PEEK

Buzz, perspectives, insight and news from AlterNet

Conservatives Can Really Be Heartless Bastards
Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet on November 29, 2009 at 1:10 PM.

The U.S. economy has shed 7.3 million jobs in the past 23 months, the biggest hit to the labor market since the Second World War. (Just to keep up with the growth in the working population would have required the addition of around 3.5 million jobs during that time.)

Unemployment has more than doubled in the past two years, and is now over 10 percent. The dispiriting number rises to more than 1 in 6  -- 17.2 percent of working Americans -- when you include those underemployed against their will (working part-time, free-lancing, etc.).

And American households have lost $14 trillion in wealth in the real estate and stock markets since the crash.

Against that backdrop of very real pain, I want you to consider what kind of person would sit down, as John J. Miller did for the National Review, and write something like this about food-stamps, which are currently helping feed 1 out of every 4 American children [ht Tintin]:

Seems like there ought to be a stigma attached to the use of welfare. A little bit of shame can go a long way toward encouraging people to find jobs. The federal government may think it's doing people a favor by providing them with access to food, but it's doing them a disservice if it also robs them of the motivation necessary to break free from dependency.

Yes, an empty belly is just the incentive people need to get up off their lazy asses and go out to find one of those nonexistent jobs.

Allow me to point out that John J. Miller lives off the hand-outs of hard-right cranks and wealthy ideologues. He writes for The National Review, which has never turned a profit (founder William F Buckley once said that NR had lost over $25 million dollars over the years). Miller's latest book was a paean to a big-money right-wing foundation, published by another big-money right-wing foundation.

Perhaps if there were a bit of stigma attached to being a clown who earns his keep off of wingnut welfare, it would discourage Miller from being so dependent on the generosity of others. Parasite.

If Miller's name rings a bell -- he's a C-list right-winger --it's most likely the result of a much-mocked book arguing that we should regard France as our mortal enemy which he co-authored after the invasion of Iraq. It prompted a review in Foreign Affairs that began: "That a book as shoddy and biased as this one should be published by a reputable press is eminently regrettable."

You can buy a copy on Amazon right now for a penny, if you don't need it for food.

Is Laura Bush Delusional?
Posted by Julia , Firedoglake on November 29, 2008 at 11:56 AM.

The Bush family have recorded a Story Corps interview about George W. Bush's presidential legacy, and what they're most proud of. This is what Mrs. Bush had to say

Well, it’s certainly been very rewarding to look at Afghanistan and both know that the president and the United States military liberated women there; that women and girls can be in school now; that women can walk outside their doors without a male escort.

I worry about Afghanistan, but I will always have a special place in my heart for the women that I’ve met there, both on my visits to Afghanistan and then the many women from Afghanistan who’ve traveled to the United States on scholarships or with the Afghan American Women’s Council, or with a lot of other ways that American citizens have opened their homes to women in Afghanistan so they can be educated quickly, because they missed their education when they were children or young women, because they weren’t allowed to learn anything.

Well, then. I would have been more charitable, but since Mrs. Bush has chosen this as her legacy, allow me to introduce you to Mrs. Bush's legacy:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Black Friday Indeed: Man Trampled and Killed at Wal-Mart
Posted by Melissa McEwan, Shakesville on November 29, 2008 at 9:58 AM.

[Blub alert, and not in a good way. I'm also going to politely request right up front that this not turn into an excuse to engage in classism because of the particular site of this event. Deadly apathy is not exclusively owned by the lower classes.]

Shaker Graham and Arkades both mentioned this in earlier threads, but it really deserves its own post:

A Wal-Mart worker died after being trampled when hundreds of shoppers smashed through the doors of a Long Island store Friday morning, police and witnesses said.

The 34-year-old employee, a temporary maintenance worker, tried to hold back the unruly crowds just after the Valley Stream store opened at 5 a.m.

Witnesses said the surging throngs of shoppers knocked the man down. He fell and was stepped on. As he gasped for air, shoppers ran over and around him.

"He was bum-rushed by 200 people," said Jimmy Overby, 43, a co-worker. "They took the doors off the hinges. He was trampled and killed in front of me. They took me down too...I literally had to fight people off my back."

People pushed right past as the emergency crews tried to revive the worker; they also knocked down a pregnant woman who was taken to the hospital for treatment.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Report: Fox Bosses Despise and Loathe Bill O'Reilly
Posted by Faiz Shakir, Think Progress on November 29, 2008 at 9:31 AM.

