PEEK

Buzz, perspectives, insight and news from AlterNet

Copenhagen: Getting Past the Urgency Trap
Posted by Sara Robinson, Orcinus on November 28, 2009 at 4:11 PM.

The article below appeared earlier this week at Grist.

Copenhagen’s still three weeks away, but climate activists are already voicing their enormous disappointment about everything that’s not going to get done there. The heat is rising, and we’re all feeling the overwhelming urgency to get a strong global agreement that will get the laggards off their butts and launch the structural reformations most of us know we need to fix the problem. A lot of us, it seems, loaded all our highest hopes onto this one conference, wanting desperately to believe that this would finally be the moment the long-awaited Grand Transformation would occur.

But the hard truth of the matter is this: change of this magnitude never happens with a single conference, a single treaty, or even a single disaster. The structural changes required to get us off carbon and onto a truly sustainable footing challenge the economic assumptions that humans have lived by for 2500 years. Change that wide and deep will be the work of an entire century, maybe two. (If we’re smart and lucky, our grandchildren may live to see it mostly done.) All of us are well aware of the precarious time crunch we’re under here; but humans change only as fast as they change, and forcing the issue isn’t likely to help. And it may even hurt us in the long run.

We didn’t get into this mess overnight, and we’re not going to get out of it in one dazzling planetary stroke of universal enlightenment, either.

The good news: big, deep changes like this one tend to proceed in a fairly predictable order. If we understand the whole arc of that process, we can have a little more patience with where we are, and think a little more strategically about what comes next.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Hey Gov. Kaine, Restore Voting Rights for Felons
Posted by Tara Lohan on November 28, 2009 at 2:00 PM.

Tim Kaine will be leaving office as Governor of Virginia in January but there's one last things folks are hoping he'll do: Restore voting rights for felons. Virginia and Kentucky are the last states to permanently revoke voting rights for anyone convicted of a felony as well as other civil rights like serving on juries or holding public office.

Here's a message from the Virginia Organizing Project, which has been working on this issue.

1. Virginia has an estimated 300,000 former felons who cannot vote.

2. The Governor of Virginia can restore voting rights for former felons.

3. We need Governor Tim Kaine to sign an Executive Order to correct this injustice -- before he leaves office in January. Call Governor Tim Kaine at (804) 786-2211 or send an e-mail here and ask him, "Please sign an Executive Order to restore voting rights for former felons so that their rights are automatically restored when they finish their sentence."

What you can do if you live in other states:

Please contact Valerie Jarrett at the White House (202-456-1190) and ask her to encourage Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (also DNC Chair) to sign an Executive Order to restore voting rights for former felons.

THANKS! Your phone call can make a HUGE difference -- please pass this on...

After Kaine leaves office he'll be replaced by Republican Bob McDonnell and Virginia residents are afraid that will be a backwards step on this civil rights issue.

Selling Out Democracy in Honduras: The U.S. and the Honduran Election
Posted by Isabel Macdonald, AlterNet on November 28, 2009 at 12:10 PM.

The June 28 military coup d'etat that overthrew Honduras' democratically elected president provided President Obama with "a golden opportunity...to make a clear break with the past and show that he is unequivocally siding with democracy," as Costa Rica's former vice president put it.  However, the U.S.'s recognition of the sham election Honduras' de facto regime is staging on Sunday makes it quite clear that Obama is choosing instead to side with the  far-right Republicans who support the coup.

In the wake of the coup that overthrew Honduran president Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales, the Guardian's Calvin Tucker observes that there had been some promising signs that Obama was going to remain true to his pledge to "seek a new chapter of engagement" in Latin America. Despite some initial waffling by the State Department, Obama spoke out in strong terms against Zelaya's overthrow, saying that "it would be a terrible precedent if we start moving backwards into the era in which we are seeing military coups as a means of political transition, rather than democratic elections." The U.S. backed a Costa Rican-brokered compromise that would have seen Zelaya returned to office, at the helm of a "unity government." All non-humanitarian U.S. aid was suspended to the de facto regime, as were the U.S. visas of the coup leaders. The State Department indicated that the US would "not be able to support" the outcome of the elections out of concern that they would not be "free, fair and transparent." And finally, during a visit to Honduras by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in late October, the coup leaders agreed to sign the U.S. backed agreement providing for Zelaya's return.

This firm U.S. reaction apparently "privately stunned" the coup leaders, who were sure "this would never have happened if the Republicans had still been in power," according to the New Yorker's William Finnegan.

Indeed, the coup leaders, who along with their allies such as the Latin American Business Council have spent at least six hundred thousand dollars on Washington lobbyists and lawyers, count amongst their supporters several prominent congressional Republicans, including South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint.

DeMint had been leading efforts to block key diplomatic appointments in Latin America, and earlier this month, the Obama administration succumbed to this pro-coup Republican pressure, announcing that it will after all recognize Sunday's election, and not insist on the return of the legitimate president. On November 4, Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Shannon announced on CNN that "the formation of the National Unity Government is apart from the reinstatement of President Zelaya" and that the Honduran Congress will decide when and if Zelaya is reinstated.

DeMint took credit for the change in U.S. policy, releasing a press statement declaring "Senator secures commitment for U.S. to back Nov. 29 elections even if Zelaya is not reinstated." In the statement, DeMint said he was

happy to report the Obama Administration has finally reversed its misguided Honduran policy and will fully recognize the November 29th elections... Secretary Clinton and Assistant Secretary Shannon have assured me that the U.S. will recognize the outcome of the Honduran elections regardless of whether Manuel Zelaya is reinstated.

