because that's not something we're supposed to do.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Your friends skeptical about 655,00 Iraqi Dead? [AUDIO]
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 18, 2006 at 2:10 AM.

This American Life Producer Alex Blumberg delves into the controversial Johns Hopkins studies (both printed in the Lancet Med Journal), showing enormous Iraq War casualties: 100,000 in the first study; 655,000 in the more recent one [Listen or download, right].

What he found is that they're only controversial if you don't look at them.

This astonishing, thorough and human journey explores the methodology, stories, and media cowardice surrounding the study, including one man's shift from the Pentagon to a human rights org.

It closes: "Despite the difficulties surrounding civilian casualties in war time, it's actually not that hard." Maybe just too damned sad to comprehend...

Frist & Kyl, bitches...
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 18, 2005 at 1:31 PM.

Picture a big, $60 billion ice cream sundae of tax cuts for the wealthy delivered by the Republican senate. No, a new one.

Okay, now picture the Democrats and a single Republican dissenting and at least getting Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-IA) to knock the cherry (capital gains and dividend cuts) off.

Seems the least they can do. You know, spirit of compromise and all. But wait, according to Adam Hughes:

"But there was something happening behind the scenes. The only way to win the support from conservatives was for Grassley to promise to sneak the capital gains and dividend cuts back into the bill after it left the committee."

"While that kind of secret handshake assurance between Grassley and conservatives on the committee might be difficult to prove, Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN) and Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), two members of the Finance committee whose votes Grassley needed and both of whom are members of the Senate Republican leadership who will have great influence over this bill during a House-Senate conference, have publically announced the capital gains and dividend cuts will absolutely be included in the final bill that appears before the Senate. In fact, Frist released a press statement guaranteeing the cuts would be included."

This week in voter suppression
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 18, 2005 at 12:16 PM.

A significant debate is shaping up surrounding voter fraud, the 2004 elections and a strategy for going forward. On the one hand you have Mark Crispin Miller and the Democratic Underground crew, while on the other stand Salon's Farhad Manjoo and Mark Hertsgaard.

To be clear: nobody doubts that, as Manjoo writes:

"the machinery of American democracy is broken; mistakes, inaccuracies, chicaneries, snafus, frauds, fiascoes and disasters debilitate almost every race everywhere every two years... It's no exaggeration to say the problem has reached the level of a national emergency."

If it's Peking, duck
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 18, 2005 at 11:00 AM.

"The Meeting will be held in China. China is a Communist country. That’s easy to remember if you look at a map – it’s a little left of California. (China is also a very large country but it is probably not a good idea to say 'Wow, I thought Brazil was big!')"

"During this trip there will be two important diplomatic events. We are hosting an informal cook-out at the US embassy. That will give you a chance to get to know Chairman Hu Jintao. He’ll be the one wearing the badge that says Hi! My name is 胡錦濤."

So begins Kevin's satirical memo. Want more?

"The Chinese will be hosting a state dinner. As President of the United States, you get to order three from column B, and since Condy is not on this trip you get her fortune cookie in addition to your own."

On the agenda?

"The trade issue continues to be a problem. Thanks to Wal-Mart, the Chinese have more US dollars than they know what to do with..."

Read the rest [HERE]. (HomoInsapiens)

--> Sign up for Peek in your inbox... every morning! (Go here and check Peek box).

Chomsky gets his apology
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 18, 2005 at 9:45 AM.

In case you haven't been following, the Guardian UK published a rather unflattering interview with Noam Chomsky, in which the writer mismatched questions and answers to create a sensational but wholly false characterization of The Wold's Number One Intellectual™.

The impression was given that Chomsky supported those who claimed the Srebrenica massacre was exaggerated, when the reality was that he supported the right of an author to make the contention. A very different story.

Chomsky wrote a letter to the Guardian which was published, and an open letter. The Guardian has responded by retracting the whole interview and apologizing "unreservedly." (Metafilter)

--> Sign up for Peek in your inbox... every morning! (Go here and check Peek box).

Is it Dick?
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 18, 2005 at 8:26 AM.

In the wake of Bob Woodward's admission that he too was told of Valerie Plame's identity years ago, you can practically hear the whoosh of administration spokespersons rushing in to deny their role in telling him.

Jesus, it's starting to look like they just spammed the press corps with the info.

Tim Grieve, cautioning against believing in anyone's statements too strongly, notes: "A 'senior administration official' says it wasn't George W. Bush, Andy Card or Dan Bartlett. Spokesmen for Colin Powell, George Tenet and John McLaughlin say it wasn't them, either. Woodward says it wasn't Scooter Libby. Karl Rove's lawyer says it wasn't him."

He then points to this curious paragraph from the Times: "Mr. Cheney did not join the parade of denials. A spokeswoman said he would have no comment on a continuing investigation."

Judd Legum has a line on Stephen Hadley's meticulously ambiguous nondenial. (War Room)

--> Sign up for Peek in your inbox... every morning! (Go here and check Peek box).

A modest proposal
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 18, 2005 at 7:02 AM.

Earlier this week, as the intrepid Deanna noticed, Ward Report's Don proposed that Democrats give up Roe v. Wade as he's "just tired of being burdened with defending Roe often to the detriment of so many important things that we who are centrist and to the left of center need to be advocating."

Whoa whoa whoa; lest you think this is just about caving in: "Just think of the political fall-out to the GOP if they orchestrate an overturn of Roe and the windfall to the Democrats."

So naturally (and appropriately) arrows began to fly as bloggers, like Deanna, pointed out that this IS one of the things that the center and left need to be advocating etc etc.

Andrew has a better idea: give up Brown v. Board of Education and allow legal segregation. Amanda winks:

"Now, I know what you're thinking. Why the hell does this stupid white girl think she has a right to tell black people what an appropriate sacrifice for the good of the party is? But see, you have to understand, I'm not pro-segregation. In fact, forced segregation is far more unpopular with the electorate than laws banning abortion and I'm sure that the second Brown v. the Board of Education was overturned, the states would immediately rise up due to the anti-racist will of the electorate and pass laws banning segregation. And, barring that, I'm sure that Congress would immediately pass laws banning it. I'm sure of it."