PEEK

Buzz, perspectives, insight and news from AlterNet

Focus on the Family's Insurance Plan Covers Abortion (And Other Ironies of The Latest Assault on Choice)
Posted by Eyal Press, TheNation.com on November 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM.

As is now widely known, added to the health care reform bill just passed by the House of Representatives was a provision barring access to abortion called the Stupak-Pitts Amendment. Passed with the support of sixty-four Democrats, Stupak-Pitts doesn't merely prohibit coverage of abortion in a public option. It also forbids women who receive a federal subsidy from purchasing any health insurance plan that covers the procedure, even if the abortion is paid out of a separate pool of private premium dollars (for all the background and details, see my colleague Emily Douglas' post).

If this highly regressive amendment makes its way into the legislation that Barack Obama eventually signs, millions of less affluent women who obtain access to affordable health insurance will thus join the ranks of low-income women on Medicaid, most of whom live in states that don't cover abortion procedures. The two-tiered system that dictates who in America has "choice" (more privileged women do, less affluent women do not) will be further entrenched.

But if the social consequences of Stupak-Pitts are clear, the logic is not. Supporters of the provision evidently want to assure taxpayers that they will not be forced to subsidize abortion in any way. But if they are serious about this, why haven't they drawn up an amendment abolishing tax breaks for employer-sponsored health insurance? As Jonathan Cohn has pointed out, this is by far the largest subsidy in health care policy today. (It is also a regressive subsidy, but that's another story.) If the employer-sponsored insurance that a worker gets happens to cover abortion – which, in roughly half the cases, it does – than that taxpayer already subsidizes abortion.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Conservatives Register Tea Party as Official Third Party In Florida
Posted by Matt Corley, Think Progress on November 9, 2009 at 2:00 PM.

After hard-line conservatives and tea party activists forced moderate Republican Dede Scozzafava to drop out of the race in New York's 23rd congressional district, they announced that Florida Gov. Charlie Crist would likely be their next target in the GOP civil war. Politico's Ben Smith reports that some Florida Republicans recently registered an official "Tea Party" to challenge both Republicans and Democrats:

"The current system has become mired in the sludge of special interest money that seeks to control the leadership of both parties. It's time for real change," says Orlando lawyer Frederic O'Neal, the new party’s chairman, who couldn't be reached immediately by phone, in a press release.

A spokeswoman for the Florida Secretary of State, Jennifer Davis, said the party had registered in August.

O'Neal compared his party's role to that of the Conservative Party in New York's 23rd District. Florida, however, lacks the "fusion" rules that has allowed third parties in New York to amass influence by offering their ballot line to acceptable major-party candidates.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Will the Stupak Amendment Force Women Who've Miscarried to Lose Insurance Coverage?
Posted by Robin Marty, RH Reality Check on November 9, 2009 at 1:00 PM.

This weekend, a group of male pro-life Democrats gambled with women's health, and women lost. By broadly writing in that insurers can chose whether or not to cover "abortion services," pro-life amendments don't just affect their intended victims -- women seeking a way out of an unwanted or medically harmful pregnancy. They also affect another group of victims -- women whose pregnancies have already ended but have not yet miscarried.

I'm one of those women, and this past Halloween I had what the hospital officially termed an "abortion."

Hospitals and doctors in general do not have terminology to classify a difference between the termination of a live pregnancy and one in which the fetus has already died. To them, a D&C is a D&C, regardless of the state of the "conception materials" removed.  Regardless of how many times I made sure to mention to the staff, either for the sake of my sanity or to spare me some sort of imagined shame, that I was ridding myself of my "dead fetus," to them, it was all the same.

I had learned the day before that the baby I thought was nearly 12 weeks old had no heartbeat, and had actually died at 8 weeks. I was given three options: wait for a miscarriage to occur on its own, something I was told my body had no intention of doing anytime soon, take medication that would expel the fetus, passing it in my own home (classified a "chemical abortion") or come in for a D&C to remove the fetal materials. 

As much as I struggled with the sudden realization that the pregnancy was over, I also found myself trying to decide financially what I was willing to do. A chemical abortion would cost $40, but I would be alone, bleeding, and it could still be incomplete and I would require a D&C anyway, since my pregnancy was so advanced. Surgery would be quick, total, and under controlled circumstances, but would likely be our full maxed insurance amount of $1500.  And of course, there was the free option of waiting for my body to finally realize I wasn't pregnant, but after 4 weeks the risk of infection was steadily climbing, increasing my chances of future miscarriage, infertility, or even death. With a toddler at home, and still nursing hopes for extending our family some day, this was not an option.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Fred Phelps' Church Protesting Outside Sasha and Malia Obama's School
Posted by Tana Ganeva, AlterNet on November 9, 2009 at 11:00 AM.

Members of Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist Church, who think 9/11 was punishment for America's tolerance of homosexuality and express their views on that issue by protesting the funerals of dead soldiers, were seen demonstrating outside of the school attended by the Obama girls. TPM reports: 

Protesters were carrying signs with anti-gay, anti-abortion and anti-Obama slogans, slowing down traffic all along Wisconsin Avenue this morning.

[...]

"Quakers?! Are you frigging kidding me? You pretend to be all non-violent, and you allow the most bloody, deceitful, evil, murderous bastard and his shemale sidekick to place their satanic spawn within your four walls?" reads the posting for today's protest at Sidwell Friends, which is a Quaker school.

The appearance is part of a busy schedule that also includes demonstrating at the funerals of the 12 soldiers and civilian killed at Ft. Hood last week.

Blaming Muslims For the Fort Hood Massacre Will Only Create More Victims
Posted by Wajahat Ali, Comment Is Free on November 9, 2009 at 10:00 AM.

After an American soldier's tragic outburst of violence at Fort Hood, Texas -- the army's largest U.S. post, with some 40,000 troops -- dominates the headlines, a fear-mongering hysteria concerning his supposed religious motivations is taking priority over questions regarding his mental health.

Although the facts, and clues about motive, are still being uncovered, we know that the alleged shooter, 39-year-old Major Nidal Malik Hasan, is an American-born medical doctor and licensed psychiatrist, who also happens to be a Muslim born to Palestinian immigrant parents.

When Hasan's Arabic name was revealed as the alleged shooter, the blogosphere and message boards lit up with the predictable assortment of anonymous bigoted bile vilifying Islam and questioning the loyalty of American Muslims.

