Shakesville

W is for Women

Editor and Publisher reports that the women of press were none too happy about Bush’s decision to all but ignore them at Tuesday’s press briefing. Scottie was there to punt on behalf of his boss, as usual:

At his almost-daily press briefing at the White House today, Press Secretary Scott McClellan fielded the usual policy questions about Hamas, Venezuela, Syria, and even one about W. Mark Felt.

But there was also something on the minds of a couple of the female correspondents, who apparently were still smarting from what they perceived as possible presidential gender bias, as exhibited at George W. Bush's press conference on Tuesday.

Here is the back-and-forth from the official transcript:

Q Scott, at the press conference yesterday, approximately 25 percent of the journalists were women, and the President took only one question from a woman reporter. Can you explain this pattern?

McCLELLAN: That might be a reflection on the media. That's not -- I don't think that's a reflection on who the President calls on.

Q Their hands were up, the female hands –

McCLELLAN: You pointed out that there is a smaller percentage of women at the event. I think that's a question you may want to address to the media, if it's a question of diversity in the media.

Q If 25 percent of the journalists are women, I would think more than 2 percent of questions -- or, in fact, it was one question -- would perhaps be directed to the women.

McCLELLAN: The President looks forward to taking questions from a wide variety of people, and I don't think that's a reflection on the President. I think that's a reflection on maybe the media and the diversity within the media. So I think that's a question you ought to direct to the media, not us.

Q Can you assure us that he will take note next time to count –

McCLELLAN: He was pleased to call on women journalists yesterday –

Q He called on one. (Laughter.)

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, like I said, there are a number of major media organizations that were represented there. The President believes it's important to get to those major media outlets and start the news conference that way. And if it's a question of diversity within those organizations, I think it's a question to direct to those organizations, not us.

Ah, right. Blame the media.

How long will the media continue to take the blame for the president’s failings before they get fed the fuck up and stop kissing his ass? Yeesh.

And for the record, directing only one question to a woman when women comprised fully a quarter of those with their hands in the air isn't possible gender bias. It's obvious gender bias, the existence of which in the Bush administration shouldn't even be remotely doubted, considering the sustained attack on women's rights emanating from the same source.

Bill Suggests Hillary Take Advice from Bush

"She ought to do pretty much what President Bush did when he was re-elected governor of Texas. He said he would serve -- he didn't rule it out."

-- Bill Clinton, on CNN's Larry King Live, about what Sen. Hillary Clinton should say in her 2006 re-election campaign about running for president. (Link)

Reason #1,336,989 why liberals need to cease the Clinton-worship: Because he can’t stop talking about the Bushes, both father and son. Enough already.

Woe is we.

Downing Street Memo: Awaken the Media

The Big Brass Alliance, in addition to supporting Congressman John Conyers’ and AfterDowningStreet.org’s efforts to pursue a formal inquiry into the administration’s actions leading up to the Iraq war, is also throwing its weight behind the Awaken the Mainstream Media campaign started by Daily Kos diarist smintheus.

Each day, smintheus will be posting a new diary identifying three media contacts to be emailed, faxed, and/or called to politely request they report on the Downing Street Memo.

The campaign started yesterday with the following three media contacts:

(A) CBS Evening News. email: evening@cbsnews.com phone: 212-975-3247

(B) Associated Press. email: info@ap.org phone: 202-776-9400 (DC) or 212-621-1500 (National News)

(C) C-Span Washington Journal. email: journal@c-span.org

Today’s alert is for the following:

A) ABC News. email: PeterJennings@abcnews.com phone: 212-456-4040

(B) PBS NewsHour. email: newshour@pbs.org phone: 703-739-5000

(C) The Baltimore Sun, Public Editor Paul Moore. email: publiceditor@baltsun.com phone: 410-332-6364

Smintheus notes:

Please note that the third contact, The Baltimore Sun, is a special case for us. Its long history of producing outstanding investigative series and hard-nosed political reporting often has provided a valuable counterweight in D.C. to the bland or indifferent journalism of bigger newspapers. We would like to encourage them to live up to that proud tradition. Though they do not have the same resources as WaPo or NYT, The Sun is still capable of breaking the DSM story wide open. Our goal is to convince them to do that, much more than to pass judgment on their lack of coverage thus far.