In a forthcoming biography of Rupert Murdoch entitled "The Man Who Owns The News," author Michael Wolff reports that the Fox News bosses have no fondness for Bill O'Reilly but are willing to tolerate him for his ratings:

"It is not just Murdoch (and everybody else at News Corp.'s highest levels) who absolutely despises Bill O'Reilly, the bullying, mean-spirited, and hugely successful evening commentator," Wolff wrote, "but [Fox News chief executive] Roger Ailes himself who loathes him. Success, however, has cemented everyone to each other."

"The embarrassment can no longer be missed," Wolff wrote, in another section of the book. "He mumbles even more than usual when called on to justify it. He barely pretends to hide the way he feels about Bill O'Reilly. And while it is not that he would give Fox up--because the money is the money; success trumps all--in the larger sense of who he is, he seems to want to hedge his bets."

Update: Franken and Coleman Vote Count Timeline
Posted by Phoenix Woman, Firedoglake on November 29, 2008 at 9:02 AM.

I've decided to channel Emptywheel and start constructing a timeline of sorts for the Franken-Coleman recount. Take a look at this handy chart compiled by Twin Cities blogger Jeff Rosenberg. It shows the ratio of challenges to ballots counted.

Notice that for most of the first three days of the recount, the ratios for each campaign stayed between three and five challenged ballots per every ten thousand ballots cast. Those three days were the period where Coleman's officially-announced lead over Franken was shrinking. (See here, here and here for details.) They were also in the period just before the Coleman campaign went on a frivolous-challenge jag in order to artificially (and temporarily) goose the official recount numbers in their favor, and the Franken campaign felt compelled to play tit-for-tat just to make sure the publicly-announced faked-up Coleman "lead" didn't get too high.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Al Qaeda's P.R. Team Decides to Make Matters Worse
Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly on November 29, 2008 at 8:56 AM.

About two weeks ago, al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri looked quite foolish attacking Barack Obama, calling the president-elect a "house negro."

Zawahri drew considerable international ridicule for the video, and it appears his p.r. team decided to make matters worse.

Al-Qaeda's No. 2 leader appeared in a new video posted Friday calling on Americans to embrace Islam to overcome the financial meltdown, which he said was a consequence of the Sept. 11 attacks and militant strikes in Iraq and Afghanistan. [...]

Appearing in a white turban and robe, Zawahri discussed the roots of the U.S. economic crisis. He said it was a repercussion of the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States, and that the crisis would continue "as long as the foolish American policy of wading in Muslim blood continues."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Huckabee Pretended to Get a Phone Call from God Endorsing Bush in '04
Posted by Faiz Shakir, Think Progress on November 29, 2007 at 3:00 PM.

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

Last night at the CNN/YouTube debate, a questioner asked the candidates -- "who would call yourselves Christian conservatives" -- to answer what would Jesus do about the death penalty. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee jokingly responded, "Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office. That's what Jesus would do."

It was fitting that Huckabee be asked what Jesus thinks because, in the past, the former Baptist minister has asserted an ability to talk directly to God.

At a Republican Governors Association Dinner in 2004, Huckabee took the stage and began to deliver remarks when his cell phone rang. He took the phone out of his pocket and proceeded to have a conversation with God about President Bush's reelection:

HUCKABEE: Hello? I'm sorry. I'm right in the middle of an event. It's who? It's God? On the phone for me? How did he get my number? Oh, God has everybody's number. OK? Yes, I'll hold.

Huckabee then engaged in a 3-minute back-and-forth exchange with God, in which Huckabee asserted that God was with the Republicans and President Bush:

We're behind [Bush], yes, sir, we sure are. Yes, sir, we know you don't take sides in the election. But, if you did, we kind of think you'd hang in there with us, Lord, we really do.

Huckabee then ended his conversation and walked off the stage to roaring applause. ThinkProgress has obtained the video from this 2004 GOP fundraiser. Watch it to your right.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

The Swiftboating of Obama Is Already in Full Effect
Posted by Taylor Marsh, Huffington Post on November 29, 2007 at 2:00 PM.

This post, written by Taylor Marsh, originally appeared on The Huffington Post

Swiftboating is something I know a lot about. I've written on it for years. The latest efforts by the wingnuts began in January with Fox "News" and Steve Doocy. It continued in February with the Malcolm X hit. In March it was Roger Ailes. April came Townhall. Now, as the primaries close in, it's the Washington Post.

