Glenn and Digby

Very interesting and illuminating chat between Glenn Greenwald and super-political-blogger Digby:

Listen to it here:

How bad is it?

Pretty fucking bad.

Lunatics and Liars

Heh heh. More here.

Animal Farm Friday - Cat Fight

Or rather, kitten fight. And how to stop it.

Lets say the two kittens represent our current lame-o Congress (I know, it's not fair to the kittens). Then we say the third kitten (on camera near the end) represents how I feel about all of this.

Rove to be held in contempt

Okay, so he's not being frog-marched to justice, but he might be sooner rather than later.

MoveOn not a movement?

Another TPM nugget seriously worth a look!

UPDATE:

Great rebuttal!

Republican's adopting my values? Sweet!

Maybe Petey thought that holding his fundraisers in Vegas wouldn't get out because, what happens in Vegas...

From TPM:

Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX),
who once bashed Janet Jackson and that Justin guy for their "liberal
values" as displayed in the wardrobe malfunction is now holding fundraisers at Las Vegas strip clubs.

Here's one of the employees at the establishment crawling on all fours wearing a belt and a leather bra. Not that there's anything wrong with that ...

Nothing wrong in my book with a hot chick in leather gear crawling on all fours. What's IS wrong in my book is this shameless hypocrisy these fucking Republiscums exude as they wrap themselves in the flag, stand on the breaking backs of our soldiers, and lie right out of their putrid faces about their devotion to God and family, and that queers and perverts and people with "liberal" values are corrupting this country.

Pete must really be confusing San Francisco values with Vegas values. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Fournier the Fraud and the "Associated" Press

I've railed before about the partisan hack Ron Fournier who is now heading up editorial for the Associated Press, and from the looks of things, he gives new meaning to the word associated.

In October 2006, the McCain team approached Fournier about joining the fledgling operation, according to a source with knowledge of the talks. In the months that followed, said a source, Fournier spoke about the job possibility with members of McCain’s inner circle, including political aides Mark Salter, John Weaver and Rick Davis.

Salter, who remains a top McCain adviser, said in an e-mail to Politico that Fournier was considered for “a senior advisory role” in communications.

“He did us the courtesy of considering the offer before politely declining it,” Salter said.

Indeed. This would certainly explain why they've decided to more or less race Fox News to the bottom of the press gutter.

How little we've progressed

Interesting look back on ideas for harnessing natural, renewable energy.

Don't drown your phone

I could have used this stuff last week before I dropped my Crackberry into a glass of water.

What happened to 4:20?

Surely there must be some kind of respite for the infinite hour!

Karma can be a bitch, eh Bob?

Bob "Douchebag for Liberty" Novak has a brain tumor. Josh wishes him well, but I don't. I'm not one for believing in fate, but I do sort of believe in karma. Novak's is coming back in spades, it seems.

Gonzo is at the center of attention

Great interactive map from Slate:

Sunday Sketch - Maliki Kneecaps McCain

By now you must have heard that Maliki has endorsed Obama's 16 month plan for withdrawing US troops (*with caveats) from Iraq. That basically cuts McCain's campaign off at the knees. I don't see how he'll recover from this.

Salon Radio with Glenn Greenwald launches

And it launches big in an interview with Dan Ellsberg.

Listen to it here:

Animal Farm Friday - Rabbit Rules

This looks kind of brutal, but I'm sure this crow deserved it.

Why teaching Intelligent Design would be so bad

More fun stuff here.

Why I'm proud to be part of MoveOn

Got this in my inbox tonight. All I can say is WOW! Take that, racist FOX pigs!

.....................................................................................................................

Watch the video!

Dear MoveOn member,

Big news! Your petition signature telling FOX to stop their racist smears against the Obamas had a really exciting day on Wednesday. Here's what happened:

1:00 p.m. Your signature was printed off at a New York City Kinko's along with 620,126 others—filling 19 big boxes.

2:00 p.m. The signatures were piled in front of FOX's national headquarters at 6th Avenue and 48th Street.

3:15 p.m. Hip hop star Nas (whose new album had just risen to #1 on the Billboard charts hours earlier) joined over 100 activists and delivered the petitions to FOX on behalf of ColorOfChange, MoveOn, and Brave New Films.

3:30 p.m. FOX refused to accept the petitions. (Sometimes, the truth hurts.)

4:00 p.m.—9:00 p.m. News of FOX's racism and the star-studded petition delivery made its way around the world—with stories in Rolling Stone, Billboard, USA Today, Associated Press, Reuters, India Express, Huffington Post, MTV, OpenLeft, and over 200 other places.

11:30 p.m. Stephen Colbert welcomed Nas as his guest on the Colbert Report and dedicated over half of his show to FOX's racism. The boxes containing our signatures were stacked prominently on Colbert's set in place of his normal interview table and chairs—and he conducted the entire interview surrounded by petitions! Then, Nas performed his new song "Sly Fox," which is all about FOX's racism.

12:00 a.m. Several MoveOn staffers, jaws dropped open, get on the phone and engage in several rounds of, "Wow!" :)

Since then, the news has kept spreading around the world. You sent a message to FOX, and that message was very much received!

And the fight's not over. We'll continue to push back together against FOX's racism and their smears against Obama. But for now, enjoy the video of Wednesday's petition delivery—led by our friends at ColorOfChange—and the video of Colbert. Both videos are at this link:

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3980&id=13325-8603905-2fbj40x&t=4

Thanks for all you do.

–Adam G., Laura, Ilyse, Justin, and the rest of the team

P.S. You can listen to Nas's new single "Sly Fox" on the Colbert video at the link above. If you like it and want to buy the full album, it's available here:
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3979&id=13325-8603905-2fbj40x&t=6

Want to support our work? We're entirely funded by our 3.2 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.

---

PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. This email was sent to James Barlow on July 24, 2008. To change your email address or update your contact info, click here. To remove yourself from this list, click here.

This is what my life is like

McCain's Counter-inSURGEncy

If you watched Countdown with Keith Olbermann tonight (segment posted below in case you missed it), you saw that very sloppy bit of CBS editing from the previous night's blathering interview of John McCain by Katie Couric, arguably the worst anchor outside of Fox News. This is the piece where CBS edited out McCain's major, major gaffe when answering her question about Obama's statement on the "surge" at the expense of inserting in a spiteful and insipid remark about Obama wanting to lose the Iraq war.

You also would have seen McCain trying to explain away his gaffe - which was exposed the night before by Olbermann - about the surge starting nearly a year before it actually started. Check it out:



In McCain's world, a "surge" is synonymous with a counter-insurgency, and that because a counter-insurgency had been underway in Iraq long before the technical "surge" start date, his "surge" had begun long before. Never mind that the term surge is actually a media-propagated euphemism for "escalation" that Bush preferred because it sounded less - invasive.

But I get it now. McCain can sees surge in counter-insurgency, so by his twisted logic, this all makes sense.

