Good God. If you ever needed proof of how irrelevant the big-monied liberal advocacy groups have become, we got a lovely demonstration today when the NAACP and the National Organization for Women spoke at a press conference on behalf of the nutsy-cukoo Democrat from Georgia, Cynthia McKinney.
You may have already heard about this ridiculous brouhaha. McKinney waltzes into the Congress the other day, bypasses the security checkpoint (which members of Congress are permitted to do), but she doesn't identify herself as a member of Congress and isn't wearing her ID pin that ALL members of Congress are required to wear when at work (for the very reason that there are 535 of them, and it's not always clear who's a member). It's that pin that tells the cops at the metal detector that she's a member of Congress and not a walking human bomb.
Anyway, the cop, not recognizing her and she's not wearing her pin, yells after her "ma'am, ma'am" - McKinney just keeps on going. So he runs up to her and grabs her with his arm (not an unreasonable thing to do, considering). She turns around and slugs him in the chest. And now she's crying racism and sexism, he attacked her - oh, I'm sorry, the phrase she's using is that he "touched her inappropriately" - gee, let's make it sound like he raped her or something - anyway, yes, the brutal police man attacked her simply because she's black, a woman and he hates her politics, and now she's going to file charges against him, maybe.
Give me a frigging break. The cop ought to file charges against her.
Then, to add to the farce, also in attendance at the press conference today is actor Danny Glover and Harry Belafonte. (This is apparently to ensure that any credibility Belafonte had as a critic of the president is now totally shot.) Anyway, Glover and Belafonte then tell the crowd they have no idea what the facts of the case are. Nice.
I'm sorry, but what a pitiful excuse for a Democrat. Yes, let's cry racism and sexism and Democratism, I guess you'd call it, because a cop didn't recognize you and you decided to not even wear your member of Congress pin, or turn around when the cop called out to you while we're at war. Next time, it'll be better if the cop lets strangers without their pins just barge into the halls of Congress, bypass security, and oh blow the hell out of the entire building because they're afraid the person they stop might be - what? - a Democrat?
Like I said, the only thing more pathetic than McKinney is that NOW and the NAACP would lower themselves to attend this ridiculous farce of a press conference. Have they nothing better to do than pander to someone who belittles legitimate concerns about race and gender and political bias?
Pathetic liberal groups, and pathetic Democratic members of Congress. Their funders should cut them all off until they prove the worth of their continued existence.
I'm hoping AMERICAblog reader Barney won't mind me sharing the photo he sent in today of an orchid his wife bought a few weeks ago. It's a "typical" phalaenopsis, the kind you find in lots of local stores, but looking at this "typical" plant you can see why they sell so well. It's pretty cool.
It's spring time finally, and that means, hopefully, a new crop of orchid blooms. Different orchids bloom at different times of the year, I have I think two that are currently in the process of spiking (i.e., throwing up a flower spike that will eventually bloom). Stay tuned.
Thanks to Barney for sending in the photo, hope he doesn't mind I used it. :-)
Seems like it's been days since Bush's approval hit a new low. No fear...he's starting up the streak again in a Time magazine poll conducted Wednesday and Thursday of this week:
While the President's position on illegal immigration is clearly resonating with many voters, it hasn't helped his sagging approval ratings. They sank to 37% in the poll, a new low.
So much for that whole campaign of pep talks about Iraq to boost his approval ratings. Karl Rove's running out of tricks.
John W. Dean, Richard Nixon's White House lawyer, told senators Friday that President Bush's domestic spying exceeds the wrongdoing that toppled his former boss.
Bush, Dean told the Senate Judiciary Committee, should be censured and possibly impeached.
"Had the Senate or House, or both, censured or somehow warned Richard Nixon, the tragedy of Watergate might have been prevented," Dean said. "Hopefully the Senate will not sit by while even more serious abuses unfold before it."
UPDATE: I just found out that this was written by Nance over at Democratic Underground, here's the link:
REMEMBER WHEN you displayed your flag on the front porch on the 4th of July, and you didn’t have to worry about whether it would be misinterpreted as support for a corrupt president and his administration?
REMEMBER WHEN ‘Support the Troops’ meant equipping our military with everything necessary for battle, instead of just being a catchy phrase that looked good on a bumper-sticker?