The 23 Latin American and Caribbean nations of the Rio Group do not recognize Sunday's election. However the Obama administration is now going ahead in recognizing the vote held in the midst of what Amnesty International has characterized as a "human rights crisis," marked by an"increasingly disproportionate and excessive use of force being used by the police and military to repress legitimate and peaceful protests across the country." Since Zelaya's overthrow, over 3,500 people have been illegally detained, over 600 have been beaten and dozens have been killed, according to the Committee of Families of the Disappeared (COFADEH), with media workers, human rights defenders and female protesters particularly targeted, according to Amnesty.

The only two presidential candidates on the ballot supported the coup that ousted the elected president. The leading opposition candidate, Carlos Reyes, recently withdrew his nomination for the presidency, calling the election fraudulent, and hundreds of candidates for congressional and municipal seats have also withdrawn from the election.

And Tucker notes that

Trade unions and social movements calling for a boycott of the election are facing mafia-style threats, with the regime's chief of police boasting that he has compiled a blacklist of "all those of the left".

At the same time, Honduras' big business federation, which supported the coup, is reportedly offering "cash discounts" to Hondurans for voting in the election.

The fact that such an election has won the support of the Obama administration does not bode well for the president's "new chapter" of U.S.-Latin America relations.

Wingnuts: Insane Effort to Draft Cheney for 2012 Race Will Frighten Liberals!
Posted by Thers, Whiskey Fire on November 28, 2009 at 9:44 AM.

Comedy, from those scamps at the Jawa Report.

Listen. Can You Hear The Heads Of Liberals Exploding Like Popped Balloons?

The noise is made from the rapid release of air that occupies the space where brains should have been. Heh.

Gracious! To clarify, here is the Exciting News which is supposed to be upsetting to Liberals:

A new group wants former Vice President Dick Cheney back in the White House. The organization - "Draft Dick Cheney 2012" - launched on Friday, and unveiled their new Web site. Their aim: To convince the former vice president to seek the Republican presidential nomination in the next race for the White House.

Yes, yes, indeed, my head is exploding! This has made me hysterical and afraid, the prospect of a Dick Cheney presidential run! I fear it so! Please, please don't throw the fearsome Dick Cheney into the asshole patch that is the 2012 GOP presidential "field"!

Because this, you know, is true:

"The 2012 race for the Republican nomination for President will be about much more then who will be the party's standard bearer against Barack Obama, the race is about the heart and soul of the GOP," said Christopher Barron, one of the organizers of the Draft Cheney movement.

Right. And who would doubt for a moment that Dick Cheney is indeed the most perfect embodiment of "the heart and soul of the modern GOP"? Not this liberal!

Poor Peggy Noonan, Stuck Recycling Right-Bloggers' Talking-Points
Posted by Roy Edroso, Alicublog on November 28, 2009 at 8:36 AM.

Peggy Noonan, newly filled with a sense of purpose, tells us that people don't like Obama anymore. That is, the polls indicate a lot of them do, but the people who matter don't. Among these: columnists, and people Peggy Noonan meets in unspecified "bipartisan crowds":

As I read Ms. Drew's piece, I was reminded of something I began noticing a few months ago in bipartisan crowds. I would ask Democrats how they thought the president was doing. In the past they would extol, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, his virtues. Increasingly, they would preface their answer with, "Well, I was for Hillary."

It's amazing Clinton didn't win the Democratic nomination, with so much vital bipartisan support.

This in turn reminded me of a surprising thing I observe among loyal Democrats in informal settings and conversations: No one loves Barack Obama. Half the American people say they support him, and Democrats are still with him. But there were Bill Clinton supporters who really loved him. George W. Bush had people who loved him. A lot of people loved Jack Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. But no one seems to love Mr. Obama now; they're not dazzled and head over heels. That's gone away. He himself seems a fairly chilly customer; perhaps in turn he inspires chilly support. But presidents need that rock --bottom 20% who, no matter what's happening -- war, unemployment -- adore their guy, have complete faith in him, and insist that you love him, too.

Her model for such people might be Peggy Noonan, who once said things like "Mr. McCain is the Old America, of course; Mr. Obama the New." Remember those days? In any case it would explain her certainty in this analysis.

 

But Obama does have such people, despite the fact that Noonan is no longer among them.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Try Your Hand: GOP Sex Scandal Haiku!
Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet on November 28, 2009 at 6:17 AM.

This is pretty funny -- the folks at TPM are asking readers to send them haiku based on their favorite GOP sex scandals. All good, clean holiday fun for the whole family.

Poetry's not my bag but I figured I'd give it the old college try. So, reaching for some low-hanging fruit, I came up with this:

Hot Summer toe-tap

Dull lay-over, need relief

Oh, no, officer

Have at it in the comments.

Update: there are certainly different forms of haiku (and you don't have to limit yourself -- they're doing limericks in the comments), but the traditional anglicized version is 3 lines, with 5 syllables, 7 syllables and 5 syllables respectively. And if you want to be a purist, try to work in a kigo, or seasonal reference.

Conservatives Say Low Wages Will Solve the Economic Crisis, But the Opposite Is True
Posted by Stirling Newberry, Firedoglake on November 28, 2008 at 10:14 AM.