Satire aside, I want to make another point here, and this is critical. McCain keeps crediting General (then Col.) McFarland as the genius who thought up the surge, and the media seem to be fine with giving him a pass on this. But the truth is that McFarland adopted the strategy that had been put into successful play in Tal Afar back in 2005 by one Colonel H.R. McMasters, which was to clear, hold, and re-build. In order for this strategy to succeed, you need troops. It took some time, but the idea caught on and was implemented in other parts of Iraq (primarily Baghdad). In order for these types of operations to succeed, an escalation of troops was needed, which is what the rest of us know as "the surge". So it is true that a "clear/hold/rebuild" counter-insurgency strategy had been succeeding long before the Anbar Awakening, this can in no way be confused with a "surge". This strategy is not a surge, but a surge makes a strategy like this more successful.

If McCain had been throwing props to McMasters, then he might have some credibility his idea of a "surge" already happening, but he showed his true colors when he gaffed on CBS. There can be no doubt about it, McCain's old age was showing through. He might have actually been thinking about McMasters's successes in Tal Afar. Instead, he got his timeline confused and implied that the surge had been succeeding before it even started, and tried to support that with events that did actually happen, just not in the order that they actually happened (in this universe at least). By confusing the actual start of the surge (where most surge troops deployed to Baghdad) with the Anbar Awakening, McCain showed that he does not have a solid grasp on what has been going on in Iraq. Then, by trying to explain his screw-up by conflating a counter-insurgency strategy with operational logistics, he showed that he is a liar who will say anything and hope that no one catches him.

McCain says that we don't understand what a surge is. No, we understand. McCain is confused.

Old man driver

Josh is on point here:

Novak says he didn't realize he'd hit anyone. And if that's true it
removes a great deal of the moral and potential criminal liability. But
it puts in real question whether Novak should be driving a car. If you
can be driving through the relatively compact streets of downtown
Washington, hit a pedestrian so that he rolls up on to your windshield
and then trundles off onto the ground and you don't notice, should you
really be driving?

Think about that. For most of us I think having anything make
contact with your car while you're in motion is very jarring, as it
should be. That's certainly been my experience. And you don't notice
when you plow into a guy and he rolls up on your windshield? I don't
get that.

My guess is that Novak has been reading all the pro-velo posts about bicycles in D.C. at Andrew Sullivan's blog, got all pissed off and tried to make a point. Too bad his point was so potentially dangerous.

McCain is (not) a foreign policy expert.

hilzoy puts McCain's major faux pas under the microscope.

Money quote:

Note to self: if I ever run for President and decide to stake
everything on my understanding of one thing, I should familiarize
myself with the basic facts about it. I should be especially careful to
do this before I say something like this about someone who got it
right: "I don't know how you respond to something that is such a false
depiction of what actually happened."

Obama thwarts McCain's oil rig photo op with hurricane

Not really, but I'm sure old man McSame feels that way. Ol' Johnny tried to upstage Obama by flying out to an oil rig in the Gulf Coast, but he got upstaged by Hurricane Dolly.

Of course, maybe that was (his) God getting back at him for stepping on his toes.

Animal Farm Friday?

Obviously, I didn't post anything last Friday, but for good reason. I spent a couple hours in line for the opening night of The Dark Knight (and have been too busy ever since). So here's the post, a little late. In honor of Batman, I bring you bats.

Be warned. This even creeps me out.

My next new bike

Wasp Knife

Pretty sick mind what thought this up...

Santa Claus is EVIL!

Justice on hold

Yes, I am pissed off at Cass Sunstein's recent wussified remarks about an Obama administration not pursuing justice against "egregious" crimes committed by the Bush administrations. But after reading about Radovan Karadzic's capture, and knowing that Ratko Mladic is still on the loose, and factoring in that it will take many years before - if ever - these barbarians will face trial, adding to that the notorious impatience and short attention spans of Americans, I am certain there will never be any war crimes trials at the Hague for Bush and Dick (hell, Dick will be dead in a couple of years anyway). The best we can hope for would be that a President Obama declares Bush and Cheney enemy combatants and ships them off to Gitmo forever. Of course, along with the many pardons Georgie doles out - including his own and Dick's too - he'll close own Gitmo on the off chance that it might have even a slight possibility of becoming a permanent residence.

From out here, looking at the Hague's back-logged docket and lack of ideal locations to imprison war criminals, the world is a very small step away from looking like the American penal system. We're well on our way to becoming a prison planet. (Insert imaginative leap here.)

Don't even get me started on one of histories current living "war" criminals Mugabe.

Straightjackets Popping Off

I'm not one to quote Joe Klein. In fact, I think he's one of the douchiest of the douches, and I squarely sink him right down in that shithole where most contemporary journalists writhe. But it is telling when even Mr. Klein is gobsmacked by how frackin' pathetic McSame is.

Popping off to McSame's "popping off" in New Hampshire this Tuesday, Joe unloaded on John's un-presidential behavior.

McSame said this:

This is a clear choice that the American people have. I had the courage
and the judgment to say I would rather lose a political campaign than
lose a war. It seems to me that Obama would rather lose a war in order
to win a political campaign.

Joe said this:

This is the ninth presidential campaign I've covered. I can't remember
a more scurrilous statement by a major party candidate. It smacks of
desperation. It renews questions about whether McCain has the right
temperament for the presidency. How sad.

Joe went on to say this:

There is a reason why politicians who want to be President don't say
these sort of things: It isn't presidential. A President exists in the
straitjacket of literality. His words mean something. So John McCain
has to literally believe that Barack Obama would "rather lose a war in
order to win a political campaign." I can't imagine that he does. He
popped off, out of frustration.

I give props to Joe for finally coming around to acknowledging what so many of us have known all along, but he's showing again that he's not very much in control of his own "popping off". If he were, then he would have been applying that "straightjacket" metaphor to nearly every utterance that dribbled past King George's vulture-like lips.

If only there were some truth to that metaphor. There wouldn't be enough straightjackets on this planet for Georgie. How sad.

How I spent last Saturday

The day before the annual AIDS Walk, Clarice and I volunteered with Hands On Bay Area to help spruce up a [tiny] part of the route that passed through the AIDS Memorial Grove in Golden Gate National Park. I know it looks like I'm having a tough time planting this little sapling, but it had nothing on the blackberry shrubs I was digging up later. Check out the photos here, and be sure to look deep in the bushes. That's where I was battling it out with the blackberries... and I have the scars to prove it.

It was a cold July day in SF (that never gets old), but we were greeted with a nice breakfast before getting started, and a bit of lunch at the end. I wasn't expecting either, really, so that ended up being quite the treat. The work was really tough, but I was loving it. The significance of it didn't really sink in until the end when we all gathered in a circle around the memorial and stood silent for a moment, hands joined, while we remembered and acknowledged those we've known and lost to AIDS. Many of the volunteers there - some since the inception of the memorial - had lost many, many more loved ones than I have, but it was a very emotional experience for us all, driven home as we spoke the names of those we lost. There is nothing else quite like getting genuinely present to a moment and a feeling.