Thankfully, most mainstream voices, such as Republican senator John Cornyn of Texas, urged caution and moderation, stating: "It is imperative that we take the time to gather all the facts, as it would be irresponsible to be the source of rumours or inaccurate information regarding such a horrific event."

But some, such as Republican U.S. representative Michael McCaul of Austin, Texas, alarmingly responded with inflammatory histrionics: "Whether it was domestic or foreign, clearly when a U.S. military base is attacked in this fashion, that is an act of terror in my book."

If it is discovered that this lethal rampage was motivated by an inexcusable and misplaced sense of religiosity, it would provide ammunition to those extreme rightwing, minority voices in America who are convinced their Muslim neighbours are stealth jihadists ready to commit suicide bombings at a moment's notice. These proponents of modern day McCarthyism find their allies in members of the "Birther movement," who remain convinced President Obama is not an American citizen. Their esteemed colleagues include those who pontificate about Obama being a closet Muslim and an agent of socialism.

Reports of an image taken hours before the killings showing Hasan in a prayer cap seem to insinuate that a common article of clothing worn by many Muslims before they are about to pray somehow conclusively proves an religious intent behind the violence. A blog note attributed (though this is unconfirmed) to Hasan -- comparing terrorist suicide bombings to suicidal acts during war to protect fellow soldiers and inflict damage upon the enemy, such as Japanese kamikaze missions -- is being pointed to on the net as his potential justification for the alleged shootings.

It should comfort most Americans that mainstream Muslim American organizations, which often espouse a sense of victimhood and unnecessary rationalisations, unequivocally denounced Hasan's alleged actions as "heinous" and incompatible with Islam. The Council of American Islamic Relations issued a statement saying: "No political or religious ideology could ever justify or excuse such wanton and indiscriminate violence."

Ultimately, this use -- or misuse -- of fear and rumor over Hasan's Islamic faith should be moot in light of the record of the thousands of Muslim American soldiers who have served and made sacrifice – such as Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, awarded the prestigious Purple Heart and Bronze Star and praised by Colin Powell, who now rests in Arlington cemetery after giving his life to protect and serve his country in Iraq. There are currently 20,000 Muslims serving with honor in the U.S. military, according to the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council. If Hasan's faith is ultimately proven to be the misguided inspiration for his violence, then the brave and patriotic service of thousands of Muslim American soldiers renders him an isolated and aberrant exception.

Sadly, although the violent outburst against fellow soldiers was the most deadly in U.S. history, it was not the first of its kind. In May this year, five soldiers were shot dead at Camp Liberty in Baghdad by Sergeant John Russell. In February 2008, an Air Force sergeant diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) upon returning from Iraq fatally shot his son and daughter after a domestic argument with his ex-wife. Religion was not the common link between these soldiers; it was mental instability. Even if such individuals purported to be religious, their wanton acts of barbarism reflect rather their tenuous grasp on sanity.

A cousin of Hasan, interviewed by reporters, has suggested an alternative motivation, not necessarily influenced by religious conviction. "He was mortified by the idea of having to deploy," said Nader Hasan. "He had people telling him on a daily basis the horrors they saw over there [in Iraq and Afghanistan]."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

The Lesson in the Health-Care Vote
Posted by Digby, Hullabaloo on November 9, 2009 at 9:00 AM.

I've received a couple of comments and emails wondering why I haven't weighed in on the health care vote. I did, it was just done before the vote was taken. Sadly, my predictions were correct.

One of the things that those of us who follow politics from afar tend to see that those who are involved in the minutia often understandably miss, is the over-arching themes that guide the politicians and the villagers. I don't suppose that they are necessarily aware of it, although some of the influential strategists may be, but it's there nonetheless.

I knew that after all the sturm and drang over the past few months over the public option, the number one liberal priority in the health care debate, there would be a price for its success. The ruling elite could never allow an unambiguous liberal victory. It would endanger their narrative that says fealty to business, religion, military and other authoritarian structures is democratically inspired. They have to maintain the fiction that the people prefer to be subjects. If politicians aren't convinced that there will be a price for being liberals, they might get the idea that they can actually govern liberally.

This is why changing the media narratives and forcing Democrats to use liberal rhetoric and reject right wing framing is as important to the process as anything else. By perpetuating this default, conservative ideology, even as they are excoriated for being liberals (see: Obama campaign) they permanently tilt the playing field to the right, even in a liberal era or one in which the only pragmatic answers to difficult problems are liberal.

This problem isn't just a matter of good negotiating or putting pressure on politicians. Yes, these things are important. But in my opinion, unless we begin to change how this country defines itself, and how it projects its values, liberal policies are going to be impossible to implement to the extent that's necessary. Everything in our system is designed to prevent it.

Universal health care is something any decent, wealthy society shouldn't even have to think twice about. It's a global embarrassment that the United States, the chest thumping superpower, is even having this debate at this late date. It's equally embarrassing that we have put together a Frankenstein of a system because our democratic government is in league with wealthy interests which are exploiting its people. It's hard to believe that anyone would call that system liberal, much less socialist, but as you can see every day on Fox News, it's set off a tantrum among a vocal minority that would hardly be less hysterical if aliens from a foreign planet landed in Washington. (And that hysteria is also a tool of the permanent establishment, funded by big money, and used as a way of keeping the debate focused on the right, even if it's taking on an absurdist quality.)

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Neo-Nazis Protest Immigration in Phoenix, Get Out-shouted by Reasonable People Who Came to Protest Them
Posted by Byard Duncan, AlterNet on November 9, 2009 at 8:00 AM.

Arizona neo-Nazis got quite a surprise when they showed up in Phoenix Saturday to demonstrate against illegal immigration: they were outnumbered by people who came to demonstrate against them. According to the Arizona Free Republic, a sizable (and ethnically diverse) crowd made sure the neo-Nazis knew they weren’t welcome in the capitol.

Among the counter-protesters was Andy Hernandez, who said his intention was to peacefully disrupt a totalitarian ideology.

"We represent America," he said. "We didn't shut them down, but we gave them a counter protest. We just oppose what Nazi represents."

Phoenix police kept the two groups from exchanging anything more than insults, and the neo-Nazis disbanded after about an hour.

Many had disguised their faces and carried American flags. The goal for NSM's protest, according to one of the group's leaders, was to stand "in defense of America."

Apparently, they hadn't expected America to defend itself.