Obama is being swiftboated yet again. It's despicable. It's not surprising, because this is what wingnuts do best. Get scurrilous whisper campaigns inside the hack pack press, long after they've been debunked. South Carolina is known for this stuff. That The Washington Post is revealing it through a long winding piece is journalism at its worst. If it came as a warning on what's on wingnut radio that would be one thing. But what it actually does is provide a platform for a rumor campaign, not to mention a preview of things to come for Democrats. It's John Kerry revisited, the religious version.

Conservative talk-show hosts have occasionally repeated the rumor, with Michael Savage noting Obama's "background" in a "Muslim madrassa in Indonesia" in June, and Rush Limbaugh saying in September that he occasionally got "confused" between Obama and Osama bin Laden. Others repeatedly use the senator's middle name, Hussein.

The rumors about Obama have been echoed on Internet message boards and chain e-mails.

Bryan Keelin of Charleston, S.C., who works with an organization of churches there, posted on an Internet board his suspicion that Obama is a Muslim. "I assume his father instructed him on the ways of being a Muslim," said Keelin, who described himself in an interview as a conservative Republican who will vote for former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.

"The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the U.S. from the inside out," says one of the e-mails that was posted recently on a blog at BarackObama.com, the campaign's Web site, by an Obama supporter who warned of an attempt to "Swift Boat" the candidate. "What better way to start than at the highest level, through the President of the United States, one of their own!"

... ..

Foes Use Obama's Muslim Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him

Mr. Obama has to have a signed letter attesting to his Christian faith for assuage Iowa voters? Excuse me, but I'd tell them to go pound sand and so should Obama's team. The Post using this is disgusting. It's even worse than the flag pin hit.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Scandal-Plagued President of Evangelical University: "God Forced My Resignation"
Posted by Daniel DiRito, The All Spin Zone on November 29, 2007 at 1:00 PM.

This post, written by Daniel DiRito, originally appeared on The All Spin Zone

Apparently god is one savvy attorney as well as an omniscient and all knowing creator. Given sufficient time to review the case against Roberts, god apparently decided Roberts lacked a plausible defense and forced him to resign.

I just love watching "fundies" use god to explain and justify their every action...whether it be good or bad. For those who haven't heard,Richard Roberts, the son of Oral Roberts, now reports that he resigned his position as President of Oral Roberts University because god told him he must (on Thanksgiving Day no less).

Apparently god wasn't speaking loud enough or Roberts was ignoring him while he and his family were milking the University to enable their lavish life of excess...or perhaps god was simply too busy at the time to tell him to stop. And by all means we can't have expected Roberts to do the right thing of his own accord. How would a man of god know the difference between right and wrong without proper consultation from the heavenly father? It just goes to show that heaven is understaffed and it's leading to all sorts of improprieties and numerous lost souls here on earth.

Richard Roberts told students at Oral Roberts University Wednesday that he did not want to resign as president of the scandal-plagued evangelical school, but he did so because God insisted.

Roberts told students in the university's chapel that God told him on Thanksgiving that he should resign the next day.

Roberts said he resisted the idea, and that "every ounce of my flesh said 'no,'" but he prayed over the decision with his wife, Lindsay Roberts, and his father, Oral Roberts, and decided to step down.

Roberts has previously said that God told him to deny the allegations. The week the lawsuit was filed, Richard Roberts said that God told: "We live in a litigious society. Anyone can get mad and file a lawsuit against another person whether they have a legitimate case or not. This lawsuit ... is about intimidation, blackmail and extortion."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Iraqi Lawmakers Walk Out of Parliament to Protest "Humiliating" US Treatment
Posted by GottaLaff , Brave New Films on November 29, 2007 at 12:00 PM.

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

Iraqi lawmakers are the latest to protest US troops. See how easy it is to win hearts and minds?

Dozens of Iraqi lawmakers walked out of parliament Wednesday to protest what they view as overly aggressive and humiliating treatment by U.S. soldiers as representatives enter Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone, where the legislature is located.

What next, protesting Blackwater? Perish the thought.

Feryad Rawandozi, a high-ranking official with the Kurdish parliamentary bloc [said] U.S. soldiers "are very arrogant and impolite when they talk to us, especially with those who don't speak English."

All the security apparently doesn't help them to feel very secure:

Legislators, like everyone else entering the Green Zone, must submit to a gauntlet of physical searches, and allow their vehicles to be inspected by bomb-sniffing dogs. They must line up with the throngs of other residents and employees seeking to enter the area, which is also headquarters to U.S. operations in Iraq. The process can take up to two hours.

"This is unacceptable," Rawandozi said.

They say it's understandable to go through security checks. The two-hour wait and their demeaning treatment isn't so understandable.