Honestly, I can sort of see why most people try to avoid being present with their emotions at certain, intense moments. As incredible as the experience can be, it is almost too much to take on a regular basis. That may sound cold, and perhaps it is, but then I've always been on the bleeding edge of being overwhelmed by my emotions. But I also know that it's important to put emotions aside when it involves helping others, and often times helping others helps manage emotions. So I'm definitely signing on for more volunteer work with Hands On Bay Area, and elsewhere.

If you get a chance, give some of your time to someone or something else that needs it (besides your self, your kids, or your pets). As Mahatma Ghandi said, "You must be the change you want to see in the world."

Censure DiFi

Sunday Sketch - Bad Press

No Hope

Hunter has an eloquent post about how the criminal Bush administration and those complicit in their crimes will simply get away with it.

I say it's time to "storm the Bastille," but everyone else is too busy waiting for the Rock Band II to come out.

Why do we even bother supporting these clowns? Time to consider exercising my 2nd amendment rights, since my 4th amendment rights are about to be gone.

SUGARRETAW|WATERRAGUS

Cool like Lucas with the Lid Off, as it should be since they were both made by the awesome Michel Gondry.

The video...

The Making of...

Libertarian candidate Bob Barr endorses AccountabilityNowPAC

At least there's one presidential candidate willing to fight for our civil liberties!

Presidential Honors

Mine is one of the signatures that helped get the "George W. Bush Sewage Treatment Plant" on the ballot, and I am highly confident such a fitting honor will be bestowed.

Glad to see other like projects are in the works for Mr. 28%, and even thoughts about how to honor vice Dick.

America doesn't pardon war criminals

Well said, Andrew!

America doesn't pardon war criminals. It prosecutes and, in the
past, has even executed them for the same techniques that Bush and
Rumsfeld and Cheney endorsed. (emphasis mine)

Bad day for legal justice

Revenge obsessed sociopaths in America may be rejoicing, but for the very few of us who believe that laws come before men, today we were thrust headlong into bizarre-o world by one Judge James Roberts, who - from a certain perspective - just issued a ruling that translates to it being okay that you get to be tried for a crime without even being charged with a crime.

Armchair warriors and those that jack off to Sean Hannity and 24 might sidle up to this ruling as being fine and good since it only involves terrorists, but they do that because they're dumber than boxes of rocks, and couldn't solve for two if they had one in each hand. What most people won't get is that laws we establish in America are laws that can be applied to everyone in custody in America.

Terrorists, and those who aid and abet them, should be treated as criminals, even criminals under special circumstances. But we need not bend our laws, or break them, or retroactively remake them after they've been broken. Without a respectful rule of law, anarchy is not far away. Believe it or not, there are a bunch of lubed up Hannity fans out there packing a whole lot of heat that are just itchin' to prove my point (against my wishes as it were).

The 52 Million Dollar Man

looks like Obama doesnt need my money after all, which is good since there are some terrific progressive candidates that do. as does the ACLU.

from Kos:

Barack Obama has another amazing fundraising month:

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama raised $52 million in June, the campaign said on Thursday, a jump from last month and more than double the $22 million raised by his Republican rival John McCain.

June is his second best month ever (he brought in $55 million in February).

The stunning tidbit from June's totals is that the average donation has decreased, from around $100 in February to $68 in June. In other words, while the average amount donated has decreased, the number of donations has increased. A lot.

As the article notes, McCain raised $22 million in June, which, in any other year, would be quite a in and of itself. But it's clear that whatever fears existed over the last month or so that enthusiasm for an Obama candidacy would wane and affect his fundraising was misguided. Indeed, it is McCain who is the victim of a seemingly insurmountable enthusiasm gap.

A Gallup poll at the end of June revealed that "61% of Democrats said they were more enthusiastic than usual about voting in this year's election, while just 35% of Republicans said that." A recent Pew poll (PDF) found that 13% of Obama supporters have donated to his campaign, while just 7% of Republicans who support McCain have donated to his campaign.

In short, what was true at the beginning of this race is still true, and will likely be true up until election day: Democratic voters are more engaged in the process, more enthusiastic about their candidate, and more likely to reach into their pockets--even at $5, $10, or $20 at a time--to put an end to Republican governance.

For more on Obama's huge fundraising numbers, check out the discussion in sharris0512's diary here.

http://feeds.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/338071613/55309

--
This article was sent using my Viigo.
For a free download, go to http://getviigo.com

Talking Points Memo | More Appeasement?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/204413.php

Josh is skeptical about the Guardian's reporting of a US diplomatic office opening in Tehran, but I have heard from an Iranian woman recently back from Iran that people on the streets over there are gearing and talking about the same thing. So maybe there's some truth to this.

The Penguin called...

he wants his unbreakable fighting umbrella back.

Privileged Executive...

Can someone please tell me where it is written - in any legally binding form - this thing they call "Executive Privilege"? Maybe it's written just above or below that line where it says the congress has to surrender its nuts to the president.

Time to MoveOn!

Dreams of justice

Maybe this means that, once president, Barack Obama can declare George W. Bush and Dick Cheney - and most of SCOTUS - enemy combatants and lock them away for decades in a military brig.

FISA (and torture) CYA

I've been really spun up about Obama's FISA vote, scratching my head trying to find reasoning for his reversal, which felt like a serious kick in the crotch. But while Obama's flip-flop on the issue was heartbreaking, he wasn't really the one to blame for this capitualtion. The real head-scratcher was the number of Democrats that supported this bill. What could they all possibly know that they aren't telling us that would make support of this bill - a bill that is an affront to our Constitutional Fourth Amendment rights - so necessary? Trying not to be too cynical, I was wanting to give them the benefit of the doubt, that maybe there was some kind of information of an imminent attack that was being collected. Maybe they were genuinely looking out for our best interests.

As it turned out, giving them the benefit of the doubt was actually the cynical view. What was really going on should have been obvious to me from the start. The support of the FISA bill, much like the support of the Military Commissions Act that got rid of the writ of habeus corpus, was a CYA - Cover Your Ass - move, and nothing more.

While I had seen information about this before, it must have been pushed out of my brain by all of the new and disgusting information about our elected leaders that I absorb on a daily basis. Glenn Greenwald did a great job compiling the information that supports this reasoning behind the Democrat's capitulations.

The bottom line is that way back in the days after 9/11, and many times since, the Democrats totally caved in to demands by the Bush administration, demands that were very likely illegal, and/or un-Constitutional. Cowards all, they were trying to act tough or avoid looking weak, so they bought into the chest-thumping Bush bluster which dictated that in order to be tough we had to throw away all those sissy civil liberties we enjoyed, those pesky little things written into our founding documents, and ignore the Geneva Conventions, and torture prisoners, deny potentially (and actual) innocent detainees the right to challenge their detention (a centuries old right), and spy on American citizens.