Let’s get busy letting the mainstream media know we’d like them to cover the Downing Street Memo. Let them know how important this story is.

Big Brass Update

Okay, after spending all afternoon in meetings, and then coming home and having to get my internet turned back on (ARGH), I'm back in business.

New additions to the Big Brass Alliance will be added as quickly as I can add them. In the meantime, everyone should be running with this Fox story. And if you're left with nothing else to do, somebody please find me a sugardaddy so I can quit my job, or I'll never have a life ever again! ;-)

UPDATE: Pam has been going to town updating the Big Brass Alliance page. It's looking awesome. Check it out.

And, at the suggestion of some kind (and optimistic) people, I've added a tip jar to the lefthand menu, because I am broker than a broke thing with lots of little broke bits all over it.

FOX NEWS COVERS DOWNING STREET MEMO!

Everything I thought I understood about the world continues to spin out of control as Fox News covers the memo under the headline Downing Street Memo Mostly Ignored in US:

A British government memo that critics say proves the Bush administration manipulated evidence about weapons of mass destruction in order to carry out a plan to overthrow Saddam Hussein has received little attention in the mainstream media, frustrating opponents of the Iraq war.

The "Downing Street Memo" — first published by The Sunday Times of London on May 1 — summarizes a high-level meeting between Prime Minister Tony Blair and his senior national security team on July 23, 2002, months before the March 2003 coalition invasion of Iraq.

The memo suggests that British intelligence analysts were concerned that the Bush administration was marching to war on wobbly evidence that Saddam posed a serious threat to the world.

[…]

White House spokesman Scott McClellan has said there is "no need" to respond to the memos, the authenticity of which has not been denied.

Dante Zappala does not agree. For Zappala, the Downing Street Memo strikes a critical and personal chord. His brother, Sgt. Sherwood Baker, 30, a soldier in the Pennsylvania National Guard, was killed in Baghdad 13 months ago on what Zappala said was a mission to find weapons there.

"My family knows the consequences of the decision they made to go to war," said Zappala, 29, of Philadelphia. He is a member of Military Families Speak Out, a group that opposes the war and, according to Zappala, now has more than 2,000 members.

"I can't speak for what the TV news decides to focus their attention on," Zappala said. "They seem to have a willful deference to all relevant information. I think they've really just dropped the ball on this."

They also mention Conyers’ efforts, and here’s our challenge from Fox News:

Several popular left-leaning blogs have taken up the cause to keep the story alive, encouraging readers to contact media outlets. A Web site, DowningStreetMemo.com, tells readers to contact the White House directly with complaints.

"This is a test of the left-wing blogosphere," said Jim Pinkerton, syndicated columnist and regular contributor to FOX News Watch, who pointed out that The Sunday Times article came out just before the British election and apparently had little effect on voters' decisions.

"In many ways that memo might prove all of the arguments the critics of the war have made," he added. "But the bulk of Americans don't agree, or don't seem that alarmed, so it is a power test to see if they can drive it back on the agenda."

All right, Big Brass Alliance—Fox fucking News has thrown down the gauntlet. Onward and upward!

Hmmm...

It's been a week, and still no veto.

Maybe he's building up to something. After all, we know Dear Leader wouldn't hide from an important issue.

(At the cross-post, cross-post-cabana...)

Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Don't Make Any Fucking Sense

Back in April, I wrote about an Iraq War veteran with a Purple Heart, Army Sgt. Robert Stout, 23, who wanted to continue his military career, even though the military wasn’t sure they wanted him. In spite of the Army having problems meeting its recruitment goals, the National Guard relaxing educational standards and age requirements, and every segment of the military upping their advertising and fighting to keep recruiters on college campuses, the military was considering turning away a heroic Army Sergeant who has courageously served his country in war because he is gay.

Well, they’re done thinking about it, and you’ll no doubt be totally unsurprised to hear they have kicked him out.