Army Maj. Anton Alston, a spokesman for Multi-National Force-Iraq, acknowledged that U.S. soldiers guarding checkpoints might be misconstrued as hostile, but said the troops were simply trying to ensure security. [...]

"If we come off as aggressive, it might be a cultural thing," Alston added.

::slaps head:: Of course. It's that cultural thing. Verbal abuse and humiliation is just something we American invaders do because we're, well, American.

So the culturally indignant lawmakers vented.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Trent Lott's Brother-In-Law, Nephew, Indicted On Federal Bribery Charges
Posted by Max Follmer, Huffington Post on November 29, 2007 at 6:30 AM.

This post, written by Max Follmer, originally appeared on The Huffington Post

Prominent Mississippi trial attorney Richard "Dickie" Scruggs, the brother-in-law of outgoing GOP Sen. Trent Lott, was indicted by a federal grand jury Wednesday on charges that he and four other men tried to bribe a Mississippi state court judge.

According to the 13-page indictment, Scruggs and three other attorneys -- including Lott's nephew Zach -- attempted to bribe Mississippi Third Circuit Court Judge Henry L. Lackey with at least $40,000 in cash.

Lackey was assigned to hear a lawsuit in which Scruggs' firm was named as a defendant in a dispute involving $26.5 million in attorneys' fees stemming from a court settlement with State Farm Insurance over Hurricane Katrina claims.

The indictment alleges that the bribe was intended to resolve the case in Scruggs' and his firm's favor. Also charged was Sidney A. Backstrom, an attorney at Scruggs' firm; Timothy R. Balducci, a New Albany, Miss., lawyer; and former State Auditor Steven A. Patterson, an employee of Balducci's law firm.

Neither Scruggs nor an attorney for the firm, Joey Langston, returned telephone messages seeking comment. Langston does not work at The Scruggs Law Firm.

Lott's office did not respond to a request for comment. Lott is not named in the indictment, and has not been accused of any wrongdoing.

Lott, the second-highest ranking Republican in the Senate, announced Monday he was resigning his seat after 35 years on Capitol Hill. Lott's decision to leave Congress came one year after he won re-election to his fourth term.

Scruggs, long a power player in Mississippi legal circles, rose to prominence after securing huge verdicts for plaintiffs in asbestos litigation, and from his role in brokering a multibillion dollar settlement with tobacco companies in the 1990s.

He later represented hundreds of Gulf Coast homeowners -- including Lott -- whose claims were denied by insurance companies in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Lott's home in Pascagoula was destroyed by the storm.

The case at the center of the bribery allegations involves a fee dispute between Scruggs' firm and an attorney, John Jones, who did work on behalf of Katrina plaintiffs.

According to the indictment, the five defendants met at Scruggs' Oxford, Miss. office in mid-March to discuss the scheme. On March 28, Balducci allegedly traveled to Calhoun County, Miss. to meet with the judge in order to make "an overture" to resolve the lawsuit "favorably to the defendant Richard 'Dickie' Scruggs and The Scruggs Law Firm."

The indictment says that Lackey immediately reported the bribery scheme to the FBI, and began cooperating with federal authorities.

In May, Balducci allegedly had a conversation with Lackey where he said "for over the last five or six years there, there are bodies buried that, that you know, that [Scruggs] and I know where...where are, and, and, my, my trust is his, mine in him and his i mine."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Romney Refuses To Call Waterboarding Torture, Says He’ll Consult With Blackwater’s Cofer Black
Posted by Amanda Terkel, Think Progress on November 29, 2007 at 5:44 AM.

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

During last night's CNN/YouTube debate, a YouTube questioner asked the candidates why they refuse to condemn waterboarding as torture. Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney said that before making such a determination, he would need to get "counsel on a matter of this nature" from "a lot" of people. One of the people with whom Romney said he would specifically like to speak is Blackwater vice chairman Cofer Black:

I am not. I'm not going to specify the specific means of what is and what is not torture so that the people that we capture will know what things we're able to do and what things we're not able to do. And I get that advice from Cofer Black, who is a person who was responsible for counterterrorism in the CIA for some 35 years.

Black is Romney's Senior Adviser for counterterrorism and national security issues. He has described Black as a man with a "long and impressive career dedicated to making America safer and more secure in the world," despite the fact that Blackwater has allegedly been involved in at least seven violent episodes this year that have left almost 30 Iraqi civilians dead.