It wasn't just Bush's fault. It was the fault of senior Democrats also. Pelosi, Rockefeller, Harman, and many others. They weren't looking out for us then, and they aren't looking out for us now. They are only worried about keeping their jobs. In my mind, they ALL need to go. Pathetic, gutless cowards! They make me sick.

We need to do everything within our legal limits to throw these scumbags out of office. A good first step is to send a message to them that they will listen to and receive loud and clear. What do politicians listen to more than anything? Money.

That's why I've joined Strangebedfellows to send a Money Bomb on August 8th. Anyone who cares about and believes in the principles this country is supposed to stand for should join the cause!

Sunday Sketch on Wednesday - CiC Test

This one couldn't wait...

the rut.

heh heh.

racist toys

I think my grandparents had one of these. Here's a top 10 list.

Pablano exposed!

The political pollster that has been more accurate than nearly all other pollsters, especially the big ones, is identified.

(Dumb) Intellectual Humor

A man living in Unit #1 on Shay Street was one-upped by his nemesis who moved in across the street.

Get it?

I hate stupid reporters

Hard to believe, but I've been seeing tighter journalism coming from NY Daily News. The NY Times has just become a major rag.

Check out this piece of drivel from William Yardley at the Times. Here's my note to him (I'm just picking on one point, but I could have gone on much further:

Mr. Yardley,

Could you please provide proof for your assertion that Barack Obama has shifted his position on Iraq? As someone who has closely followed the rhetoric of all candidates, I can't find anything in Obama's statements anywhere that anyone would consider a "shift". I challenge you to prove that you are not a hack journalist, and invite you to provide evidence to support your claim that Obama has shifted his position on the Iraq war. Otherwise, you should print a retraction or an apology.

Sincerely,
Jake Barlow

Will I flip-flop?

So I walk into this bar... well, it was actually a cafe. I didn't actually walk in. No, I did. But I rode there on my motorcycle with my wife. We both walked into this bar cafe. There's no punchline. We just walked in.

We were there for a meeting of supposedly like-minded Obama supporters, and without dragging this out much more, we got on to the subject of the recent FISA vote, and Obama's support for that garbage bill, and why I decided to stop donating time and money to the Obama campaign. I was there to air my grievances face-to-face with other Obama supporters, instead of anonymously online in that big-ass group of pissed-off supporters angry over the FISA flip-flop. But I wasn't just venting, I was also looking for an open discussion, hoping to gain insight into the perspectives of others on this issue. I learned a long time ago that it was pointless to stand around pissing and moaning about a problem without having an intention to actually solve the problem. So there I was.

Or, there we were. Talking about this FISA issue. Some folks weren't wholly versed on the matter, and some seemed to be. All seemed to understand that this was a serious issue. A thoughtful discussion ensued, and I was actually surprised by a bit of insight I got from the discussion. Ironically, the insight didn't come directly from this conversation, but comically enough, the insight was allowed to happen based on something I read earlier in the day. I say 'comically' because what I had read earlier was in a write-up about the new Batman movie.

As cheeky as it sounds, there was some gravity in that write-up, as with most Batman write-ups post-Heath Ledger. The point that was being made is that despite the power of Heath's performance, and that of the character the Joker, the director was intent on making the Joker an 'absolute' in the story. The story wasn't 'about' the Joker, but the Joker was the catalyst for the story.

I meditated on that idea of catalyst all afternoon. Then, after I walked into the cafe and started on about the FISA BS, what came out of the discussion was the idea of Obama being not the embodiment of change, but the catalyst of change.

From the perspective of Obama as an absolute in the equation for change, it becomes imperative that he win this election, if for nothing else than the possibility and survival of all of the change movements that will erupt after his victory. Much like all of the social justice and liberty movements that sprung forth from JKF's and MLK's successes, so too will many worthwhile social justice movements explode into being if Obama wins.

But if McCain wins, there will be no explosions of justice, but explosions of bombs on innocent peoples. There will be no eruption of justice or liberty, but the exact opposite. If the ever-malleable McCain wins the oval office, twilight will have set on America, and only darkness will follow (at least for all besides the top 10%).

So at this moment, I am still incredibly pissed about this FISA bill, and incredibly disappointed in Obama's support for it. I'm not fired up and I'm not ready to go. But I am ready to re-consider my attitude, and may actually swallow hard and take one for the team. Not for the sake of Obama's team, but for the sake of the progressive movement at large.

Forgetting about Barack Obama the man, and embracing Barack Obama the idea is meaningful in more ways than most can imagine in one sitting. For America to elect an black man as president will cement in the minds of "low information" peoples of the world the idea that America is truly the land of opportunity and equality. And while the intellectuals might bicker over the nuances of whether he is white enough or black enough, right enough or left enough, they will all undoubtely accept that a black American president is truly transformational.

The possibilities that will emerge from an Obama presidency are almost too much to imagine, but the crushing repression and suffocating lack of possibility that would follow a McCain presidency is very easy to imagine. We've been living a form of that for nearly the past eight years, and it will only get worse with McCain, the malleable master of the flip-flop. The Pander Bear.

Sunday Sketch - FISA Pigs

Coming in under (or just over) the wire. It's sad that only on my 2nd Sunday Sketch, I almost blow it. But not without good cause!

This idea is what I think about the "bi-partisan" effort on the FISA bill.

The small gap between torture and spying

Glenn Greenwald appears to agree - at least in principle - with my issue with Andrew Sullivan's contradictory positions on torture and illegal surveillance.

That's why this ongoing, well-intentioned debate
that Andrew Sullivan is having with himself and his readers over
whether "torture is worse than illegal, warrantless eavesdropping" is
so misplaced, and it's also why those who are dismissing as "an
overblown distraction" the anger generated by last week's Congressional
protection of surveillance lawbreakers are so deeply misguided. Things
like "torture" and "illegal eavesdropping" can't be compared as though
they're separate, competing policies. They are rooted in the same
framework of lawlessness. The same rationale that justifies one is what
justifies the other. Endorsing one is to endorse all of it.

New and NOT improved FISA must be stopped

As explained by the inimitable Chris Hedges.

The monitoring of suspected terrorists, with proper oversight, is a
crucial part of our national security. But this law is not about
keeping us safe, which can -- and should -- be done in a constitutional
manner and with judicial oversight. It is about using terrorism as a
pretext to permit wholesale spying and to silence voices that will
allow us to maintain an open society.

Digby says it well

Unlike Digby, I was taken in by Obama's personality, as much as by his message. But I had read his books and studied his legislative record, so while I knew him to be somewhat centrist, I was okay with it. As a socially liberal/fiscally conservative progressive, I have a couple of center-right tendencies on certain issues, and I actually liked those contradictions in Obama. But why I am now turned off and have stopped supporting (donating to/volunteering for) his campaign is that I feel completely betrayed.