Who Are the Dems Who Voted Against Health-Care Reform?
Posted by Adele Stan, AlterNet on November 9, 2009 at 7:01 AM.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi saw her historic health-care reform legislation pass the House of Representatives this weekend, eking out victory with a two-vote margin. But 39 Democrats voted against the legislation, despite months of wrangling to appease the concerns of members from more conservative districts.

Mike Ross, leader of the House Blue Dog Coalition, lobbed a "no" vote, after having held up legislation in committee before the summer recess. As a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Ross was able to marshal the seven Blue Dog members of his committee to sow the seeds of opposition to the bill. 

(As ProPublica reported, Ross not only enjoys the largess of mucho health sector dollars in the form of campaign contributions; he and his wife made a million-dollar killing in what appears to be a sweetheart deal with a large pharmacy chain. In Ross's congressional district, 22 percent of constituents report having no health insurance.)

Of the 39 naysayers, 31 hail from districts won by John McCain in the presidential race. Only one progressive vote against the legislation: Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, who continues to advocate for a single-payer health-care system.

Here are the 39, listed in alphabetical order. The New York Times has a nifty chart that ranks the members according to the margin of victory in their districts for either McCain or Obama in the 2008 presidential election. (Links go to their official Web sites, where you can leave them a message.)

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Pretentious Scold Bernard-Henri Lévy Decries "Lynching" of Roman Polanski
Posted by , Shakesville on November 9, 2009 at 7:00 AM.

[Trigger warnings apply, especially for the external links.]

I found this article by Bernard-Henri Lévy (the creator of the original "Free Polanski" petition) on a French site the other day, and I wanted to translate some of it for you. Turns out the HuffPo has already taken care of that. It sickens me that the man gets a platform for the bile he is spewing.

In this new pile of utter bullshit, Mr. Lévy once more tries to educate the simple-minded on why arresting Roman Polanski should be a moral no-no. He should know. After all, his own website describes him as "dedicated to all struggles for human dignity."

For those who can bear to do so, let's have a look at some of his arguments. The gist of his text is that the way everyone is behaving in the Polanski affair is just shameful. He keeps repeating this word, over and over again, like he invented the anaphore.

Since we're at this point, since time is passing and everyone seems to find nothing wrong with the situation, since Roman Polanski's supporters are losing faith and, sometimes, are even starting to doubt [yay!], since the pack of gossipers have even succeeded, it seems, in convincing the French minister of culture that he spoke too hastily, and under the influence of emotion, though he only did his duty, I want to say again, once more, why this affair is shameful. [...] It is shameful to see the regulars of the global Café du Commerce [the French equivalent of bar-room politics], whose Pavlovian anti-Americanism never leaves them at a loss for words when lambasting America on any and everything, are suddenly silent, become gentle as lambs and, when it comes to Polanski, just repeat: "Ah, that's America... better not mess with American law... dura lex sed lex (the law is harsh, but it is the law)..."

Those people (who are they, anyway?) couldn't possibly have come to the conclusion that he should be extradited, could they? No, they are suddenly, inexplicably intimidated by America, that's it!

It is shameful to see the intellectuals, whose role should be to calm the frenzy and cool popular anger [elitism anyone?], ratchet up, like Michel Onfray in Libération, the moment when "the worst are full of passionate intensity" (Yeats) and to indulge, in the name of abused childhood, in the most obnoxious amalgams [Onfray had said that if you think a pedophile sex tourist should be punished, you simply cannot say otherwise about Polanski].

Right. Because Maude help us if the intellectuals aren't there to think for the masses. Also: I feel passionately about this issue. Does that make me one of "the worst"? Ouch.

[W]hy don't we hear these intellectuals denounce with equal ardor, the limitless outrage that is the martyrdom of child soldiers in Africa, or child slaves in Asia, or the hundreds of millions of children dead of hunger, according to the estimates of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), for the last...32 years?

It is shameful to see Luc Besson rush to television, cloaked in ingenuous probity, inveigh against Polanski, like in the worst era of the McCarthyist witch hunts, and denounce his friend.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Students Who Exposed 30-Year-Old Wrongful Conviction Being Targeted By Chicago DA
Posted by Ari Berman, The Nation on November 9, 2009 at 6:00 AM.

There's a very important editorial in The Nation this week that I hope everyone will take the time to read. It's about the wrongful conviction of Anthony McKinney, who's been in prison for thirty-one years for a murder he did not commit. I'm posting the relevant portions below. 

On the evening of September 15, 1978, a white security guard named Donald Lundahl was murdered in a robbery gone awry in a racially fraught southern suburb of Chicago. Police fingered Anthony McKinney, an 18-year-old African-American with no criminal record, as the killer. The prosecution sought death by lethal injection; the judge sentenced McKinney to life in prison.

McKinney has long maintained his innocence. Based on newly uncovered evidence, there's strong reason to believe that he has spent thirty-one years in prison for a crime he did not commit.

...In 2000 the Land of Lincoln's Republican governor, George Ryan, issued a moratorium on the death penalty, and in 2003 he granted clemency to all death-row inmates. Ryan announced his decision at Northwestern University, citing the work of Northwestern journalism professor David Protess and his students at the Medill School of Journalism, who had uncovered evidence that helped free five wrongly convicted men from death row.

In 2003 Protess and his students began examining McKinney's case. Over three years of painstaking reporting, they unearthed startling new evidence: the prosecution's two main witnesses, 15 and 18 at the time of the trial, recanted their testimony during interviews with the students, claiming they were beaten by the police and intimidated into doctoring the facts; McKinney alleged that he was beaten with a pipe by a detective with a history of police brutality before signing a sham confession; TV logs proved that both witnesses were watching a boxing match at the time of the shooting and thus could not have seen the murder; an ex-gang member, Anthony Drake, confessed on tape to being at the murder scene, named two perpetrators and said McKinney was not involved; current and former residents of the neighborhood confirmed they heard Drake and two other suspects confess to Lundahl's murder.

In 2006 the Medill Innocence Project turned over its findings to the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern's law school. The center shared the evidence with the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, which began an internal investigation the following year. After more than a year of delay by the state, the center filed a postconviction petition on behalf of McKinney in October 2008, calling for a new trial or his immediate release. Following her election that November as Cook County State's Attorney, hardline career prosecutor Anita Alvarez fought the discovery of new evidence, and in May she issued a sweeping, unprecedented subpoena ordering Protess to hand over all material related to the McKinney case--including students' private memos and grades. Alvarez insultingly suggested that students might receive better grades for uncovering exculpatory evidence and claimed that Protess and his students were "investigators," not journalists, and thus not subject to the Illinois shield law...Apparently Alvarez has never heard of investigative journalism.