Romney is also relying on a man for torture advice who in 2001, infamously ordered a CIA agent to "Capture Bin Laden, kill him and bring his head back in a box on dry ice," and once promised put the "heads" of terrorists in Afghanistan "on sticks":

"We're going to kill them," CIA counterterrorism official Cofer Black said, according to the book, which details the Bush administration's build-up to the Iraq war. "We're going to put their heads on sticks. When we're through with them they will have flies walking across their eyeballs."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Giuliani Billed City Agencies for Hamptons Trips During Extramarital Affair
Posted by Daniel DiRito, The All Spin Zone on November 29, 2007 at 5:09 AM.

This post, written by Daniel DiRito, originally appeared on The All Spin Zone

New York's semi-smarmy super hero, the drag queen wannabe who no doubt wishes he could campaign wearing Annie Oakley-esque outfits complete with a pair of precious plaid holsters sporting a set of sassy squirt guns, apparently left some rather large loose ends in his winsome wake...and I'm not talking about the backsides of his bevy of former Frauleins. It appears that Rudy made a number of trips to the Hamptons to shack up with Judy "Make Room For My Vuitton" Nathan on Gotham City's dime.

As New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons, according to previously undisclosed government records.

The documents, obtained by Politico under New York's Freedom of Information Law, show that the mayoral costs had nothing to do with the functions of the little-known city offices that defrayed his tabs, including agencies responsible for regulating loft apartments, aiding the disabled and providing lawyers for indigent defendants.

At the time, the mayor's office refused to explain the accounting to city auditors, citing "security."

The Hamptons visits resulted in hotel, gas and other costs for Giuliani's New York Police Department security detail.

Now one can speculate what America's mayor meant by "security" when deflecting questions about these rather suspect expenditures...perhaps his psyche was subconsciously pondering the problems he might encounter if the woman holed up in Gracie Mansion had the goods on her cousin kissin' diddly dallying husband?

I could include additional excerpts but I'm having way more fun sharing my silly and snide snark. When I read about Rudy's amorphous accounting, I couldn't help but harken to the head-scratching that followed his loquacious telephone interludes with wifey number three while standing at the podium to deliver a speech. Perhaps the current Mrs. Giuliani wants to keep account of her hubby...after all, she knows all too well about her hubby's clandestine capabilities.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

GOP YouTube Debate: Who Loves Torture and Hate Immigrants the Most?
Posted by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report on November 29, 2007 at 5:05 AM.

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

It’s almost impossible to pick a winner from last night Republican presidential candidate debate in St. Petersburg, Fla., except maybe the entire Democratic field — for more than two hours, the GOP hopefuls made it abundantly clear that none of them should be the president.

With the campaign clearly in “crunch time,” and the Iowa caucuses about a month away, the candidates were bound to start picking some fights. Overall, there were fewer elbows thrown than I expected, but there were still plenty of noteworthy exchanges. The Romney-Giuliani fight over immigration kicked things off. After Romney noted Giuliani’s lax immigration policies, Giuliani hit Romney for having illegal immigrants work at his house. It led to this:

“Are you suggesting, Mr. Mayor — because I — I think it’s really kind of offensive, actually, to suggest — to say look, you know what, if — if you’re a homeowner and you hire a company to come provide a service at your home — paint the home, put on the roof — if you hear someone that’s working out there — not that you’ve employed, but that the company has — if you hear someone with a funny accent, you as a homeowner are supposed to go out there and say, I want to see your papers? Is that what you’re suggesting?”

Giuliani didn’t have a compelling response. Point to Romney. (Fred Thompson got in a related dig: “I am a little surprised the mayor says, you know, everybody’s responsible for everybody that they hire…. I think we’ve all had people, probably, that we have hired that in retrospect probably it was a bad decision.” He was obviously referring to Kerik, but it may have been a little too subtle.)

The even more striking exchange came between McCain and Paul. McCain argued:

“I just want to also say that Congressman Paul, I’ve heard him now in many debates talking about bringing our troops home and about the war in Iraq and how it’s failed.

“And I want to tell you that that kind of isolationism, sir, is what caused World War II. We allowed … Hitler to come to power with that kind of attitude of isolationism and appeasement.”

Generally, McCain tries to come across in these debates as the grown-up, elder statesman of the crowd. This rant about Hitler made him sound like a crazy person.

And perhaps the most substantive exchange came between Huckabee and Romney on education benefits for the children of illegal immigrants. After Huckabee defended his relatively progressive approach in Arkansas, Romney responded:

“Well, you know, I like Mike, and I heard what he just said. But he basically said that he fought for giving scholarships to illegal aliens. And he had a great reason for doing so. It reminds me of what it’s like talking to liberals in Massachusetts. All right? They have great reasons for taking taxpayer money and using it for things they think are the right thing to do.