You might be hearing from the right wing about how breaking the unions and letting wages fall is the solution to our problems. We've heard this before. Let me tell you where.

In the late 1920's and early 1930's the global economy as it then was constituted, suffered a series of moments of crisis. In truth it had never gotten back to balance since the "Great War." The responses to these crisis points made the situation. Orthodoxy of the age brought disaster, and that orthodoxy was returning to an international gold standard that was really only a recent innovation. As Bordo and Eichengreen put it: "a system which relied on inelastically supplied precious metal and elastically supplied foreign exchange to meet the the world economy's demand for reserves was intrinsically fragile, prone to confidence problems, and a transmission belt for policy mistakes."

It's a nice way of saying that the Gold Standard was unsafe at any speed.

When the crisis arrived, there were three responses. One was to try and stick it out with the old system. This lead to falling wages and high unemployment under persistent deflation. The other two responses involved "casting off the fetters of gold." However, once this was done there was still a choice: keep wages high and the industrial system functioning, or let wages fall all the way to the floor, and employ people by the state.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Is Chris 'Hardball' Matthews Gearing Up for a Senate Run?
Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly on November 28, 2008 at 9:48 AM.

The LA Times reported the other day that Chris Matthews, the MSNBC "Hardball" host and a former Capitol Hill Democratic staffer, sat down with Democratic leaders in Pennsylvania earlier this week to "discuss the prospect" of a Senate campaign.

This has been the subject of speculation for months -- Matthews even conceded interest during a "Colbert Report" appearance a few months ago -- and FiveThirtyEight reports that the MSNBC host appears to be increasingly serious about challenging Sen. Arlen Specter (D) in 2010.

Chris Matthews, it appears, is in.

FiveThirtyEight has been hearing for some time that Matthews is serious about running for the United States Senate, but it took a trip to Georgia among the Georgia-runoff-congregated and well-connected Obama organizer throng to confirm.

According to multiple sources, who confirmed the Tip O'Neill staffer-cum-MSNBC host has negotiated with veteran Obama staffers to enlist in his campaign, Chris Matthews is likely to run for United States Senate in Pennsylvania in 2010. Matthews, 62, would run as a Democrat. Arlen Specter, the aging Republican incumbent, will be 80 if he chooses to run for re-election.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Florida Lawyer Slaps a Cop, Gets Tasered
Posted by Digby, Hullabaloo on November 28, 2008 at 8:10 AM.

A lawyer was stunned with a Taser twice this afternoon after he became upset at a Tampa Code Enforcement Board meeting, police say.

Tampa lawyer Carl Roland Hayes, 53, was addressing the board when he became irate and verbally abusive, said Lt. Ronald McMullen of the Tampa Police Department. Officials asked Hayes to calm down, but he did not, McMullen said.

As Hayes was being escorted out of the meeting, he slapped an officer's face, McMullen said.

An officer used a Taser, but it had no obvious effect, police said. Hayes started "fighting and flailing," McMullen said, and an officer had to press the Taser against Hayes' body to "drive stun" him.

Those poor cops must have been terrified when slapped that officer. He's lucky they had the tasers or they would have had to mow him down in a hail of gunfire.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

In Feeble Bid to Be Cool, Bush Pardons Cocaine Smuggling Rapper
Posted by Lisa Derrick, Firedoglake on November 28, 2008 at 7:14 AM.

Guess those Peruvian Pisco sours finally caught up with W and left him feeling mellow. Or maybe it was the phone calls from Carly Simon. Whatever the reason George Bush pardoned rapper John Forte who was convicted of smuggling 1.4 million dollars worth of liquid cocaine through Newark Airport.

Carly's son Ben Taylor went to school -- well to be precise, Philips Exeter  Academy -- with Forte who performed with the Fugees on their multi-platinum, Grammy-winning album The Score and sang back up with Simon -- and Carly put up $250,000 in bail money for Forte upon his arrest. 

Fellow musician Utah senator Orrin Hatch also lobbied for Forte's pardon. 

Is Pop Culture Finally Admitting That Women Like to Touch Themselves?
Posted by Jill Filipovic, Feministe on November 28, 2008 at 6:48 AM.

Maybe I’m imagining things, but has anyone else noticed more allusions to female masturbation on TV? On Gossip Girl a couple of weeks ago, the show started with Blair having a sex dream and Dorota (her housekeeper) warning her that “God is always watching” -- and Blair telling her to go away, ostensibly so Blair can finish her business. Last week on Grey’s Anatomy -- a show which is legitimately terrible at this point -- Izzy (spoiler alert!) is having loud sex with her ghost-boyfriend and her room mates (including her real-boyfriend Alex) hear her. Everyone’s confused, and Alex says something like, “She’s flying solo. It’s hot.”

I’m only 25, but growing up I never heard about women masturbating -- and I certainly never saw it referenced on TV. Male masturbation, on the other hand, was an assumption -- something all men supposedly did, that they could joke and talk about. Female masturbation was gross and weird, something we all denied doing, if we talked about it at all. So I’m glad to see it presented as normal.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Toby Keith's Holiday Message for Liberals
Posted by PZ Myers, Pharyngula on November 28, 2008 at 6:33 AM.

I'm pretty sure this is satire.I'm not a fan of Toby Keith at all, but I'll make an exception for this one time.