REMEMBER WHEN your tax dollars paid for things like improved education and social programs, instead of making Halliburton shareholders millionaires?
REMEMBER WHEN you watched movies about WWII, and it was the enemy who tortured captured American soldiers, instead of American soldiers torturing the people they’d allegedly ‘liberated’?
REMEMBER WHEN you heard something on the TV news or read something in a newspaper, and you didn’t have to go to the internet to find out just how much of it was fact, and how much of it was ‘spin’?
REMEMBER WHEN a politician was caught with his hand in the cookie jar and he resigned in disgrace, instead of excusing his own behaviour by claiming that his political opponents were equally as guilty of wrongdoing?
REMEMBER WHEN ‘Made in the USA’ labels on products were the norm, and not a total oddity?
REMEMBER WHEN you hitchhiked through Europe as a teenager, and you DIDN’T have to replace the American flag on your knapsack with a Canadian flag in order to be a welcomed guest in a foreign country?
REMEMBER WHEN organized crime figures had to make phone calls from the corner phone booth, because they were the only people who had to worry about wire-taps?
REMEMBER WHEN telling a fellow politician on the floor of the House to ‘go f*ck himself’ was considered behaviour unbecoming an elected official, instead of being accepted as the way a Vice President behaves himself?
REMEMBER WHEN you could pretty well count on the fact that if the president said it, it was based on sound intelligence and was probably true?
REMEMBER WHEN you could rely on your elected representatives to put your interests ahead of the corporations that filled their campaign coffers, or the lobbyists who gave them great basketball tickets?
REMEMBER WHEN you didn’t even KNOW what religion the people you voted for were, because it didn’t really matter? Remember when you didn’t know what party your neighbour belonged to, because that didn’t really matter either?
REMEMBER WHEN the pension you’d worked for your whole life wasn’t in danger of being wiped out by corrupt CEOs, assisted by respected accounting firms that made that corruption almost impossible to detect?
REMEMBER WHEN you could brag that as an American, you were guaranteed things like free speech and due process of law, without checking the nightly news to see whether those rights were still in effect?
REMEMBER WHEN the president upheld the law of the land, instead of coming up with ‘legal loopholes’ to support the idea that he’s above the law?
REMEMBER WHEN you could say, “I’m a proud American,” without qualifying it with a list of all of the things your government is doing that you’re not exactly proud of?
REMEMBER WHEN you actually thought that the people in charge of running your country were smarter than you were?
REMEMBER WHEN your parents worked all their lives to ensure you a better life, instead of worrying about how bad the life they’d be leaving their children might be?
REMEMBER WHEN the importance of clean drinking water and breathable air were unquestionable mandates, and not some crazy hippie agenda to be weighed against corporate profits?
REMEMBER WHEN questioning your government’s policies was seen as ‘participating in the process’, and not ‘giving aid and comfort to the enemy’?
REMEMBER WHEN the ‘enemy’ was a country or military force that posed a threat to American democracy, and not a nation of innocent civilians who whose destruction was dismissible as ‘collateral damage’?
REMEMBER WHEN your country went to war based on facts beforehand, instead of constantly-changing suppositions after-the-fact?
REMEMBER WHEN ‘patriotism’ was judged by your words and actions, and not by whether you were a member of the party currently in power?
REMEMBER WHEN the ‘American Dream’ was attainable through diligence and hard work, and not the luck of the ‘outsourcing’ draw?
REMEMBER WHEN the election of a president was considered the result of democracy in action, and not the result of Diebold executives doing the job they were expected to do?
REMEMBER WHEN you sang ‘God Bless America’ as a kid, and never thought you’d grow up to wonder if, in view of your country’s actions, asking God’s blessing was asking a bit too much?
I REMEMBER WHEN … and I wonder if these ideas will become ancient history by the time those of us old enough to recall them are dead and gone.
Oh look, it's the Easter Bunny! How much more of this nonsense are people going to tolerate?
Chief executive Dennis R. Wraase's salary and bonus last year was $1.43 million, compared with $1.17 million in 2004. Also, Wraase's base salary of $825,000 is up more than 47 percent since 2003 and will go up to $950,000 this year, according to company documents filed yesterday with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Pepco standard service rates for District customers will go up 12 percent this summer, and for the company's 500,000 Maryland customers, the average increase will be $468 a year, or 38.5 percent.