...The state's subpoena, wielded to stall justice and intimidate those who seek it, sets a terrible precedent. Lawyer Barry Scheck says that in his seventeen years at the Innocence Project in New York, he's never seen a subpoena of this nature directed at journalists or lawyers. Concludes Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law expert at George Washington University, "It creates an enormous chilling effect that's positively glacial."

Judge Cannon will soon rule on the validity of the state's subpoena. We urge her to throw it out and order a prompt evidentiary hearing. The kind of difficult reporting undertaken by the Medill Innocence Project should be celebrated, not undermined. It's shocking that the state would rather keep an innocent man behind bars than admit a mistake.

Nine groups of student journalists from Medill have interviewed McKinney in prison. By their accounts, he's a fragile and gentle man who's battled severe depression during three decades of wrongful incarceration. "If the state had gotten its way," Protess notes, "he would have been executed long ago."

I was one of those students. I took Protess's class in the spring of 2004 and worked on McKinney's case. The experience became the highlight of my time at Medill. My team and I were just twenty-one and twenty-two at the time, thrust into unfamiliar environs on the South Side of Chicago and elsewhere, trying to ferret out the facts of a murder that occurred before any of us were born. David's class, more than any other, taught me how to be a reporter, how to make make difficult decisions in a quick and decisive manner and how to always strive for justice and empathy in my work. (CNN anchor and McKinney alum Nicole Lapin has also posted a great piece about her own experiences.)

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Lieberman Pledges To Filibuster Healthcare Bill, Says Public Option Is "Unnecessary"
Posted by Amanda Terkel, Think Progress on November 9, 2009 at 5:00 AM.

On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace asked Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) about the House's historic passage of health care legislation last night. Lieberman said that as a "matter of conscience," he will join a Republican filibuster if a public option -- which has supposedly been put forward "by people who really want the government to take over all of health insurance" -- is also included in the bill that goes before the Senate:

LIEBERMAN: A public option plan is unnecessary. It has been put forward, I'm convinced, by people who really want the government to take over all of health insurance. They’ve got a right to do that; I think that would be wrong.

But worse than that, we have a problem even greater than the health insurance problems, and that is a debt -- $12 trillion today, projected to be $21 trillion in 10 years.

WALLACE: So at this point, I take it, you’re a "no" vote in the Senate?

LIEBERMAN: If the public option plan is in there, as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote because I believe debt can break America and send us into a recession that's worse than the one we’re fighting our way out of today. I don’t want to do that to our children and grandchildren.

Watch it:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

On Oppresion and White Christian Heterosexual Men (First in a Series of Nasty Posts)
Posted by , Echidne of the Snakes on November 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM.

There will be more nasty posts in this new series, which is based on the idea that I got of collecting all the things that keep irritating me like a pebble in my shoe, things which keep happening over and over without anyone correcting them much, things which are like frogs leaping out of the mouths of otherwise intelligent people (this being a reference to fairy tales).

I recently read a comment somewhere about how the oppressors are white Christian heterosexual men and how everyone else should join forces against them and that way we would win. This is terribly simplistic for several reasons:

First, we all have the ability to be oppressors, given the opportunity to be so. There was a time when the Irish attacked the shores of Britain to capture slaves for themselves. Then later the British enslaved the Irish and so on. History can tell us that the once oppressed can quickly become oppressors when the tables are turned.

This is why I find the victim-focused or the oppressor-focused approaches insufficient without a long and hard look at what makes people oppress other people in the first place. True, writing boring theory is -- boring -- but I see no way around that problem.

Second, being oppressed doesn't necessarily make a person good, kind and otherwise fascinating. Being oppressed can also make a person bitter and vindictive or most likely just down-trodden, passive and hopeless.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Obama Victory Boosts Gun Sales
Posted by Steven Rosenfeld on November 9, 2008 at 12:03 PM.

The victory by Barack Obama and Joe Biden has already caused an economic boomlet, though one of arguable merit.

According to Reuters, gun sales have taken off red states following last week's presidential election. The hottest item apparently include makes and models of guns that are seen as being likely targets of new gun control laws.

The article said:

Sales of rifles, pistols and ammo are surging in parts of the United States, as many gun owners fear President-elect Barack Obama's administration may seek to tighten ownership of certain weapons.

"The day after the election, I had many more calls than usual from people looking for semi-automatic rifles," said David Greenberg, the owner of the Second Amendment Family Gun Shop, in Bisbee, Arizona, who sold out of AR-15 rifles in recent days.

"There seems to be a fear they will be banned, and it's fairly likely," he added. "Obama and Biden are driven to eliminate firearms from the face of the country."

Another Election Victory: Anti-Muslim Rep Goes Down in VA
Posted by John Nichols, The Nation on November 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM.

The 2008 election is the gift that keeps on giving.

At the close of the week of Barack Obama's election to the presidency came the news that Virginia Congressman Virgil Goode -- one of the originators of the creepy politics that was used by the worst elements within the Republican Party to try and frighten voters about the Democratic nominee -- had been swept from office in the tide of Obama votes.

Goode, an otherwise obscure Republican, stirred a national controversy two years ago when he worried publicly about the precedent set by the election of a Muslim, Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison, to Congress. The Virginian declared in a letter to a constituent that "When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Qur'an in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don't wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Qur'an."

Goode made several television appearances during which he pushed this line, even after it was pointed out to him that Ellison was born in the United States and traced his family's roots in this country back at least to 1742.

Goode left no doubt about his disdain for Islam and for its practitioners, declaring that "I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped. The Ten Commandments and 'In God We Trust' are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Qur'an. My response was clear, 'As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Qur'an is not going to be on the wall of my office.'"

Predictably, Goode found a forum on Fox News, where he stood by his statements and said, without a hint of irony, that "I wish more people would take a stand and stand up for the principles on which this country was founded."

What made Goode's ignorance of those founding principles remarkable was the fact that he represents Virginia's Albemarle County, where Thomas Jefferson was born in 1743.

Ultimately, Keith Ellison countered Goode's attacks, with an assist from Jefferson.

The new Congressman from Minnesota declared his loyalty to the Constitution while clutching a copy of the Koran that was once owned by Jefferson. One of many Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist texts that the author of the Declaration of Independence donated to the Library of Congress at its founding, the Jefferson Koran was been loaned to Ellison by the rare book and special collections division of the library.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

In Alaska, Stevens-Begich Race is Far From Over
Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein, Majikthise on November 9, 2008 at 8:38 AM.