Coal Industry Sponsored Last Night’s CNN/YouTube GOP Presidential Debate
Posted by Amanda Terkel, Think Progress on November 28, 2007 at 2:00 PM.

This post, written by Amanda Terkel, originally appeared on Think Progress

Last night at 8 pm EST, CNN aired a Republican presidential debate, live from St. Petersburg, FL. A full-page advertisement in yesterday's Washington Post states that the debate is being sponsored by the "clean coal" industry:

(click for larger version)

View the full page ad HERE.

Sponsorship of last night's debate appears aimed at influencing Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R), who is leading a "crusade against coal." Crist has unveiled a plan to reduce his state's carbon dioxide emissions by replacing coal plants with solar thermal power plants. He has also canceled plans to build new coal plants that were pushed by his predecessor, Jeb Bush.

In early October, when Tampa Electric shelved plans to build a $2-billion power plant, Crist applauded the move:

"I am not a fan of coal," he reiterated. He pointed to the expansion of nuclear power, as well as recently announced solar and biomass projects, as examples of clean, reliable, affordable energy.

"There's a lot of different ways to skin the cat and still provide the energy that Floridians need and deserve without harming Florida in the process," Crist said.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Kucinich Says He's Seriously Considering Ron Paul for VP, But What Does Ron Think?
Posted by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report on November 28, 2007 at 1:00 PM.

This post, written by Steve Benen, originally appeared on The Carpetbagger Report

Dennis Kucinich is generally not taken seriously as a credible presidential candidate, and is generally invited to participate in presidential debates because organizers can't think of a rationale to block a sitting member of Congress. A lot of observers are under the impression that Kucinich is running just to run -- a presidential campaign, even a quixotic one, offers people a fairly high-profile platform to talk about issues they find important.

But if Kucinich wants to shed his gadfly reputation, he should probably avoid pronouncements like this one.

Call it the liberal-libertarian ticket, where left meets right and Democrat Dennis Kucinich picks Republican Ron Paul to be his vice president.

Kucinich, the Cleveland congressman running in a longshot bid to become president, suggested it himself Sunday.

"I'm thinking about Ron Paul" as a running mate, Kucinich told a crowd of about 70 supporters at a house party here, one of numerous stops throughout New Hampshire over the Thanksgiving weekend. A Kucinich-Paul administration could bring people together "to balance the energies in this country," Kucinich said.

I suppose I know what Kucinich means, but serious presidential hopefuls generally don't consider running mates with whom they disagree on almost everything, including fundamental beliefs about the size, scope, and power of the government.

And as it turns out, Ron Paul wouldn't even consider it.

"Dr. Paul and Rep. Kucinich are friends and there is a lot of mutual respect," Paul communications director Jesse Benton said in an e-mail when asked whether a running-mate spot on the Kucinich ticket would be attractive to Paul. "They have worked, and will continue to work, together on ending the war and protecting civil liberties.

"However, Ron wants to substantially cut the size and scope of the federal government. There are too many differences on issues such as taxes and spending to think a joint ticket would be possible."

Granted, Paul and Kucinich appear to largely agree on national security matters, including the war in Iraq and the Patriot Act. But then, there's everything else.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Saudi Prince Whines That His Country's Punishment of Rape Victim Gets Bad Press
Posted by Lucinda Marshall, Feminist Peace Network on November 28, 2007 at 12:00 PM.

This post, written by Lucinda Marshall, originally appeared on Feminist Peace Network

While Saudi Prince Saud al-Faisal has issued a statement saying that the sentencing of the woman who was gang raped will be reviewed, it is clear that he still doesn't get it,

"What is outraging about this case is that it is being used against the Saudi government and people," he said without elaborating."

Well allow me to elaborate. What is outrageous is a country that so severely restricts women's rights and punishes them for being the victim. Could go on and on here, but the subject has already been addressed quite thoroughly in the last few weeks.

I have written about this several times now and have gotten a number of responses to the effect that why aren't feminists saying anything, feminists should take the lead, yada yada.

First of all, feminists all over the globe are speaking out, a simple search will bear that out. But WTF-why the presumption that feminists should lead the charge. Isn't misogynist violence something that all of us should be outraged about? Just because the victim of a human rights violation is a woman means that it is solely a feminist responsibility to speak out?

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

John Ashcroft Confronted by Hostile Audience, Says He's Willing to be Waterboarded
Posted by Faiz Shakir, Think Progress on November 28, 2007 at 11:00 AM.

This post, written by Faiz Shakir, originally appeared on Think Progress

Last night, former Attorney General John Ashcroft delivered an address on national security at the University of Colorado. The event was marked by heated protests. About 20 student protesters wearing "shirts with 'shame' written on the backs and wearing American flags over their faces, welcomed Ashcroft to the stage by standing up and turning their backs to him."

During the speech, Ashcroft caused an uproar when he declared Guantanamo Bay was a "good place" for detainees. In addition, he defended the torture tactic of waterboarding:

Ashcroft also responded to questions from the audience. The first question came from a woman who asked if Ashcroft would be willing to be subjected to waterboarding.

"The things that I can survive, if it were necessary to do them to me, I would do," he said.

Ashcroft apparently believes that torture should be allowed as long as it doesn't kill him.

Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and William Delahunt (D-MA) have introduced the "American Anti-Torture Act of 2007" to make clear no U.S. government agency feels it can apply the Ashcroft standard while interrogating detainees. They write:

Waterboarding is not "simulated drowning." It is drowning. It involves restraining a detainee -- usually by strapping him or her to a board -- with the head placed lower than the feet. The face or mouth is often covered or stuffed with rags and water is poured over the face to force inhalation. The victim's lungs fill with water until the procedure is stopped or the victim dies. Waterboarding has been considered torture -- even by our own government -- until recently. Indeed, we prosecuted Japanese officers for subjecting prisoners to waterboarding in World War II.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Media Celebrates Bush's Attempt at Syrian Diplomacy After Ridiculing Pelosi's
Posted by Ali Frick, Think Progress on November 28, 2007 at 6:50 AM.

This post, written by Ali Frick, originally appeared on Think Progress

When Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi traveled to Syria to visit President Bashar al-Assad last spring, the right wing immediately excoriated her diplomatic efforts.

President Bush said the trip "sends mixed signals" to the Assad government, and Dana Perino called the trip "a really bad idea." Vice President Dick Cheney said Assad's "bad behavior's being rewarded." Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) viciously accused Democrats of being "so drunk with grandiose visions of deposing Bush that they break bread with terrorists and enemies of the United States."

The media picked up the conservative talking points and ran with them:

CNN's Suzanne Malveaux: "Why should the Americans, or even the international community, see this any more as a political stunt here, a publicity stunt, a big wet kiss to President Al-Assad?"

Washington Post Editorial Board: "Ms. Pelosi's attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish."

Thomas Sowell of the Baltimore Sun: "All that Ms. Pelosi's trip can accomplish is to advertise American disunity to a terrorist-sponsoring nation in the Middle East while we are in a war there."

NBC's Matt Lauer: "But if the Democrats and Speaker Pelosi appear to be acting irresponsibly or incompetently -- and let's face it, a lot of people think she messed up on this one -- what's the impact for Democrats overall?"

Now that the Bush administration has come to its senses and invited Syria to become part of the solution in the Middle East, the media has missed the administration's reversal, instead praising Bush's "victory" in securing Syria's attendance:

New York Times: "Syria announced Sunday that it would attend the Middle East peace meeting beginning here Monday night, joining Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab League participants in a turnabout that represented a victory for the Bush administration."

The Denver Post: "Victory for U.S.: Syria to attend summit."

The AP's Amy Teibel: "The Bush administration was able to declare a clean sweep when Syria, the last Arab world holdout, said Sunday it would attend this week's high-stakes Mideast peace conference."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Writer Exposes Romney's Church of Latter-Day Hypocrisy
Posted by Sam Stein, Huffington Post on November 28, 2007 at 6:50 AM.

This post, written by Sam Stein, originally appeared on The Huffington Post

The author of a much-discussed op-ed in the Christian Science Monitor -- which charged that former Gov. Mitt Romney said he would likely not appoint a Muslim-American to his presidential cabinet - says Romney's explanation for the comment is a flat out lie.

Mansoor Ijaz, a prominent Islamic businessman, told the Huffington Post that Romney's comments were made in reference to possible cabinet appointments and not, as the former governor has since claimed, in the context of combating Islamic extremism.

"This guy is lying now to the American people," said Ijaz. "He probably never imagined someone would come out and write a piece the way I did. And I think he made a serious mistake in judgment in trying to disown what he said."

In an oped on Tuesday titled "A Muslim Belongs in the White House," Ijaz wrote of a private campaign event he attended in which Romney claimed he could not see how appointing a Muslim to his cabinet could be "justified" considering the group's demographics in America.

Pressed to explain his statement later in the day, Romney said it had been taken out of context.

"His question was did I need to have a Muslim in my Cabinet to be able to confront radical Jihad and would it be important to have a Muslim in my Cabinet," said Romney. "And I said, 'No, I don't think that you have to have a Muslim in the Cabinet to be able to take on radical Jihad anymore than during the Second World War we needed to have a Japanese-American to understand the threat that was coming from Japan or something of that nature.' I just rejected that argument..."

Reached by phone, Ijaz scoffed at such an interpretation of what transpired.

"I can tell you," he said, "that Romney's push back, meaning his statement about the Japanese is all bullshit. He never talked about the Japanese at that point. Everything he said today is simply trying to reconfigure this item, which is he doesn't feel there is a need to put people of Islamic faith into his cabinet."

Moreover, he added, this is not the first time the Massachusetts Republican has made off-the-cuff remarks that Muslims have found insensitive. Indeed, as reported by Talking Points Memo, Romney rejected the idea of appointing a Muslim to a high-ranking White House position at an earlier and, again, private campaign stop.

Irma Aguirre, the former finance director for the Nevada Republican Party, told the Huffington Post about her experience at a Romney fundraiser roughly two months ago:

"I was curious to listen to Romney, I was very impressed by him and I'm kind of undecided about whom to support. Well, at one point, they opened questions to the audience and a gentleman who was with me... raised his hand and posed a question. 'Being that Muslims do not really trust America's leaders, do you think it would be prudent, or would you consider having a Muslim in your cabinet as an adviser to lend credibility to the administration? His response was 'probably not' or 'most likely not.'"

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Ex-Bushy, Red Cross Prez Steps Down After Receiving Inappropriate "First Aid" From a Subordinate
Posted by GottaLaff , Brave New Films on November 28, 2007 at 6:46 AM.