Apparently they screwed up their OWN Medicare drug coverage, the entire thing was so confusing. Priceless
Not even the senior parents of Washington's top health official are immune from headaches caused by the new Medicare drug plan.
Dixie and Anne Leavitt - parents of Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt - recently were forced to change Medicare plans after learning that the one they chose imperiled their retiree medical coverage.
The elder Leavitts joined the program last fall with some fanfare and help from their son. Anne Leavitt, 73, was quoted in The Salt Lake Tribune touting the online enrollment as "smooth," and a guaranteed money-saver.
Hey, what's a few thousand tactical errors -- they only mean tens of thousands dead, hundreds of billions wasted and an intractable quagmire:
"I know we've made tactical errors, thousands of them I'm sure," Rice told an audience gathered by the British foreign policy think tank Chatham House.
Rudy, who served as deputy chief of staff while DeLay was House Majority leader, resigned in 2001 to become a lobbyist. He would be the first person to plead guilty to charges in the case since Jack Abramoff, once a leading GOP lobbyist, pleaded guilty to fraud charges in January.
Rudy was referred to in court papers released in connection with Abramoff's plea. The documents referred to Rudy as Staffer A, and said that Abramoff, on behalf of clients who wanted to stop Internet gambling and postal rate legislation, paid $50,000 in 10 equal monthly payments beginning in June 2000 to Rudy's wife while Rudy was a top aide to DeLay.
Okay, this is outrageous. Americans might have naively thought the Department of Homeland Security was going to use their tax dollars on the basics that would aid first responders. That would be wrong.
The Bush DHS is using tax dollars to subsidize a Fortune 500 oil company. Not kidding. ONE MILLION DOLLARS for a FORTUNE 500 refinery. That's what we learn from Department of Homeland Security Inspector General's report from February, 2006 (page 21):
For example, a Fortune 500 refinery received a port security grant in round five totaling almost $1 million for fencing and surveillance upgrades at a refinery located in a major port. It did put up the same amount in matching funds. This company recently reported 3rd quarter net income in excess of $1.2 billion. We remained concerned about the absence of more specific guidance on security measures proposed by private companies that are capable of paying for them, and what measures they should pay for.
Now, which Fortune 500 company -- with 3rd quarter net income of $1.2 billion -- needed tax dollars to build a fence? The GOP loves corporate welfare -- but giving tax dollars to oil companies is a new low.
The hypocrisy of the Catholic Church -- especially the Archdiocese of Boston -- knows no bounds. When they're not defending child abusers, they're bashing gays. Now, they're defending and protecting Antonin Scalia. By now, everyone know Scalia made an obscene gesture and swore right in one of their churches. But, they are firing the photographer who busted Scalia:
A freelance photographer has been fired by the Archdiocese of Boston’s newspaper for releasing a picture of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia making a controversial gesture in the Cathedral of the Holy Cross on Sunday.
Peter Smith, who had freelanced for The Pilot newspaper for a decade, lost the job yesterday after the Herald ran his photo on its front page. Smith said he has no regrets about releasing it.
“I did the right thing. I did the ethical thing,” said Smith, 51, an assistant photojournalism professor at Boston University.
Smith did the ethical thing. When was the last time anyone could say that about the Catholic church?:
While news outlets from across the country sought Smith’s photo yesterday, the archdiocese said there’s no proof that Scalia uttered an obsenity in the church. Smith said Scalia said, “To my critics, I say, ‘Vaffanculo,’ ” while making the gesture. That’s Italian for (expletive) you.
The Boston Archdiocese apparently has a VERY high standard for proof. That's why the ignored the child abuse scandal for decades.
Just imagine how riled up the new cardinal would be if a liberal pulled a stunt like that in one of the Catholic churches in Boston. That would cause outrage all the way to the prada-wearing pope.
But of course, the rumor is that after signing it he will then enter into negotiations to soften the law. So goes life in French politics. As an American, our natural tendency is to try and simplify just about everything, sometimes more successfully than others. In France, there seems to me as an outsider that there is a strong tendency to prefer complicated solutions. So now we can look forward to the signing and negotiation of this law that will spur new jobs for the youth (not that I'm buying it in it's current form) and then it's a wait and see to find out how the students will react. Let's just say that I'm not convinced they will buy into it.