Nate Silver on the phantom ballots of Alaska:

Stevens currently holds a lead of 3,353 votes, or about 1.5 percent of the votes tallied so far. But, there are quite a large number of ballots yet to count. According to Roll Call, these include "at least 40,000 absentee ballot[s], 9,000 early voting ballots, and an undetermined number of questionable ballots". Indeed, it seems possible that the number of "questionable" ballots could be quite high. So far, about 220,000 votes have been processed in Alaska. This compares with 313,000 votes cast in 2004. After adding back in the roughly 50,000 absentee and early ballots that Roll Call accounts for, that would get us to 270,000 ballots, or about a 14 percent drop from 2004. It seems unlikely that turnout would drop by 14 percent in Alaska given the presence of both a high-profile senate race and Sarah Palin at the top of the ticket.

But even if Begich were to make up ground and win a narrow victory, this would seem to represent a catastrophic failure of polling, as three polls conducted following the guilty verdict in Stevens' corruption trial had Begich leading by margins of 7, 8 and 22 points, respectively.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

On Iran and Obama, Battle Lines Being Drawn
Posted by Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation on November 9, 2008 at 7:23 AM.

In the realm of foreign affairs, the two wars that America is fighting, in Iraq and Afghanistan, may have higher priority for President Obama than the war it isn't fighting, namely, with Iran. But the battle lines are being drawn already, on all sides of the Iran issue.

During the campaign, Obama stated repeatedly that he is prepared for unconditional, but well "prepared," talks with Tehran. Yesterday, seizing the moment, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wrote a meandering open letter to Obama, which included the following, according to the New York Times translation:

"I congratulate you for attracting the majority of votes in the election. As you know, opportunities that are bestowed upon humans are short lived.

"People in the world expect war-oriented policies, occupation, bullying, deception and intimidation of nations and imposing discriminatory policies on them and international affairs, which have evoked hatred toward American leaders, to be replaced by ones advocating justice, respect for human rights, friendship and noninterference in other countries' affairs.

"They also want the U.S. intervention to be limited to its borders, especially in the sensitive region of the Middle East. It is expected to reverse the unfair attitude of the past 60 years to restore the rights of people in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan."

"If steps are taken in the path of righteousness, toward the goal of carrying out the teachings of the holy prophets, it is hoped that almighty God will help and that the enormous damage done in the past will be somewhat diminished."

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

With 220-Vote Lead, Norm Coleman Trying to Keep Ballots from Being Counted
Posted by AlterNet Staff, AlterNet on November 9, 2008 at 1:21 AM.

From the Pioneer-Press ...

"Republican Sen. Norm Coleman sought an injunction to stop the opening and counting of 32 absentee ballots in Minneapolis, according to a copy of the court documents filed today provided to the Pioneer Press by Democrat Al Franken's campaign.

"The race between Coleman and Franken, fierce rivals for months for the right to represent Minnesota in the U.S. Senate, is headed for an automatic recount because Coleman's lead is less than one half of one percent over Franken. Currently, Coleman has just a 221-vote advantage.

"That slim advantage, which has been slipping as counties have verified the vote totals, has put increased scrutiny on every ballot.

"According to the injunction filed by the Coleman campaign, 32 of those ballots cast by absentee voters shouldn't be tallied because they were not opened on Election Day.

"Minnesota voting rules dictate that all absentee ballots must arrive by Election Day in order to be counted — any ballots received after Nov. 4 of their year do not count.

"According to the Franken campaign, Ramsey County held a hearing on the Coleman campaign's request to toss those ballots this morning and a judge rejected the request.

"On Friday night the director of elections for the city of Minneapolis, Cynthia Reichhert, told the attorney for the Coleman campaign, Tony Trimble, that she was in possession of 32 absentee ballots that she intended to 'open and count' today, according to the request filed by the Coleman campaign."

Giuliani's Al Qaeda Connections; Ron Paul's Fundraising Buoyed By Stolen Credit Cards
Posted by Steven Reynolds, The All Spin Zone on November 9, 2007 at 3:00 PM.

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

Ron Paul has NO connection to these thieves who made donations to his campaign. But it seems Rudy Guiliani has some connections to real Al Qaeda terrorists.

OK, maybe it was a hundred thieves. Turns out part of that big fundraising extravaganza that got all sorts of publicity for the Paul campaign the other day (Richard reported it) came from stolen credit cards. Of course the Paul campaign was honest and gave the money back to the bank. No, this only reflects well on the Paul campaign. Seems some theives in Europe were testing the stolen cards and decided a Republican political campaign was as good a place as any to see if the cards worked. Let's be sure to note this barely dents that huge fundraising from the Paul campaign. But I'm a bit stunned at this comment from the Paul campaign. From CBSNews:

Added Paul spokesman Jesse Benton: "Ron Paul does not have anything to do with this."

Following earlier reports that Giuliani was still getting paid by the consulting firm he created, Mary Jacoby of the Wall Street Journal sheds light on some potentially problematic sources of Giuliani's private income. Chief among them is Qatar, the U.S. ally that paid Giuliani Partners for "security advice" regarding their petroleum facilities. The article uncovers a "potential political pitfall" for Giuliani's candidacy and image given Qatar's spotty record in fighting Al Qaeda, but it stops short of explicitly addressing an aspect of the business arrangement that could dog Giuliani during his quest for the presidency.

Specifically, the ostensible chief consumer of Giuliani's security advice in this case would be Qatar's internal security ministry--currently headed by a known Al Qaeda associate.

As Radar reported earlier this year, Qatar Interior Minister Abdullah bin Khalid Al-Thani has long had ties to top Al Qaeda operatives including Osama Bin Laden, and is believed by many U.S. officials to have personally arranged the narrow escape of Al Qaeda big-wig Khalid Sheikh Mohammed from U.S. agents in 1996, thereby ensuring his freedom to mastermind the 9/11 attacks.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

British Audience Laughs At Tom DeLay's Bogus Health Care Claims
Posted by Ali Frick, Think Progress on November 9, 2007 at 1:00 PM.

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

Speaking in the UK yesterday, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) predicted that if a Democrat is elected president in 2008, he or she would seek to install a universal health care, similar to the system in Britain. This possibility "received thunderous applause." DeLay claimed that, under the U.S. system, "no American is denied health care":

By the way, there's no one denied health care in America. There are 47 million people who don't have health insurance, but no American is denied health care in America.