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

No matter where you look, there's a scandal. Now it's the Red Cross:

Red Cross President and CEO Mark W. Everson has stepped down after revelations he was "engaged in a personal relationship with a subordinate employee," the organization announced Tuesday.

Come again? (What did you expect, a serious piece? Oh! Did I just say "piece"?)

By the way, the "other woman" is still employed there.

Everson, 53, said in a written statement that he was leaving the $500,000-per-year job "for personal and family reasons, and deeply regret it is impossible for me to continue in a job so recently undertaken."

Everson -- who is married and has two children -- joined the Red Cross as president and CEO last May.

How unusual! A Republican family man with a secret lover!

About Everson, [Chief Public Affairs Officer Suzy C.] DeFrancis said, "We're grateful for his service."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Blackwater's No-So-Little Steroids Problem
Posted by Steven Reynolds, The All Spin Zone on November 28, 2007 at 5:39 AM.

This post, written by Steven Reynolds, originally appeared on the All Spin Zone

Blackwater has another scandal on its hands, and it is turning to Bud Selig to handle it. All praise Blackwater!

In the wake of the latest Blackwater scandal, Erik Prince, CEO of Blackwater USA, is stepping down in favor of Bud Selig. It is clear this new scandal concerning steroid use by Blackwater mercenaries needs the special type of leadership only Mr. Selig can provide. Here's a bit about the scandal from CNN:

A quarter of Blackwater security guards in Iraq use steroids and other "judgment-altering substances," according to a lawsuit filed by the families of several Iraqis killed or wounded in a Baghdad shooting in September.

Blackwater denies the charges.

The suit, filed Monday in Washington, accuses the company of fostering "a culture of lawlessness" among its guards and says the use of excessive force helps the company preserve a key selling point -- the fact that none of its protectees have been killed during the four-year-old war.

"I think there is a whole corporate culture there that essentially rewards the use of excessive force -- shooting first, asking questions later," said Susan Burke, the lead attorney in the case.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Christian Coalition leader leaves in frustration
Posted by Melissa McEwan on November 28, 2006 at 12:38 PM.

WWJD? Rev. Joel Hunter, president-elect of the powerful Pat Robertson-founded Christian Coalition who was scheduled to assume leadership in the new year, has declined the job, because the group "wouldn't let him expand its agenda beyond opposing abortion and gay marriage."

[H]e had hoped to focus on issues such as poverty and the environment.

"These are issues that Jesus would want us to care about," said Hunter, a senior pastor at Northland Church in Longwood, Fla.

..."They pretty much said, 'These issues are fine, but they're not our issues, that's not our base,'" Hunter said.

At what point can we withdraw the tax exempt status from an organization who has essentially admitted that they're just using Christianity as a front for their anti-woman, anti-gay hate group?

(Thanks to Mike for the heads-up on this story.)

Olbermann: 'Civil War' naming is Iraq's Walter Cronkite moment [VIDEO]
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2006 at 11:08 AM.

Noting that "it's the media's job to cut through [the administration's deceptive language] and call things what they are," Congressional Quarterly's Craig Crawford quipped that "If these guys were designing road signs they'd probably want to call a 'dead end' sign 'outlet free.'"

Such is the flood of tragically humorous commentary unleashed by White House winging over (MS)NBC's decision to call it a Civil War. The Daily Show also had its way with the administration's (and therefore the media's) linguistic pilates with respect to the Civil War in Iraq [VIDEO].

In the clip above, Keith Olbermann compares his employers' decision to call it a Civil War to Walter Cronkite's shift in Vietnam reporting in 1968 when he began to speak of the war as unwinnable. Many believe that was the beginning of the end for America's involvement in Vietnam...

To read more about the media conflict see today's front page story on AlterNet HERE.

Psychotics 4 Bush!
Posted by Melissa McEwan on November 28, 2006 at 9:04 AM.

To be filed under duh:

[Christopher Lohse], a social work master’s student at Southern Connecticut State University, says he has proven what many progressives have probably suspected for years: a direct link between mental illness and support for President Bush.

…Lohse's study, backed by SCSU Psychology professor Jaak Rakfeldt and statistician Misty Ginacola, found a correlation between the severity of a person's psychosis and their preferences for president: The more psychotic the voter, the more likely they were to vote for Bush.

The study began in part as an advocacy project "designed to register mentally ill voters and encourage them" to vote, while assessing "knowledge of current issues, government and politics." The Bush trend emerged in the course of the study, according to Lohse, who describes himself as a "Reagan revolution fanatic" who nonetheless finds Bush "beyond the pale." During the course of the study, it emerged that "Bush supporters has significantly less knowledge about current issues, government and politics than those who supported Kerry," and that greater levels of psychosis predicted Bush support.

"Our study shows that psychotic patients prefer an authoritative leader," Lohse says. "If your world is very mixed up, there's something very comforting about someone telling you, 'This is how it's going to be'."

None of this is actually new information. That liberal voters tend to be much better informed as a group and tend to reject authoritarianism is well documented, from both the chicken came first angle and the egg came first angle. But it's nonetheless amusing to have further evidence that the people constantly calling progressives unhinged lunatics are, you know, way more likely to be nutzoid than the targets of their gleeful finger-pointing.

Via Tom Tomorrow, who dryly notes: "Anyone who's spent any time reading right wing blogs already understood this to be true." Indeed.