Up until the end of the primaries, I was convinced that he was indeed principled and not triangulating, and that he wasn't afraid of standing up for any of his principles. Sure, he may not be much of a fighter in the sense that he didn't go looking for fights, be he did seem proud and strong enough to stand his ground. I don't know where that guy went, but this General Election Obama is not the Primary Obama that I worked so hard for in the primaries.

And I did work hard. I manned the phones, I donated money I could barely afford to give up, and I flew across the country to volunteer in Texas. I did that because Obama seemed proud that he had the support of the netroots, and activists on the left. He certainly wasn't dismissive of us like Clinton was. So it did indeed come as a shock when he reversed his position on FISA, and it really hurt when he attacked MoveOn.org. I genuinely feel like he got what he wanted from us, and has now hung us out to dry.

I still believe that Obama must win, because a McCain presidency would be absolutely horrible for this country. But Obama is going to have to win without my help, as he certainly seems to be okay with. But if he wants my support, he's going to have to earn it.

Speechless

Just forced myself to sit through this nearly unbreable interview with our Chimp in Chief that Ben Cohen posted at HuffPo. The reporter, Carol Coleman, did what no American reporter has yet to do, and that's not back down from the idiot. Throughout the interview, you can tell Carol quickly tires of Bush's non-answers and tries to move the point forward. But Bush repeatedly cuts her off, whining "let me finish." And by the interview it becomes painfully clear why Bush actually needs to finish. It's because he loses his train of thought if he gets cut off, and forgets his rehearsed talking points and has to resort to meaningless platitudes and monosyllabic grunts. The fact that this was never aired in America is testament to media's complicity in our current downward spiral.

Animal Farm Friday

No video today, just this creepy pic. That cat in the background is from the government. No thanks to Barack Obama, we can look forward to a creeping sense of paranoia building in our society now that we can't even trust those who we thought were on our side. Watch your backs, people!

Organized People Beat Organized Money

Up yours, Comcast! Net Neutrality victory nears!

Re: A response to your message to Obama for America

Check out this BULLSHIT response from Team Obama regarding his FISA vote. I don't give a shit that he voted three times to strip telecom immunity from the bill, he still voted for the final piece of legislative garbage. I don't buy it for one second, and that's why the money that I would have been donating to his campaign is now going to real progressive candidates down ballot, and to the ACLU to fight this fucking FISA law.

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Obama for America Correspondence Team wrote:

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting us and sharing your strong feelings about this important issue.  Please find a statement from Senator Obama below.

We appreciate hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Obama for America,

---
Given the grave threats that we face, our national security agencies must have the capability to gather intelligence and track down terrorists before they strike, while respecting the rule of law and the privacy and civil liberties of the American people. There is also little doubt that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, has abused that authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders.

That is why last year I opposed the so-called Protect America Act, which expanded the surveillance powers of the government without sufficient independent oversight to protect the privacy and civil liberties of innocent Americans. I have also opposed the granting of retroactive immunity to those who were allegedly complicit in acts of illegal spying in the past.

After months of negotiation, the House passed a compromise that, while far from perfect, is a marked improvement over last year's Protect America Act.  Under this compromise legislation, an important tool in the fight against terrorism will continue, but the President's illegal program of warrantless surveillance will be over. It restores FISA and existing criminal wiretap statutes as the exclusive means to conduct surveillance - making it clear that the President cannot circumvent the law and disregard the civil liberties of the American people. It also firmly re-establishes basic judicial oversight over all domestic surveillance in the future.

It does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I voted in the Senate three times to remove this provision so that we could seek full accountability for past offenses.  Unfortunately, these attempts were unsuccessful.  But this compromise guarantees a thorough review by the Inspectors General of our national security agencies to determine what took place in the past, and ensures that there will be accountability going forward. By demanding oversight and accountability, a grassroots movement of Americans has helped yield a bill that is far better than the Protect America Act.

It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay.  So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives - and the liberty - of the American people.


----------------------
Paid for by Obama for America

Imagine

No, not what John Lennon sung about. Imagine if our leaders today were tasked with forming the legal foundations for a new society much like our founding fathers were. What would that new society look like?

I'd love to hear your ideas. Please share them in the comments.

How Chuck Todd disqualified himself from taking the helm of Meet the Press

NBC's Chuck Todd on McCain's bad jokes about genocide:

"That's what makes him real and that's what makes people who disagree with him say 'ah, you know what? The guy seems like any guy you'd want to have around the dinner table or the bar stool.'"

The current douchebag occupying the Oval Office was the kind of guy people want to have a beer with (even though he supposedly doesn't snort coke drink. Look how he turned out.

By suckling up to John McCain's man-teets, Chuck just made himself irrelevant to the political discourse beyond anything more than number crunching. And not that I matter all that much, but whatever respect I had for Mr. Todd has been severely diminished.

Bring back primary Obama

I like "primary Obama" much more than"general election Obama"

Why are you okay with FISA?

Andrew,

I was writing my own note to you wondering why you are so indifferent to this terrible FISA bill when you are so opposed to torture, but another reader has already said much of what I would have said. Your response to that reader, however, is disappointing.

Your response sounds like it's couched from a perspective of fear, but I think you are afraid of the wrong things. Should we be doing everything we can to find and track potential threats? Yes, but within the bounds of our existing legal framework, and in a manner that does not jeopardize our civil liberties. Certainly not in a manner that undermines our founding documents.

That reader was right to hint at the possibility of these new surveillance powers being egregiously abused, and that is what you should be afraid of more than terror threats. The distance is very short between a totalitarian police state and an unchecked executive with sweeping powers of surveillance, supported by a compliant congress and an indifferent public.

You, as someone who once had to hide his true nature, I would think the prospect of someone in authority who took a disliking to you and abused that surveillance authority in order to harm you would be a more realistic threat than the possibility of you being harmed by some foreign agent with limited reach and capabilities.

But on the comparison between FISA and torture, they are both immoral on legal grounds. They both go directly against the grain of our national fiber, and our founding principles. Not only are both issues horrible on their own merits, they are completely un-American. As a veteran from a military family, someone who has sworn an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, I take this issue very seriously. From my perspective, the Constitution - and the very soul of this country - is under assault by some cravenly immoral and cowardly individuals, who use the specter of fear to usurp sweeping powers of authority. Those who would do this are the same types of people who would also abuse that power. It is incredibly sad that you don't see this.

Jake

Time to FIGHT!

About that money that I was going to donate to Obama's GE fund. That's going to the ACLU to help fight the FISA Fuck Over.

Join the FIGHT!

What we need to do to all the Dems that caved on the FISA bill

The fight will continue

Obama may have joined the Republicans in taking their morning constitution on the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, but there are still a handful of people with spines who aren't going to bend over for Bush.

The ACLU plans to challenge the law as soon as Bush signs it into law. No telling whether or not that will do any good, but at least they're not afraid to fight.