With a new round of national strikes planned for 4 April I won't be making any travel plans anytime soon. Never a dull moment these days in France.
"People do regard it as a desirable goal," Public Agenda Chairman Daniel Yankelovich said. "But from a common sense point of view, both Democrats and Republicans have concluded that democracy is something that countries come to on their own."
The American public also gets it when it comes to the oil problems with Bush only repeating what the public overwhelmingly already knew. The president's brave declaration of oil dependence must have received a collective "duh, no kidding" when he thought he was making such a bold statement during his SOTU address.
But poll directors noted Americans are also alarmed increasingly by U.S. energy dependence. Ninety percent in the survey Â? conducted in January, before President Bush's declaration in his State of the Union address that the country is "addicted to oil" Â? said it was important to find alternatives to foreign energy supplies to strengthen national security.
We're going to be involved in in our 3rd war before Bush and company can figure out what the hell is going on with the body armor. This would be funny if it weren't so deadly serious. Could these guys be any more incompetent? Four years into these wars and they still haven't figure it out.
A few words about Hannah Arendt and her essay "Eichmann in Jerusalem." Something to keep in mind the next time someone tries to tell you that a vicious Republican like Jesse Helms or Pat Buchanan is actually a very nice person when you meet them. Rather than calling that person crazy, consider the nuance of what they're actually telling you:
She controversially uses the phrase 'the banality of evil' to characterize Eichmann's actions as a member of the Nazi regime, in particular his role as chief architect and executioner of Hitler's genocidal 'final solution' (Endlosung) for the 'Jewish problem'. Her characterization of these actions, so obscene in their nature and consequences, as 'banal' is not meant to position them as workaday. Rather it is meant to contest the prevalent depictions of the Nazi's inexplicable atrocities as having emanated from a malevolent will to do evil, a delight in murder. As far as Arendt could discern, Eichmann came to his willing involvement with the program of genocide through a failure or absence of the faculties of sound thinking and judgement. From Eichmann's trial in Jerusalem (where he had been brought after Israeli agents found him in hiding in Argentina), Arendt concluded that far from exhibiting a malevolent hatred of Jews which could have accounted psychologically for his participation in the Holocaust, Eichmann was an utterly innocuous individual. He operated unthinkingly, following orders, efficiently carrying them out, with no consideration of their effects upon those he targeted. The human dimension of these activities were not entertained, so the extermination of the Jews became indistinguishable from any other bureaucratically assigned and discharged responsibility for Eichmann and his cohorts.
Arendt concluded that Eichmann was constitutively incapable of exercising the kind of judgement that would have made his victims' suffering real or apparent for him. It was not the presence of hatred that enabled Eichmann to perpetrate the genocide, but the absence of the imaginative capacities that would have made the human and moral dimensions of his activities tangible for him. Eichmann failed to exercise his capacity of thinking, of having an internal dialogue with himself, which would have permitted self-awareness of the evil nature of his deeds. This amounted to a failure to use self-reflection as a basis for judgement, the faculty that would have required Eichmann to exercise his imagination so as to contemplate the nature of his deeds from the experiential standpoint of his victims. This connection between the complicity with political evil and the failure of thinking and judgement inspired the last phase of Arendt's work, which sought to explicate the nature of these faculties and their constitutive role for politically and morally responsible choices.
Nine months ago I wrote a post that got a good amount of attention, it was about the fear of money that some people have on the left. I think it's time for the next installment.
Last night I attended the Radio and Television Correspondents Association annual dinner in Washington, DC. I got invited by a radio-industry friend who had bought a few tables. It's a biggest-of-the-year kind of gala where anyone who's anyone in journalism and politics attends, from Senators to national TV anchors. The president is usually the invited guest, but as Bush was in Mexico, Cheney attended.
I knew, because of past experience with some reading this blog, that when I got back home and posted photos of the event a minority of my readers, but a very vocal minority, would be upset. Why? Because I'd be wearing a tuxedo at a party with famous people.
Da-da-da-dum.