“Mike, that’s not your money. That’s the taxpayers’ money. (Cheers, applause.) And the right thing here is to say to people that are here legally as citizens or legal aliens, we’re going to help you. But if you’re here illegally, you ought to be able to return home or get in line with everybody else, but illegals are — are not going to get taxpayer-funded breaks that are better than our own citizens’.”

It sounded like the kind of thing that might resonate with a conservative Republican audience.

I’m going to do separate posts on a couple of the questions, most notably the part about gays in the military, but here are some other items from my notes:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Republican Jews' poll 'a hoax'
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2006 at 11:26 AM.

I'm pretty sure there's some important symbolism in the fact that a rigged poll for the Jewish Republicans was done by a gay man (Arthur J. Finkelstein), even if I can't figure out what it is.

In an effort to carry water for its party, the Republican Jewish Coalition conducted a post-election poll of Jews showing that a hulking 26.4% of Jews voted Republican. Wow. And that'd actually be an improvement.

That number stands in contrast to national polls showing Jewish support for Democrats up around 90% in the midterms.

So what accounts for the significant difference? Jennifer Siegel writes: "[The poll] bypassed Jews who never attend synagogue or do not associate with a major movement." Or: half of America's Jewish population.

The RJC like Joe Lieberman and a host of other right wing Jews, it should be noted, doesn't have problems breaking bread with anti-semites, so long as they support the most paranoid and militaristic elements in Israel.

Black-hooded CIA paramilitaries tried to "disappear" German national
Posted by Joshua Holland on November 29, 2006 at 9:57 AM.

I often give the commercial media a hard time, but it's important -- if we want a better media -- to give them a bit of praise when they earn it. So let me offer kudos to the Washington Post's Dana Priest for not mincing words in this lede:

Khaled al-Masri was supposed to have been disappeared by black-hooded CIA paramilitaries in the dead of night. One minute he was riding a bus in Macedonia, the next -- poof -- gone. Grabbed by Macedonian agents, handed off to junior CIA operatives in Skopje and then secretly flown to a prison in Afghanistan that didn't officially exist, to be interrogated with rough measures that weren't officially on the books. And then never to be heard from again -- one fewer terrorist in the post-9/11 world.

Masri is now trying to use the courts to get a modicum of justice for that treatment -- a radical idea, apparently, in the aftermath of 9/11:

…Masri is waiting to see if the judges will allow the CIA to disappear him again.

This time, it's not the physical, flesh-and-blood, burly, ponytailed German citizen with six kids whom the U.S. government wants to make vanish from the face of the Earth. It's his legal case, his very right to have his argument heard in open court, that the CIA is seeking to have disappeared. They argue, citing the state-secrets privilege, that to proceed with the case would damage national security and that this damage outweighs any legal rights Masri may have.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Colbert Tivos Bush/Cheney lies [VIDEO]
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2006 at 9:02 AM.

Colbert shoots fish in a barrel in this Tivo skit. Cheney lied... the Titanic sank, the sun set in the West...

This is a good time to read up on the latest study showing that Bush supporters are more likely to be mentally ill...

Classified memo on Iraqi PM:
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2006 at 8:53 AM.

The NY Times reports on another boo-boo that is the fiasco of Iraq:

A classified memorandum by President Bush’s national security adviser expressed serious doubts about whether Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki had the capacity to control the sectarian violence in Iraq and recommended that the United States take new steps to strengthen the Iraqi leader’s position.

The Times opts for "sectarian violence" over "civil war" it should be noted, despite NBC's change of heart and Barry Lando's excellent piece in today's LA Times.

That aside, here's the two things to keep in mind while reading the Times article on the subject: 1. Most leaks are intentional and this one tells the American people that the Bush admin is coming down hard on its puppets and 2. This is America's government to play with. And therein lies the problem...

There's no easy answer: the government is weak and can't end the violence, the U.S. needs to come in and help, the U.S. coming in and helping has a limit because the government is then tainted by Occupation association, the government remains unable to end the Civil War...

New Dem to Bush: None of your beeswax
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2006 at 8:11 AM.

One of the Senate's newest members took steps to avoid Bush recently, but the wily prez is apparently smarter than he's given credit for being:

At a recent White House reception for freshman members of Congress, Virginia's newest senator tried to avoid President Bush. Democrat James Webb declined to stand in a presidential receiving line or to have his picture taken with the man he had often criticized on the stump this fall. But it wasn't long before Bush found him.

"How's your boy?" Bush asked, referring to Webb's son, a Marine serving in Iraq.