Keep on rockin' in the (not-so-free) world, Glenn!

Hey Glenn,

Since you mentioned that you've gotten a lot of e-mails from Obama supporters that say you should stop criticizing him, I just want you to know that there are others out here who think like you do. That it is Obama's behavior that warrants criticism, not the criticism of his behavior.

You're calling it like it is. No matter how anyone feels about this bill, there is one simple truth that cannot be denied. Barack Obama LIED to his supporters back when he said he would support a filibuster of any bill that contained immunity for telecoms involved with warrantless wiretapping. In doing so, he completely shot himself in the foot, because he can no longer be trusted on ANY issue when he would so cravenly undermine the Constitution. He has shown himself inexplicably to be a vacillating and unprincipled politician, and in my view an utter coward.

Thanks for the truth!

Jake Barlow

Why the media loves McCain?

Does he use some kind of magical bbq sauce, laced with magic mushrooms or Ecstasy? Or maybe Cindy plies them all with promises of free Budweiser for the rest of their lives? Maybe the [Straight] Talk Express is stocked with lots of free porn and chicken.

It's easy for me to believe that it's all of these, and perhaps that they are all still in love with their "idea" of McCain the Top Gun Maverick. Except McCain was never even close to being a Top Gun, given how many planes he "crashed and burned." (Hell, he's never even been much of a maverick.) Maybe it's because they see that he's so pliable, given the way his stances on issues change seemingly by the moment. A guy like that would certainly be easy enough to manipulate, and his involvement as part of the Keating 5 would support that notion.

But maybe the reason is much more cynical. Maybe the press is trying to create an artificial horserace like they did with Clinton. even though Obama had essentially won the primaries by the first week in March, the MSM made hay out of Clinton's "dogged determination" and "won't back down" fighting, even though her odds of overtaking Obama were slim to none. But a horserace it was, yeah? A real nail-biter. The ratings and ad sales were through the roof!

Stepping back away from the trees, to me the forest looks like it has a clear path running from Chicago to the White House. That path cutting in from Arizona looks twisted, winding, and narrow, and full of fallen trees, briar patches, and nefarious, loot-stealing highwaymen. It seems clear to just about anyone who is not a white racist pig that Obama is walking all over McCain in the general election, and every day is two steps forward for Obama, and only a half-step forward (or one step back) for McCain. It's only the MSM that seems to have not gotten the memo, or if they have, they are choosing to ignore it. Instead, we find the MSM fabricating a new horserace, this time with Big Brown versus Ol' Gray Mare Mac. It is in the financial interest of the MSM to keep some sense of competition alive in this race, otherwise, consider all the lost revenue - and lost journalism jobs - if the media treated this race like it really is: Obama is beating the snot out of McCain.

Should I be happy about this?

Getting quoted in an article in the NY Daily News - with the fifth largest circulation in the US - on my 40th birthday sounds like a good thing, especially in an article that also quotes Glenn Greenwald on the same issue. But then it is the NY Daily News, a rag that has been at times in a head-to-head race to the bottom with Rupert Murdock's NY Post. It's also quoting something I wish I wouldn't have had to say. But today tomorrow will bear out my reasoning as Barack Obama votes alongside many other cowardly Democratic senators to undermine the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.

But at least Mike Saul wrote the article somewhat fairly, so I'm grateful for that. Although he could have mentioned a little more about the wiretapping flap.

UPDATE:
The votes in the Senate on various amendments to the FISA "compromise" bill and to the underlying bill itself were originally scheduled for today, but have been postponed until tomorrow (Wednesday, July 9) to enable Senators to attend the funeral of Jesse Helms.

Fired up for Mac!

It bridges the gap between pork and cookie.

You don't hear that everyday.

http://neverbashfulwithbutter.blogspot.com/2007/12/experiments-in-deliciousness-bacon.html

Why They Haven't Attacked Us Again

© Ted Rall

In a Galaxy not so far away...

Our hero races to the find its center.

heh!

Sunday Sketch - Flip-flops are Great for the Summer

On the heals of launching Animal Farm Fridays in honor of the rising totalitarian police state in America, I'm now kicking off the Sunday Sketch, featuring an unfinished - and currently exclusive - cartoon. Some of you may recall my earlier request to get readers to pound away on the Google ads to help me justify the time commitment it takes to do these cartoons. There's been modest progress there, but right now sketches and works-in-progress are the most I can do. So thanks for those who have been clicking those ads, but I'm pleading now for others to literally abuse those ads with your mouse clicks - point the arrow on the ads and pound away on that mouse button - because, while this is partly a labor of love, it is still labor, and I still have bills to pay.

With that, I'll pause on the pity party/beggars ball and introduce to you the inaugural piece to the new Sunday Sketch feature on The Low Bar. (Click the image to enlarge)

I've been paying attention

Josh wants to know if we're paying attention, and for the record I'm saying "yeah." I've been paying attention to the exceedingly clear bias the reporters from the Associated Press have shown in their stories against Obama, almost as obviously egregious as those of Fox News. That's really saying something, because at least Fox News doesn't shy away from its obvious bias against Obama, nor does Fox News try to pretend to be anything other than baseless tabloid journalism. But the folks at the AP are flea-ridden dogs pretending to be shit-eating pigs, so they haven't quite gotten the hang of what it takes to roll around in the muck and love doing it. But with Fox News's big daddy Rupert on the AP board, it's only a matter of time before the lot of them become just as useless and joyfully pathetic as all the other fecal freaks at Fox News.

New Look

I've been working on a new look for The Low Bar, and I'm interested in what you think before I kill myself trying to code it. Take a peek and let me know what you think, or if you have a preference for one or the other. All feedback is welcome, good and bad.

How dare they, indeed!

Preach it, brother!

Now these bad actors are prepared to set aside your right to privacy — written into the Constitution as a key part of our Bill of Rights — with hardly a nod in the direction of the true patriots who rebelled against an English king and his army to guarantee those rights.

That they will do this while the last empty phrases of the political windbags at the Fourth of July celebrations are still echoing across a thousand city parks and the bright red, white and blue bunting and blizzard of American flags still flap in the breeze is little short of breath-taking.

How dare they?

...

They would have us believe that a nation of 300 million people must surrender what a million other Americans gave their lives in war to protect in order to protect us from a couple of hundred fanatics hiding in caves in Waziristan.

Somewhere across an ocean and a desert, hiding in his cave, a man of hate named Osama bin Laden is laughing up the sleeve of his dirty robe at the thought that he and a small handful of fellow fanatics could tie a great nation in knots — knots of fear stoked by our own leaders.

We have done incalculably more and greater damage to ourselves since September 11, 2001, than a thousand bin Ladens and ten thousand al Qaida recruits could ever have done to us.

The world just got a little better

Jessie Helms is dead!