(This Modern World)

Daily Show on calling Iraq a "Civil War" [VIDEO]
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2006 at 8:18 AM.

Both NBC and MSNBC have decided to use the phrase "civil war" when referring to the fighting in Iraq. The administration is apoplectic, as you can imagine, and the absurd game of finding alternative names for everything is in overdrive.

The Daily Show is on it:

When pressed, Daily Show analyst John Oliver -- like our vaunted leadership -- refuses to use the words "civil war," opting instead for "faith-based melee," "internal sovereignty challenge," and more (or less)... (video to the right).

Also, watch Olbermann's segment on the Civil War HERE...

To read more about the media conflict see today's front page story on AlterNet HERE.

Democrats promise investigations of Republican scandals...
Posted by Melissa McEwan on November 28, 2006 at 7:26 AM.

It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas*:

The incoming chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee is promising an array of oversight investigations that could provoke sharp disagreement with Republicans and the White House.

...Among the investigations [Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich.] said he wants the committee to undertake:

--The new Medicare drug benefit. ''There are lots and lots and lots of scandals,'' he said, without citing specifics.

--Spending on government contractors in Iraq, including Halliburton Co., the Texas-based oil services conglomerate once led by Vice President Dick Cheney.

--An energy task force overseen by Cheney. It ''was carefully cooked to provide only participation by oil companies and energy companies,'' Dingell said.

--A review of food and drug safety, particularly in the area of nutritional supplements.

Dee-licious.

You know the GOP really lived up to its reputation as a do-nothing, rubber-stamp, power-ceding collection of useless chumps when Congressman Dingell is talking about the usually dry subject possible investigations to be launched by the House Energy and Commerce Committee and it sounds like, "Does Congressional Oversight make you horny, baby?!"

Yes, yes it does.

-------------------

* Or your gift-giving celebratory holiday of choice.

Rush Limbaugh supports civil war
Posted by Melissa McEwan on November 28, 2006 at 6:57 AM.

Let's file this under compassionate conservative fatigue:

LIMBAUGH: All right, well, let's just have them [the possibility of three civil wars in the Middle East]. Let's just have the civil wars and let the crumbs crumble and the cookie crumble where -- because I'm fed up with this...

...I mean, everybody comes to us: "You got to fix this and you got to fix that." So we go and try to fix it, and our own people, Democrats and the left in our country do their best to sabotage our efforts, and then we get blamed for trying to clean up the messes that these people start...

Hmm, I love the idea that the American Left trying to sabotage the resounding policy failures is a bad thing. Of course, that's not really what Rushbo's trying to say; he's trying to say that if the Left just shut their stinking traps and supported the team for which he cheerleads, they might be able to score a touchdown -- but they'll never find their way to the goalposts with all that distracting booing! So he's just giving up.

Fine, just blow the place up.

"Wait, wait -- let me get my ball first!"

Just let these natural forces take place over there instead of trying to stop them, instead of trying to use -- I just -- sometimes natural force is going to happen. You're going to have to let it take place. You can spend all the time you like with diplomacy, and you can spend all the time you want massaging these things with diplomatic -- you're just -- you're just delaying the inevitable.

Wow, get me a buttload of Oxycontin stat so I, too, can medicate myself into believing that Bush is a great statesman and what we've been doing in the Middle East for the past three years is diplomatic massage.

(Via Hughes for America.)

Rumsfeld to stay a while longer...
Posted by Melissa McEwan on November 28, 2006 at 6:13 AM.

The White House says that incoming Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, whose confirmation is all but a sure thing, won't be sworn in until next year, because he "needs extra time to wind up affairs as president of Texas A&M University" -- an assertion that's apparently news to Gates, who has publicly said he's ready to quit as soon as he's been confirmed.

Another source (anonymous, natch) suggests that the White House may just be letting Rumsfeld break one last thing before he leaves: the record for longest-serving Secretary of Defense.

One source close to the White House, who spoke anonymously in order to keep his job, believes President George W. Bush has decided to wait until after Dec. 29 "as a personal gesture to Rumsfeld." On that date Rumsfeld would become the longest-serving Defense secretary, beating Robert McNamara's record of 85 months.

Crack out the bubbly. That's something worth celebrating.

(Via The Carbetbagger Report.)

Look who's talking
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2005 at 12:57 PM.

If I'm Mike Scanlon, with the number of powerful people he may put on the hot seat, I only travel by train from here on out.

The latest in the Abramoff scandal is dicey, but it's nothing compared to what schemes may come. And that's saying a lot considering the Soprano-like clouds already gathering over the lobbyist's dealings. The company owned by Republican lobbyist Abramoff paid the men who eventually killed that company's founder, Gus Boulis.

That same company, SunCruz (a casino boat line) was, according to Josh Marshall, also mixed up with the Republican party:

"Now it turns out they also had the company pay the National Republican Congressional Committee (the House GOP election committee) $10,000 on behalf of Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH). That was in exchange for Ney's putting anti-Boulis remarks in the congressional record that helped Abramoff and Kidan pressure Boulis to sell them SunCruz."

The go-between was former PR consultant and GOP aide Mike Scanlon who has turned on Abramoff and has been cooperating with prosecutors for some time now, to the detriment of a widening network of Republican lawmakers including Representatives Tom DeLay, Bob Ney and John Doolittle and now Senator Conrad Burns of Montana.