"I'd like to get them out of Iraq, Mr. President," Webb responded, echoing a campaign theme.

"That's not what I asked you," Bush said. "How's your boy?"

"That's between me and my boy, Mr. President," Webb said coldly, ending the conversation on the State Floor of the East Wing of the White House.

Apparently, this episode made him want to slug the commander-in-chief.

Before you break out the bubbly and start high-fiving, it's good to remember that this brand of maverick-dom goes both ways. Webb, first of all, is no liberal. Far from it.

While many were dissing his opponent George Allen's legislative swan song, legalizing the possession of concealed weapons in national parks, they'd have been smart to note that Webb supports the bill as well.

According to Bloomberg: "He's pro-gun ownership, and he takes a harder line on illegal immigration than many Senate Republicans."

But he is against the war, and having one senator with a son serving in the military can't be a bad thing...

Right-wingers wrong about AP story - where are the retractions?
Posted by Bob Geiger on November 29, 2006 at 8:02 AM.

When I think of every time our right-wing counterparts in the political blog world humiliate themselves, I'm reminded of former NBA star Charles Barkley who, upon hearing that Tonya Harding was calling herself "the Charles Barkley of figure skating," said "I was going to sue her for defamation of character, but then I realized I have no character."

And here we have so many conservative bloggers, after days of castigating the Associated Press for running what the wingnuts claimed was a fictitious story about six Sunnis being burned alive in sectarian violence in Iraq on Friday, having to once again face what a bunch of putzes they really are.

The AP reported last night on eyewitnesses to the immolations, that occurred when Sunni worshippers were leaving a Mosque on Friday and have also substantiated the identity of Iraqi police Capt. Jamil Hussein, who the AP cited as the primary source for its story that the Sunnis were killed while the Iraqi military stood by and did nothing.

Said the most recent AP story:

"Seeking further information about Friday's attack, an AP reporter contacted Hussein for a third time about the incident to confirm there was no error. The captain has been a regular source of police information for two years and had been visited by the AP reporter in his office at the police station on several occasions. The captain, who gave his full name as Jamil Gholaiem Hussein, said six people were indeed set on fire."

You can read the rest of the AP story, which includes the eyewitness accounts, here.

But over the last few days -- ever since a Naval Public Affairs officer demanded in writing that the AP publish a retraction for the article, which the military claimed was false -- our little Bloggers for Bush have been more excited about all of this than Mark Foley at a Boy Scout Jamboree.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Swiftboating wikipedia
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2005 at 1:18 PM.

Much as it may piss off some, this is actually a stroke of genius. In an effort to actually illustrate his or her point, someone posted a laughably stupid and misleading definition for "Swiftboating" in Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia open to editing by all readers.

They write (Raw Story has the screen shot here):

"Swiftboating is American political jargon for truthful and accurate debunking of John Kerry's exaggerated military experience in Vietnam. The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth organization's ads against Democratic presidential candidate Senator John F. Kerry in the 2004 election campaign revealed the candidate to be untruthful in his representation of his military record."

Raw Story explains: "The Swift Boats were funded by the biggest Republican campaign donor in Texas and pushed what turned out to be an unfounded claim that Kerry lied to get one of his two decorations for bravery and two of his three purple hearts."

Now, since it's clear that nobody would possibly write something so idiotic and false in Wikipedia, it goes without saying that it was simply a gag intended to illustrate what a Swiftboating would look like. Right? (RawStory)


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

Brownie contest
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2005 at 12:36 PM.

In a recent post on Michael "Heckuva job" Brown's new job as a disaster consultant, heckuva Peek reader "rollo" saw the perfect opportunity for a contest.

Other commenters have followed suit while your Peek keeper, having only recently joined the fun, wants make it official. So break out the creativity stick and whack yourself a few times before setting down your entries.

Enter as many times as you like and help vote on the winner (All [appropriate] entries will be published and should be left in comments below OR sent to: peek@alternet.org no later than Sunday, December 4)

The best Michael Brown disaster consulting motto will win a free Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price DVD. Everyone else will be encouraged to start consulting firms.

Here's what we've got so far:

rollo:

• "We'll do a heck of a job for you!"
• "Disasters'R'US"
• "You've tried all the rest, now try the worst"
• "You won't drown with Brown!"

awakeallready:

• "What can Brown screw for you?"

liberalibrarian

• Brownose sewage control. (accronym BS co)

(Peek)

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

Time: White House is lying
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2005 at 10:58 AM.

On Anderson Cooper 360, Time's man in Baghdad Michael Ware put on a feisty performance.