Losing Hope

After a thorough re-reading (and re-reading) of Obama's statement on his FISA cave-in, I've come to this conclusion. What this sounds like to me is that Barack Obama's attitude is "Aw, aren't they cute? Look how the angry supporters self-organized to tell me how much they don't like that I flip-flopped on the FISA bill. That's just darling. Okay little cuties, run along now. Go back to your little blogs, and rant and rave all you like, and leave this Presidenting stuff to us grown-ups."

Obama just lost nearly all of my respect. Seeing Obama being weak on this issue and playing into the right's frames of national security, seeing Obama willfully participate in the denigration of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, and see Obama act so patronizingly towards his supporters who firmly believe that we are first a nation of laws, not a nation of men, I am so very saddened.

While I could easily believe that Obama would not abuse the power of the Executive branch the way that George W. Bush has, I cannot accept that as a reasonable defense of his new position. It is not enough to say "trust me" on such a critical issue. It does not matter how trustworthy he may appear to be. But on that note, if we cannot trust Obama to stand by his own words and principles on such a critical issue, how can we trust anything else he says? Why won't we just expect him to do the politically expedient thing of the moment? Isn't that what the Clintons are famous for? Isn't that what triangulation is?

Here is why I find him to be so patronizing with this statement:

It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate.

Potentially weakens? No, it absolutely weakens the deterrent effect of the law. It is not as though we demand accountability for the sake of vengeance. Accountability for past abuses would have the effect of increasing the deterrent effect of the law, ensuring that those who might liberally interpret those laws in the future could be held accountable retroactively. As for supporting the removal of Title II, that just talk, and talk is cheap. Actions speak louder than words. Supporting this bill even while verbally objecting to Title II is like talking out of both sides of your mouth at the same time. Clintonism at its finest.

But I also believe that the compromise bill is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year. The exclusivity provision makes it clear to any President or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court. In a dangerous world, government must have the authority to collect the intelligence we need to protect the American people. But in a free society, that authority cannot be unlimited. As I've said many times, an independent monitor must watch the watchers to prevent abuses and to protect the civil liberties of the American people. This compromise law assures that the FISA court has that responsibility

The exclusivity provision is needless rhetoric. The current FISA law was just liberally interpreted by Bush, as could this new exclusivity provision be imaginatively interpreted by a future President. As for this "compromise law" assuring that the FISA court has the responsibility of "watching the watchers", the current FISA bill already does that just fine.

But leaving that aside, I am completely appalled at this new tone Obama is taking with his supporters. Firstly, he is talking to us like children, much like Bush did. And using fear - like Bush - to defend his position. "In a dangerous world..." WTF? Seriously, Obama. WTF? Who have you become?

The Inspectors General report also provides a real mechanism for accountability and should not be discounted. It will allow a close look at past misconduct without hurdles that would exist in federal court because of classification issues. The recent investigation uncovering the illegal politicization of Justice Department hiring sets a strong example of the accountability that can come from a tough and thorough IG report.

Really? And how is that going, Mr. Obama? How is the uncovering of these illegal issues going? When a rogue Executive has the backing of a rogue Judiciary and the support of roadblocking Legislators, and when lawmakers can't enforce suppoenas against Executive staff members, ow are we to believe that this "new and improved" compromise bill will do anything to keep the government from violating our Constitutional rights again? The answer: It can't!

The ability to monitor and track individuals who want to attack the United States is a vital counter-terrorism tool, and I'm persuaded that it is necessary to keep the American people safe -- particularly since certain electronic surveillance orders will begin to expire later this summer. Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I've chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention -- once I’m sworn in as President -- to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

BOO! Are you scared yet? (I'll address in more detail the issue of these expiring electronic surveillance orders, but the short of it is that these orders need to expire, and their expiration will do nothing to make us less safe.) But to the point of Obama's intentions once he's sworn in, this goes back to the matter of trust. In the very statement he makes to defend his flip-flopping, he asks us to trust him when he's President. That sounds eerily familiar. I will repeat, we are a nation of laws, not a nation of men. That's where Bush got it wrong, and now it is looking like it is where Obama is getting it wrong.

Now, I understand why some of you feel differently about the current bill, and I'm happy to take my lumps on this side and elsewhere. For the truth is that your organizing, your activism and your passion is an important reason why this bill is better than previous versions. No tool has been more important in focusing peoples' attention on the abuses of executive power in this Administration than the active and sustained engagement of American citizens. That holds true -- not just on wiretapping, but on a range of issues where Washington has let the American people down.

Awwww. Aren't we sweet? Look how we got Obama's attention just long enough to tell us all to collectively go fuck ourselves.

Firstly, Obama supporters in the FISA group had nothing to do with this current compromise bill. While some in the group may have been vocal about the issue, this particular group was formed to tell Obama that we were not happy with this particular new bill, nor with his reversal on the issue, and his decision to go against his own words. Look how that has worked for us. We get a pat on the bottom and told to run along, while Obama goes off a plays nice with the telecoms. How much has he gotten from them anyway?

I learned long ago, when working as an organizer on the South Side of Chicago, that when citizens join their voices together, they can hold their leaders accountable. I'm not exempt from that. I'm certainly not perfect, and expect to be held accountable too. I cannot promise to agree with you on every issue. But I do promise to listen to your concerns, take them seriously, and seek to earn your ongoing support to change the country. That is why we have built the largest grassroots campaign in the history of presidential politics, and that is the kind of White House that I intend to run as President of the United States -- a White House that takes the Constitution seriously, conducts the peoples' business out in the open, welcomes and listens to dissenting views, and asks you to play your part in shaping our country’s destiny.

Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have. After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.

So I appreciate the feedback through my.barackobama.com, and I look forward to continuing the conversation in the months and years to come. Together, we have a lot of work to do.

I don't see a whole lot of "accountability" here at all, not with Obama being so dismissive of and patronizing to so many of his supporters. As for this being a deal breaker, I mentioned earlier that it is indeed a deal breaker for me. I hope Obama wins against McCain. I really do. I really believe that McCain would be horrible for this country, and despite this "new but not improved Obama," I think he'd be a great President. But he is going to have to do it without my help.

Obama's campaign was the first campaign I ever volunteered for. I have donated more of my money to his campaign than to any other, by far. I got on board back when he formed his exploratory committee, and have been supporting him on the phones calling almost every state, walking the streets of San Francisco, and the streets of San Antonio. I did this because he convinced me that he was not like other politicians. He convinced me that he was a true leader, not someone who was led by consultants. He seemed guided by principles, not blown by political winds. He talked to us all like we were adults, and treated us with respect.

I don't know who this new Barack Obama is, but I don't particularly like him, at least not as much as the old Obama.

Thanks, Glenn

First of all, thanks Glenn Greenwald for the link to a little post on this tiny little backwater blog in your very astute post on Obama's FISA cave. I really appreciate the traffic, and the lively discussion it has generated.

More importantly, thank you for your dogged determination to get the story out about just how dangerous this new FISA bill is, and how damaging it is to our country.