Texas resident Shirley Lowe was denied health care because her breast cancer was diagnosed at a medical center rather than a clinic receiving federal cancer-research funds.

New Orleans bus driver Emanuel Wilson was denied health care when the government refused to pay for his chemotherapy because he had had a job that had provided insurance -- a job he lost after Hurricane Katrina.

Thousands of 9/11 workers who worked at Ground Zero were denied health care when the federal government approved woefully inadequate funds to address the permanent health problems, such as sinusitis and asthma, associated with work at the site.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Wal-Mart Is Directly Responsible for Deadly Toys
Posted by Cliff Schecter, Brave New Films on November 9, 2007 at 12:00 PM.

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

With their Chinese toy selection, Wal-Mart might save you a few cents while killing your kids. Heartwarming.

Retailers such as Wal-Mart put so much pressure on suppliers to produce cheap goods that health, environmental and labor protections get brushed aside. Wal-Mart is the nation's top importer of Chinese-made products. The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) reports the giant retailer's reliance on cheap goods made in China has cost this country nearly 200,000 jobs since 2001.

(click for larger version)

The U.S. trade deficit with China reached a whopping $233 billion last year, and imports for Wal-Mart alone accounted for $27 billion-11 percent of the growth in the U.S. trade deficit with China since 2001.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

On Iraq, Political Dogfights and the Commercial Media's Inability to Get the Story Right
Posted by Joshua Holland, Raed Jarrar, AlterNet on November 9, 2007 at 7:19 AM.

Over on the front page, our choice of title, "Iraqi Government to UN: 'Don't Extend Mandate for Bush's Occupation'," is almost a form of protest against the reporting we see every day in the legacy media.

If we were writing for the New York Times, the Washington Post or any other "mainstream" outlet, the same story -- if it were reported at all -- would have a title like this:

"Iraqi Government Requests UN Extension for Coalition Mandate."

You'll never see a clearer example of the divergent realities that different media can present than these diametrically opposed descriptions of what's happening with the UN mandate (we would have preferred to offer a real title for comparison, but none of the traditional media have so far told the story).

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

GOP Perv Trial Visits Public Toilet Scene of the Crime On "Field Trip"
Posted by Pam Spaulding, Pam's House Blend on November 9, 2007 at 6:10 AM.

This post, written by Pam Spaulding, originally appeared on Pam's House Blend

Wonder what it's like to be the jury on the field trip to Space View Park restroom in Titusville to see where Florida lawmaker Bob Allen:

1) went to the public restroom to avoid a lightning storm that was about to start.

2) claimed to be intimidated by the "stocky black guy" (the police officer) and his observation that there "was nothing but other black guys around in the park" and that he believed that he was about to be robbed.

3) offered a black undercover cop $20 as payment for Allen could blow him.

Florida Today:

The six jurors and two alternates were seen along the waterfront of the park before heading to the park bench where Titusville officers sat on July 11.

After taking turns sitting on the bench, jurors headed into the men's restroom to view the handicapped stall where the exchange between Kavanaugh and Allen allegedly occurred.

Hat tips go to Cliff and blogenfreude, who has updates on more GOPervs, including Ted Klaudt, former Republican lawmaker from South Dakota, who allegedly violated two foster children. It's beyond belief:

The "former state lawmaker was convicted of raping two former foster daughters during physical examinations that he claimed would help them sell their reproductive eggs." He could get 25 years on each count, which should put him away for the rest of his miserable life.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Senate Confirms Pro-Torture Mukasey As Attorney General
Posted by Howie Klein, Down With Tyranny! on November 9, 2007 at 6:05 AM.

This post, written by Howie Klein, originally appeared on Down With Tyranny!

Late last night, when respectable people were fast asleep, the Senate confirmed Michael Mukasey, a pro-torture/anti-Constitution, ultra-partisan reactionary as Bush's Attorney General. This was engineered by two people, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). Whatever Mukasey does wrong should be lain on their doorsteps:

The 53-to-40 vote made Mr. Mukasey, a former federal judge, the third person to head the Justice Department during the tenure of President Bush, placing him in charge of an agency that members of both parties say suffered under the leadership of Alberto R. Gonzales.

Six Democrats joined 46 Republicans and one independent in approving the judge, with his backers praising him as a strong choice to restore morale at the Justice Department and independently oversee federal prosecutions in the final months of the Bush administration.

Thirty-nine Democrats and one independent opposed him.

"The Department of Justice needs Judge Mukasey at work tomorrow morning," said Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the senior Republican on the Judiciary Committee. "The Department of Justice has been categorized as dysfunctional and in disarray. It is in urgent need of an attorney general."

But Democrats said Mr. Mukasey's refusal to characterize waterboarding, an interrogation technique that simulates drowning, as illegal torture disqualified him from taking over as the nation's top law enforcement official.

"I am not going to aid and abet the confirmation contortions of this administration," said Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and chairman of the Judiciary Committee. "I do not vote to allow torture."

All five senators who are running for president -- Joseph R. Biden Jr., Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Christopher J. Dodd, all Democrats, and John McCain -- did not cast votes. The four Democrats had said they would not support Mr. Mukasey because of his equivocation during the confirmation hearings over whether waterboarding is torture. Mr. McCain has also denounced the interrogation method but he issued a statement last week saying he would vote to approve the nomination.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Anti-War Veterans Banned From Veteran's Day Parade
Posted by Paddy , Brave New Films on November 9, 2007 at 5:31 AM.

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

Boy, this pisses me off.

Veterans For Peace Say They Will Pass Out Flyers

DENVER -- A group called Veterans for Peace will not be participating in this Saturday's Veterans Day parade.

Parade organizers didn't invite Veterans for Peace this year because they say the group staged an inappropriate protest at last year's parade.

"The parade is not a platform for protesting. It is a platform for honoring the veterans of all services," said Andrew Grieb, with United Veterans Council of Denver.

Vietnam veteran Frank Bessinger believes the ban violates his groups freedom of expression.

"Certainly, our point of view is different from a lot of other people in the parade. But, we believe it's legitimate," said Bessinger.

Bessinger said his group still plans to have a presence at this year's parade. They will be on the sidewalks distributing flyers.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Tuesday's big winner: an honest economic argument
Posted by Joshua Holland on November 9, 2006 at 3:28 PM.