Interestingly enough, it doesn't take Abramoff and Scanlon to make Republicans take bribes. Some, like Duke Cunningham who just pleaded guilty to taking bribes, are quite capable of cutting out the middlemen.

Let's just hope the administration doesn't decide to invade Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Massachusetts or San Francisco to divert our attention. (TPM)

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

What Bush will see tomorrow
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2005 at 11:31 AM.

A truck bearing the image at left will greet the president as he meets with Colorado Republican Marilyn Musgrave to, ostensibly, boost her campaign.

She may want to have a word with Virginia gubernatorial loser Jerry Kilgore to see whether that's actually a wise strategy or not.

The billboard contest was run by the good folks at Progress Now Action. (Hat tip: David Grossman)


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

Enter the (peacemaking) dragon
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2005 at 11:03 AM.

In Bosnia, the major ethnicities involved in the bloody struggle gathered to unveil a statue of Bruce Lee to celebrate the martial arts star's 65th birthday.

Cory Doctorow writes: "Bruce was apparently equally popular on all sides of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia."

Veselin Gatalo of the youth group Urban Movement Mostar commented: "We will always be Muslims, Serbs or Croats, but one thing we all have in common is Bruce Lee."

Whatever it takes. (BoingBoing)

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

My own private genocide (video)
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2005 at 9:53 AM.

Sent to AlterNet by Mike Farrell (BJ Honeycutt on MASH), Gabriel Stauring and Chris Bessenecker, cofounders of StopGenocideNow.org, are in the process of creating a diary of their visit to the Darfur region of Sudan.

The diary is currently on Day 9 and provides both an excellent remedial for those who haven't kept track of the conflict and an engaging personal story about what it means to take action.

In addition to the videos [HERE], there's a page listing all the ways for you to take action (none of which involve a 10-hour journey into a war zone). Please forward this one widely. (StopGenocideNow.org)

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

Bush youth
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2005 at 8:33 AM.

Supporting the troops by mocking the mothers of the dead, eh? For all the conservatives and Republicans trolling this blog, I'd love to hear a genuine condemnation of this sick and disrespectful image. I doubt the intellectual honesty exists, but I hope I'm wrong.

The photo [left] graced the sign of a 12-year-old Bush supporter. It depicts hunter Bush having slaughtered Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq.

Can it be read as anything other than conveying the message that vocal disagreement with the president warrants execution? I'd also love to hear from soldiers on this attack on a fallen soldier's mother.

T writes: "It’s a minor hit with the Freepi. And, not surprisingly, the creator of the image is one of them. You can get a better look at the image itself here, and the 'Butcher’s Commentary' too."

The Freepers, if you're unfamiliar with them, are a group of right wingers who wave the flag despite having only the vaguest notion of what it stands for. The founding fathers would've doubled over in laughter at them; or better yet, they'd have written quips, the likes of which would elicit anger, blank stares and charges of treason. (Republic of T)

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

Administration, alone
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2005 at 7:27 AM.

Watching Richard Perle on C-SPAN this weekend talk about how high morale was in Iraq, how the media wasn't reporting on the positive news, it isn't difficult to see why those who lend him the smallest shred of credibility might grab on to that shred. His voice was so calm and soothing. So rational.

But madmen are often effective precisely because they actually believe their own fantasies.

Steve Gilliard has a first-hand account of a well-placed conservative soldier who paints a very different picture. The troops want out.

My brother-in-law [an active-duty Major, decorated Army Ranger, and West Point graduate with more than 15 years in and about to ship out to Afghanistan] thinks that Murtha is 100% right and that we should pull back in Iraq to forward operating bases in Kuwait, if not leave entirely. Even more interesting, my brother-in-law says that ALL of his officer friends in the 10th Mountain (a real front-line outfit) and around the military agree as well.

My brother-in-law is a gregarious, well-connected guy and literally has hundreds of well placed friends at the rank of Major and above. He says that ALL of his miltiary friends feel Iraq is a "mistake" and a "meatgrinder" that serves no purpose anymore if it ever did.

Watch as every pathetic argument is shot down in flames by an actually soldier and conservative.

On debating withdrawal: "My brother-in-law laughed off as ludicrous the claim that troops are somehow undercut by people debating the usefulness of their mission and questioning whether to pull out of Iraq."

On Bush asking for no sacrifice: "He also is outraged that Bush has asked the country to do nothing and downplayed the war effort that Bush claims is somehow so important."

On our Iraq strategy: "From what he hears, there basically is no overall strategy, just a bunch of LTs, CPTs, and Majors making it up as they go." Read the whole thing and email to friends... (Steve Gilliard)

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

Katrina czar
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 28, 2005 at 6:23 AM.

Being that the press (and thus public sentiment and thus political will...) can only track stories of, as Dan Carol puts it "(1) crisis, (2) cover up and (3) personality," Carol suggests that progressives "demand that Bush name a recognizable Cleanup Czar -- so the press would have someone to track, talk to, blame or lionize."

Earlier he suggested Colin Powell (who may be interested in penance for f-ing up so badly with respect to Iraq), but now he throws up Giuliani and Brangelina.

I suggest the Jacksons, Michael and Janet, looking to erase public memories of molestation charges and exposure; Bill Clinton whose incentive will be to jam with jazz bands as they repopulate the city in repair or Chalabi, as the administration still believes in his good will.

Any other suggestions? (HuffPost)

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