Cheers!

Animal Farm Friday - Independence Day Edition

Predictable, I suppose. But what can I say. These are magnificent birds. Stephen Colbert, this one's for you!

Declaration on Independence Day (eve)

I wish I was part of this group. Where do I sign on?

Rabble Rousers Post Subversive “Declaration” in NYT

Off Obama's bus

Here is an excerpt from Obama's statement on his FISA cave in, interspersed with my knee-jerk commentary (I will have full analysis when I have a proper keyboard again):

...

Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward,
some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That's
ok.

Me: It is a deal breaker, and I guess Obama is happy to lose my support.

But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast
majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have.

Me: If by differences Obama means the way we value the Constitution, then he is astoundingly out of touch with the way I - and many like me - feel. I am sorry, but pissing on the Constitution is absolutely unequivocal to any other issue in this - or any - campaign. Accepting the past transgressions against the Constitution, and those transgressors, is unacceptable.

After all, the choice in this election could not be clearer. Whether
it is the economy, foreign policy, or the Supreme Court, my opponent
has embraced the failed course of the last eight years, while I want
to take this country in a new direction. Make no mistake: if John
McCain is elected, the fundamental direction of this country that we
love will not change. But if we come together, we have an historic
opportunity to chart a new course, a better course.

Me: Sorry mate, but turning your back on your principles and on the Constitution is an act of cowardice. It is a weak political move, and it goes against the primary reasons I supported you since prior to your official announcement to run. The Barack Obama who penned this letter is not the same person I flew to Texas to volunteer for.

The vacillating, flip-flopping politician that you appear to have become is little different from McCain, and I can no longer trust you any more than I could McCain.

This does not sound like a new course at all, but rather a failed course, and one I want no part of. Not only have you lost my support, you may have even lost my vote. Consider me officially off the Obama bus.

WHIP IT! WHIP IT GOOD!

/Shift

Earlier today in a response to a question by Mike Saul from the NY Daily News on Obama's statement today on withdrawing from Iraq I wrote:

My first thought is that Obama's recent actions and statements won't help him avoid being painted a flip-flopper by the right, but they were going to find a way to do that anyhow. It also won't help Obama much with the "low information" voters for the same reason. I, however, expected this. Obama has always said that how he wants to proceed with Iraq will be determined by the information he has available, and he never ruled out that his thinking might shift. I remember this from either a debate moderated by Tim Russert, or perhaps it was on his MTP appearance. However, the context of those statements seemed to apply more to post-inauguration than while still campaigning. But we can't deny - at least from recent press reports - that things do appear to be changing in Iraq, at least from the point of the Iraqi government trying to at least appear to be acting more independent.

I'm less concerned about what he has to say about Iraq, because lets face it, there's no easy way out of this for anyone. What I am very concerned about is what he says about Iran. Any "tough talk" is going to have a negative affect on me.

On their own, many of the apparent "flip-flops" from Obama lately are anything but. If you've read his books, you'd know that he was for the death penalty for those who would rape and murder a child. He was also fairly pro gun, though he was also for gun control, especially in Chicago, and those positions are not incompatible.

His recent remarks about withdrawing the troops from Iraq are consistent with what he has said all along, but when you put all of these recent positions together and view them out of their original context, you see what appears to be a pattern of Obama shifting away from his progressive values and pandering more to the "center" - wherever the hell that is.

I guess I could be in the center, considering that my positions swing far right in some cases, but far left on most others. What I liked about Obama is that he seemed to embody a similar dynamic, that he could be liberal and libertarian and conservative, without those positions being in conflict. What I liked most about him, however, was that he seemed guided more by principles than by politics, and wasn't afraid to be controversial. I still believe that for the most part, but I cannot compromise on the FISA issue.

Make no mistake. I am holding Obama accountable to his words, not mine. When I say he has lost my support, I mean that I am no longer willing to give him my money, nor give him my time. It's not too late for him to change my mind on that, just as it's not too late to lose my vote as well. I'll be watching Obama with the same critical eye that I have always watched with, even when I walked up and down the San Francisco hills on that cold and rainy February day, even those days in Texas when I walked three precincts, and even when I talked to potential voters on the countless numbers of calls I made.

Not that it really matters all that much, what with me being one person. But then maybe it matters a little more when you factor in all those folks I encountered while volunteering for the campaign, and especially when you factor in all the fence sitters I talked over to Obama's side.

I'm anxious to see what Obama does next.

FISA is still the law!

If a judge appointed by Bush Sr. says that Li'l Bush's wiretaps were illegal, and that FISA gives Congress authority on this matter, will Obama still support a bill that grants telecoms immunity?

Not a glitch in the Matrix, but an attempt to break the matrix

Strange Bed Fellows, indeed. I'm on board to add to the "money bomb!"

Yes. It is torture.

Take it from the mouth of one of the biggest champions of the Iraq war.

A top 10 list...

...that will really piss you off!

Cockney rhyming slang...

...just about blows my loaf off! Have a butcher's.

No, Russ. We thank you!

Glad to see someone standing by their principles and not being a political coward.

No sycophancy here either!

I'm with Kos on this one, for the very same reasons!

So it's not just me...

From Greg Sargent at TPM:

Anti-FISA-Cave Group On Obama's Web Site Keeps On Growing

By Greg Sargent - July 1, 2008, 12:00PM

That social networking group set up on MyBarackObama.com for the specific purpose of urging Obama not to support the FISA cave-in bill has now grown to nearly 7,500 members.

It's the fourth largest group on the site, after less than a week in existence.

As of 9:20 AM 2:00 PM Pacific, there are over 7,900 8,900 members.

A glitch in the Matrix?

or just Chronotopic Anamorphosis from Marginalia Project on Vimeo? It gets better as it goes on.

Worth remembering...

"In adversity lies opportunity, however hidden or dim. And we must find that dim or hidden opportunity and seize it. Otherwise, despair swallows us whole."
–Cary Tennis

Can you tell I'm feeling melancholy?

The First Fax

Apparently, this question was interesting to me a couple of years ago:

What did the first person who owned a fax machine do with it?

WTF Obama?!?

What the fuck has gotten into Obama? His campaign is turning into one big massive mistake right before our very eyes. General Wes Clark rightfully says that McCain's military service and experience as a POW does not necessarily qualify him for being president, and that it also does not serve as a reliable indicator of good judgment. There was no attack on McCain, nor on his service, but to hear the right-wingnuts and media blowhards tell it, Clark might has well have pissed on McCain's medals.

But then the Obama campaign has to come running to McCain's defense? Why? There was no attack to defend against.

"As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark," said Obama campaign spokeman Bill Burton.

I'm already done donating and volunteering because of the whole FISA/telco amnesty flip-flop, but Obama is dangerously close to losing my vote outright. If they keep up this kind of wussy behavior and allow themselves to be led around by the nose by the media and the McCain campaign, then Obama can go fuck himself.