The truth is that the big winner on Tuesday wasn't Rahm Emanuel or any of the single-issue groups that are claiming to have turned the election. Tuesday's big winner was an honest economic argument.

Advocates of higher minimum wages and those who are routinely dismissed as wild-eyed "anti-globalization" freaks were vindicated in a big, big way on Tuesday.

Yesterday I caught a conference call with a bunch of Congressional winners including Democrat Heath Shuler, who has quite the Southern drawl and who picked up one of those Southern House seats everyone's been squabbling about lately. Shuler said that "without a doubt" trade was "the issue, the hot button issue in every corner of the district." He added: "Every single stump speech began and ended with a discussion of fair trade and every commercial we ran focused on working American families."

There's more than just anecdotal evidence that this is a winning strategy: there was an almost perfect correlation between calling bullshit on the bipartisan trade consensus of the Bush (and Clinton) administration(s) and winning, regardless of party or region. Consider this analysis put out yesterday by Public Citizen (PDF):

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Breaking: DEMOCRATS RETAKE THE SENATE!
Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein on November 9, 2006 at 2:33 PM.

George Allen conceded the Virginia senate race to Democrat Jim Webb! For the first time in 12 years, Democrats control both houses of Congress.



[AMERICAblog]

Video: Bill Maher outs Ken Mehlman on CNN
Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein on November 9, 2006 at 1:50 PM.

Last night at nine o'clock Bill Maher outed RNC chair Ken Mehlman on Larry King Live. Maher told King that Mehlman's is one of many powerful Republican insiders who are widely known to be gay. The Huffington Post reports that CNN censored Maher's revelation when the show was rebroadcast later that night.

I bet CNN cut out that footage to protect Larry King, not Ken Mehlman. During the interview Larry King told an obvious lie: When Maher said that everyone in Washington had known about Mehlman's sexuality for years, King claimed that he'd never heard that rumor. There's no way Larry King hasn't heard those rumors.

The outing of Mehlman, after all these years, is proof of the institutional implosion of the Republican Party. Nobody wants to cover for a closeted gaybasher, and Mehlman is no longer powerful enough to command complicity.

[Huffington Post, Crooks and Liars]

Updated: Can we puh-lease put the Southern Strategy Wars to bed?
Posted by Joshua Holland on November 9, 2006 at 1:35 PM.

Over at The Gadflyer, where I share a bit of cyber-space with Tom Schaller, who wrote Whistling Past Dixie, the triumphalism has been ridiculous. One Gadflyer, David Lublin, called the election "fierce vindication" for Schaller's analysis.

And here at AlterNet today we have Bob Moser, one of Schaller's sparring partners, saying that Tuesday's results showed "the South -- aka "Jesusland" -- has a message for those national Democratic wizards: No, fuck you."

Am I the only one growing tired of this?

Of course, after a big election win everyone claims that their favorite theories were validated by the results. But the reality is that Tuesday didn't do a thing to validate -- or refute -- Tom's much-debated book.

First, the Dems didn't follow Tom's advice-- they spread the money and resources around as part of Dean's fifty-state strategy.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

An intimate look at purity balls [VIDEO]
Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein on November 9, 2006 at 1:00 PM.

Steve Gilliard links to a rather alarming video promoting a bizarre Christian ritual/industry known as the purity ball (video right). They're like proms, complete with evening gowns, limos, slow dancing. The only difference is that Christian dads take their daughters. At the end of the evening, the girls pledge to hand their sexuality over to their dads until they can give themselves "as wedding gifts" to their future husbands.

When Mark Foley flirts with 16-year-olds, it's a national scandal. When Christian dads do it, it's called "showing Godly affection."

[The News Blog]

Be a slut
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 9, 2006 at 9:03 AM.

Feministing's Jessica Valenti, undoubtedly depressed at this distinctly anti-abstinence finding, writes:

Scientists say that promiscuity can increase women’s chances of having healthier babies.

Promiscuity in some mammals results in greater competition between sperm, with the winner having the best genes.

In controlled tests, each of 17 female marsupials mated with the same three males. In another group, 19 females were forced to be monogamous and take only one mate.

After the offspring were born, the more polyandrous females were found to have young attached to every teat.

The proportion of each litter that survived was three times greater for the females that had mated with several partners.

Top Gay Republican outed on Larry King, and.... [VIDEO]
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 9, 2006 at 8:27 AM.

John Aravosis found this clip of Bill Maher outing one of the nation's most high-profile Republicans... According to some viewers, the bit about the gay Republican didn't make it the rebroadcast...

Alito respects Roe v. Wade
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 9, 2005 at 1:30 PM.

The wires have been abuzz with the news that Bush's Supreme nominee Sammy Alito's recent statements indicate that whatever his personal feelings (his mother claims he's pro-life), he won't overturn Roe v. Wade. Well, at least Joe Lieberman is convinced by his statements.

But Scott Lemieux calls bullshit: "It takes someone as hard-wired to roll over and play dead as Lieberman to infer something from them."

Here's what Alito said, in Lieberman's words: "He basically said . . . that Roe was precedent on which people -- a lot of people -- relied, and been precedent now for decades and therefore deserved great respect."

Noting that Rehnquist used remarkably similar language of "respecting" an opinion to which he dissented, Lemieux cautions: "these kinds statements by Alito mean absolutely nothing. Talking about 'respected precedents' is a good way of evading the issue, and that's it."

It's politics, pure and simple. Lieberman is given the cover of having been "convinced" that Alito is a moderate -- or some such baloney -- and Lieberman remains in the good graces of the Republicans in control of the Senate. (Lawyers, Guns and Money)

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

We said, we think you HEARD that wrong...
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 9, 2005 at 11:58 AM.

During a Halloween press conference, Scott McClellan appeared to agree to some comments made by NBC's David Gregory about Rove's involvement in the Valerie Plame outing ("That's accurate").

At least, that's what the Congressional Quarterly and the Federal News Service (hardly partisan rags) had in their transcripts, not to mention what the [VIDEO] of that press conference reveals.

But the White House is so sure that McClellan actually disagrees ("I don't think that's accurate"), they've asked the CQ and FNS to change their records.

Wonkette writes: "Usually, the White House just puts words into Scott McClellan's mouth. Last week, the press office tried to wrench them into the transcripts of White House briefings provided by CQ and the Federal News Service."

"[White House] Media maven Dana Perino told CQ she 'just [wanted] to let you know it is not accurate, as you had it in the transcript.' Also, she added, war is peace and freedom is slavery. FYI."