To Cooper's question about reports that the Iraqi fighting forces are improving, Ware responded:

"Whoever from the White House is saying that is one of two things. Clearly, they have never been in Iraq. And, clearly, they have never been in a firefight with an Iraqi unit."

"Secondly, they're clearly lying, whether they know it or not. I mean, a very senior U.S. military intelligence officer, one of the most high-ranking in the country, just in the last few days, said to me, these Iraqi forces will never be in a position to be able to crush this insurgency."

"if the Iraqi security forces are the exit strategy, then get ready to be here for a long time."

True enough in the real world (and certainly Joe Lieberman is doing his darndest to provide cover for the administration with his flawless recitation of their talking points).

But the counter-argument proposed for several months now is that one way to end this war (and surely that's the short term goal) is for the administration to declare victory and leave.

It's a dicey prospect of course. There's no guarantee that once there's an "upswing" (manufactured or not), and the attendant boost in the polls, that the administration will then leave.

Whatever you believe, it's a breath of fresh air for such candid discussion to take place on TV. Eli describes Ware's demeanor:

"Amazingly, the transcript doesn't even tell the whole story. You had to listen to Ware to hear the emphasis he placed on certain words. If you've ever heard Steve Irwin (the "Crocodile Hunter"), you have heard Ware's twin brother, not just in accent, but in the enthusiasm with which he speaks."

(LeftI)


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

Bruce Willis' unhappy ending
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2005 at 9:44 AM.

Michael Berubé peers deep into the crystal ball and spies an upcoming issue of Variety magazine from 2008, as balding action hero Bruce Willis struggles to find the perfect ending to the Iraq war epic he plans to make.

Berubé writes:

"He’ll spend a month filming the 'democracy' ending, but no one knows what that’s supposed to look like, and then he decides it’s 'too boring anyway.' So we’ll spend another month on the 'fighting terrorism' ending, where we wipe out an entire city, then another month on the 'civil war' ending... And then he’ll just spend days alone in his trailer, blasting this turgid crap by The Doors and painting his body from head to toe."

"Industry analysts note that the cost of Mission Accomplished now exceeds $200 billion... "It’s way beyond what happened with Coppola," said one of the film’s producers, "not that there are any parallels with Vietnam or anything."

(Michael Berubé)


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

Woodward, 'Dumb Blonde' of American journalism
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2005 at 7:39 AM.

While the administration was busy stoking a PR machine pushing an unnecessary war on a pack of lies, Bob Woodward had "unparalleled access" to the administration's major players as he wrote two books, Plan of Attack and Bush at War.

Arianna Huffington asks:

"So how come Woodward, supposedly the preeminent investigative reporter of our time, missed the biggest story of our time -- a story that was taking place right under his nose?"

Nope, it's not a rhetorical question:

"Some would say it's because he's carrying water for the Bushies. I disagree. I think it's because he's the dumb blonde of American journalism, so awed by his proximity to power that he buys whatever he's being sold."

Arianna demonstrates that Woodward's failure to connect dots or veer outside the point of view put forward by the administration is nearly comical in its ignorance of the greater truths available in the public record.

For example, "Woodward paints [the president] as a scrupulous, meticulous, and honest leader who 'told Tenet several times, Make sure no one stretches to make our case.'"

Except, by the time the scene occurs where Bush supposedly made this fine, presidential statement, it was December of 2002 and the public record was full of stretches that "would put Mr. Fantastic to shame." There's more and you should read it [HERE]. (HuffPost)


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

The worst draft of history
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 29, 2005 at 7:05 AM.

Chris Wallace's dad, 60 Minutes vet Mike Wallace, must be shrinking with shame at his son's tinker toy journalism.

After all, Wallace pére has some rather hefty (as far as TV goes at least) investigative pieces under his belt. He challenges the powerful. Chris, in an apparent effort to forge his own path has chosen to distinguish himself by becoming a proxy for the administration, making their arguments for them. To wit (or: twit, perhaps):

Judd Legum writes: "In a stunning display of historical revisionism, Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace argued this morning that President Bush never tried to link al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein..."

He does it by zeroing in on one Bush quote that could, if someone really really really, close your eyes tight and think of Kansas, wanted to, be read as ambiguous.

And then you'd have to completely ignore (or worse, maybe, be ignorant of) statements like this (or all these):

"Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. And an al Qaeda operative was sent to Iraq several times in the late 1990s for help in acquiring poisons and gases."

If Chris doesn't end up working for the administration, word is he's a shoo-in at Blogs for Bush. (ThinkProgress)


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