The reaction was quick and furious, and rather vicious. Some examples:
1. I was attacked for having a photo taken with Katherine Harris, the woman who threw the election in Florida for Bush. Rather than appreciate the camp value of getting a photo with Harris (and I seriously tried to get one with Bay Buchanan, Pat Buchanan's sister, but she left before I could corner her), I was lectured about the impropriety of being photographed with “that woman” and folks decided to accuse me of selling out. One person had the nerve to write that politics might not be personal for me, but it was for him. Another commenter even came up with the crazy idea that apparently Katherine and I had been "partying" together last night. Uh huh. Me and Katherine, quite the item, you should have been there.
2. Then people got irate that I noted that Harris was rather nice in person. I went one step further and reported a conversation I had with another friend last night who knows Harris quite well. The friend, who is a good liberal, told me that I'd be surprised, on a personal level Harris is one of the nicest people my friend knows. I report that fact, and big surprise, all hell breaks loose. I am now, apparently, broadcasting that Katherine Harris is actually a wonderful human being. No, I said she's nice in person and has a reputation, even among liberals, of being an incredibly nice person. That doesn't mean I think she's a wonderful human being, it simply means that whatever she is, it's a lot more complicated than folks would like to present.
Read Hannah Arendt’s “Eichmann in Jerusalem,” then get back to me and see if you still miss the point.
3. Then I make the larger observation that the nastiest of Republicans can be some of the nicest people, and vice versa for Democrats. If you live in DC and actually meet "famous" political types, you'll likely know what I mean.
Newt Gingrich, for example. I just appeared on O'Reilly, went back to the green room, and Newt starts telling me what an amazing job I did. Mind you, I was debating gay rights with O'Reilly, Newt knows this, and is still praising me. It was weird, trust me. But it was also fascinating that Newt would be that nice one-on-one.
Then there are the gun nuts. Joe can tell you stories about them. Awful people. But incredibly, shockingly nice on a personal level. And how about arch-bigot Jesse Helms, famed for being wonderful in person. Same goes for Pat Buchanan. Yes, they're horrible people, but they're FAMED for being wonderful people in person. That's fascinating, it's not something you'd expect, and I noted that fact. And of course, lots of folks freaked out again in the comments, this time saying I thought conservatives were good people and Democrats bad people.
Again, uh huh.
4. I was told I was now in danger of being wooed to the dark side (whatever that is) and that I could no longer write objectively on the blog since I'd attended this event and seen these famous people whom I now would idolize and do anything to make them happy. I get this every time I meet someone 'famous' and report back to you guys about it. Apparently, the past 20 years of working with famous people on the Hill and in my other work, including meetings heads of state, ambassadors, the secretary of state (actually two), secretary of defense, heads of major US corporations, and more didn't corrupt me, but attending one gala in a tux will. And oh yeah, when I pointed this fact out, I was accused of being egotistical.
5. I was told I was going to lose my outsider status if I continued to go to these kind of events. When I pointed out that, per number 4 above, I've lived in DC for 20 years and lost that outsider status a few heads of states and cabinet secretaries ago, I was again "arrogant" for pointing out that fact.
6. I was chastised for not making this an evening of "substance" rather than treat it as a gala. Yes, a massive dinner dance with 2,000 people in tuxedos out for an elegant evening and I'm supposed to get out my laptop and ask the hard questions, oh yeah, and kick Katherine Harris in the shins.
7. One person said they saw this day coming, AMERICAblog for along time hasn't done substantive work - as if our work on the cell phone privacy issue just two months ago wasn't substantive. Some accused me of being arrogant and egotistical for having the temerity to suggest that maybe Katherine Harris would be mortified when she found out she got her picture taken with a top gay activist. My crime? I called myself a top gay activist. Apparently I'm either not, or I'm not supposed to know it, or I'm not supposed to acknowledge it, or something. I have no idea. But apparently in defending myself I conveniently again violated some PC code of uber-liberal ethics.
8. Another person said I'd become a media whore, or something. That all I wanted was to get my face on TV, rather than helping the cause. Of course, this person has no clue about how important the media is for our cause, and how important TV appearances are for pushing our values, our projects, our legislation, our advocacy, and more generally for fighting the growing right-wing media bias. No, it was easier to attack me personally, since after all, going on TV is the electronic equivalent of wearing a tux: Someone must pay for the sacrilege.
I'm writing about all of this not to provoke the rest of you to write encouraging words. I know that the overwhelming majority of those who read this blog don't think like this. I also know that the comments are reflective of those who comment, nothing more, nothing less. But, as I pointed out 9 months, there is something se