What I find interesting is that the White House didn't claim the obvious (and far more plausible), that instead of saying "That's accurate" he said "That's (not) accurate." They changed far more of the sentence than was necessary for a standard disagreement. I'm no legal expert but this revision smells of legal-speak. Just another reason to doubt the veracity of their claims... (Wonkette / ThinkProgress)

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

Intelligent Design, electoral failure
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 9, 2005 at 10:54 AM.

In Dover, PA voters removed all 6 advocates of Intelligent Design in a clean School Board sweep.

Here's the concession they made according to Wesley R. Elsberry:

"It should be noted that the incoming board members from the Dover CARES campaign have a platform plank saying that 'intelligent design' will be taught in Dover public schools. However, the venue of such instruction will not be the science classrooms, where it was out-of-place, but rather an elective course on comparative religion, where it fits perfectly."

Mr. Chalabi goes to Washington
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 9, 2005 at 8:34 AM.

Well, Sen. Durbin and Arianna Huffington are shocked at the audacity of the administration to warmly host Ahmad Chalabi who was funded by the administration to the tune of $340,000/month as he sang them the songs they longed to hear about Iraqi WMD, hmm.

Of course, everything Chalabi said was "wrong." Or, if you prefer: a lie. Durbin, speaking on the floor of the Senate yesterday: "I don’t understand this. While the Department of Justice is actively investigating this man for wrongdoing that could have endangered American troops and American lives, the Department of State and the Department of the Treasury are hosting him like some dignitary."

Well, with Bill Frist, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, and perhaps others all under investigation for various wrongdoings, perhaps we can chalk it up to some honor among thieves kinship.

Durbin's speech is another in a series of ratcheted-up Democratic rhetoric, signs of life for a desperately needed opposition. Here, he takes on Republican foot-shuffling on pre-war intelligence investigations with a most un-DC-like candor:

"And for the Senator from Texas to say the Silberman-Robb commission has dealt with that issue is not factual, and it's not accurate, based on the words of that commission.

He went further to say that the phase one investigation also took care of the question. It did not."

So You're STILL Being Tortured To Death In An American Military Prison!
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 9, 2005 at 6:32 AM.

Just a note on this post because I'm sure some will object to the humorous tone (which, I trust, will be aired in the comments...). In fact, I object to it some. But without finding new ways of approaching the horror, new methods of exposing the hypocrisy and rotting language, it's nearly impossible to experience events as fresh and unconscionable. Consistency -- even consistent indignation -- runs the risk of inuring us to the injustice...

Courtesy of Medium Lobster:

Q. Help! I'm still being tortured to death in an American military prison! What should I do?
A. Sigh. We've been through this before. You can't be getting tortured to death because we do not torture.
Q. Whew, that's a relief! For a second there I thought I was being forced underwater until near the point of death.
A. Ha ha, that's not torture! That's what we call a "freedom dip."
Q. Can I be released from this American military prison?
A. No, because we can neither confirm nor deny that this military prison even exists. For all we know, you might not even be here!
Q. Wow, that'd be great! Any idea where I might be?
A. Not a clue! It's a mystery.
Q. Gee, I hope I'm home with my family drinking a nice big mug of cocoA.
A. You keep that up.
Q. I sure - AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Q. Is this non-torture legal?
A. Absolutely. We will beat you, bash your limbs to pulp, and leave you to die of exposure, but we will do so under the law.
Q. Congress is trying to ban the cruel, degrading, and humiliating treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody. Will this non-torture be illegal then?
A. Of course not, because this non-torture is neither cruel, degrading, nor humiliating. Although we will veto any such legislation if passed by Congress. While we do not torture, we reserve the right to hypothetically torture.
Q. Is the CIA agent breaking my legs being cruel, humiliating or degrading?
A. The CIA agent breaking your legs is doing so in the most dignified and humane way possible.
Q. What about the army officer raping me with a chemical light?
A. The army officer raping you with a chemical light will later serve you a delicious meal of orange chicken and rice pilaf.
Q. Ooh! And for dessert?
A. Death by asphyxiation and a magnificent crème brulée!
Q. I can't waAAAAAAAAAAAHH OH GOD

Q. Why am I being not-tortured in this non-prison?
A. Because you're a dangerous terrorist and an enemy of the United States.
Q. Ah! How'd you find that out?
A. You told us, right after we started torturing you.
Q. You also got me to say I was a duck.
A. Ducks are dangerous terrorists and enemies of the United States.
Q. And to think I never knew! Who told you that?
A. Some duck we tortured.
Q. At some point between going to war and beating me to death while I'm chained to the floor in my own feces, do you think you went too far?
A. No, because this is a different kind of war.
Q. Different because the threat is more dangerous, or different because it's more complex?
A. Different because it gives us an excuse to torture people to death in American military prisons.
Q. Well, I certainly don't want to stand in the way of defending America. *RRRGGGKK* Or I wouldn't, if I still had the ability to stand.
A. It's the least any of us can ask of someone else when they're being tortured to death in an American military prison! (Fafblog)
--> Sign up for Peek in your inbox... every morning! (Go here and check Peek box).

Swiftboating Wilson
Posted by Evan Derkacz on November 9, 2005 at 6:18 AM.

Well, you can certainly see where two years of a highly-publicized Watergate-like investigation would pass before two Fox News pundits with everything to gain by coming forward with information that could exonerate their compatriots would do so.

I mean, it's more dramatic that way, right? A buzzer-beater, so to speak?

Gurgling up from the bowels of right-wing media are accounts from a couple of Fox News pundits who claim that Joe Wilson casually mentioned that his wife was a "CIA desk officer."

My favorite part of this sudden recall is the specificity of the phrase they attribute to Wilson. As long as you're making shit up why not hit a talking point or two, right? Along with the outing itself this phrasing suggests that even Wilson doesn't characterize his wife as an undercover agent, just as a "desk officer." Which happens to have been one of the attempted excuses from defenders of the outing.

Wilson and his lawyer are not amused. The letter sent to a Conservative talk radio show advertising an appearance by these liars is by no means squeamish:

"Please be advised that the proffered allegations are utterly false and are intended to defame our client Ambassador Wilson. Broadcasting such statements will subject you to liability as the statements are knowingly false or made in reckless disregard of the trust or falsity... since Ambassador Wilson never disclosed his wife's status to anyone, including close friends, it is preposterous to suggest that he would have shared the information with strangers in a waiting room."