An Army sergeant from Ohio who was wounded in Iraq and wanted to remain in the military as an openly gay soldier was officially discharged Tuesday, according to an advocacy group.

Sgt. Robert Stout, 23, was awarded the Purple Heart after a grenade sent shrapnel into his arm, face and legs while he was using a machine gun on a Humvee in May 2004.

Stout, of Utica in central Ohio, told The Associated Press in April that he wanted to remain in the military and be openly gay, but that would conflict with the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

[…]

Army officials at the Pentagon could not immediately confirm the discharge. The Army declined to comment earlier on the case other than to say that soldiers discharged under "don't ask, don't tell" typically receive honorable discharges.

I feel much safer knowing our struggling military is one less faggot today, don’t you?

(Hat tip Pam.)

Never thought I'd be supporting Ford... I guess there's a first time for everything.

If you haven't yet, head over to Pam's House Blend and read this post about the disgusting American Family Association (Jesus, even the name of their group infuriates me) and their latest hate-fueled boycott against Ford.

Then call or email Ford and give them your support. Here is part of their official policy on diversity and inclusion:

Diversity embodies all the differences that make us unique individuals. Not limited to physical aspects of race, ethnicity, gender, age, disability, and sexual orientation, it includes culture, religion, education, experience, opinions, beliefs, language, nationality and more.

At Ford Motor Company we recognize that diversity is not only a reality of our global nature, it’s a distinct advantage, and one that we value and embrace. We also know that we can only leverage the benefits of diversity by understanding and respecting the differences among all employees. (More at Pam's)

As stated at Americablog,

THIS is what we were trying to tell Microsoft. These pigs aren't attacking you because you endorse pro-gay legislation. They're attacking you, and will continue to attack you, until you revoke your pro-gay INTERNAL policies and until you actively discriminate against gay and lesbian employees.

These are hate groups, they know one thing: hate. They exist for one thing: hate. They will not stop attacking you until you become as bigoted and hateful as they.

My point: Microsoft, you did the right thing, not just because it's the right thing, but because these sick pseudo-religious fucks wouldn't have left you alone until you fired every single gay employee.

Indeed. Make no mistake about it; these people would bring back concentration camps if they were able.

When corporations as large as Microsoft and Ford have the courage to tell the Radical Religious Right to go fuck themselves, other corporations will follow suit. But they won't do it unless they know we're behind them.

Take five minutes out of your day and let them know you appreciate their progressive policies.

(What's it all about... Cross-Post?)

Hello... Follow me... Okay!

This is probably only of interest to Shakespeare's Sister and myself, but if you're a fan of the Oddworld games, you may wish to trot on over to Spudville and check out this post.

Harmful Books and the Wingnuts Who Fear Them

Human Events Online (which is a wingnut site trying to approximate legitimacy by running under a name that sounds vaguely reminiscent of a legitimate outfit likely to be dismissed by the administration as “irrelevant” or “absurd”) has ranked the Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th Centuries. My top two nominations, the Bible and the Qur’an, didn’t make the list for some reason.*

Here’s their Top 10:

The Communist Manifesto
Mein Kampf
Quotations from Chairman Mao (also known as The Little Red Book)
The Kinsey Report
Democracy and Education
Das Kapital
The Feminine Mystique
The Course of Positive Philosophy
Beyond Good and Evil
General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money

The best part, however, are the descriptions of each book and why they’re supposedly so harmful. Friedrich Engels is described as the “original limousine leftist,” Mao Zedong’s Little Red Book is noted as having enamored “Western leftists,” Kinsey’s reports “were designed to give a scientific gloss to the normalization of promiscuity and deviancy,” author of Democracy and Education John Dewey’s “views had great influence on the direction of American education--particularly in public schools--and helped nurture the Clinton generation,” Karl Marx “could not have predicted 21st Century America: a free, affluent society based on capitalism and representative government that people the world over envy and seek to emulate,” Betty Friedan “disparaged traditional stay-at-home motherhood as life in ‘a comfortable concentration camp’--a role that degraded women and denied them true fulfillment in life,” and, perhaps my favorite, in describing Keynes’ General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, is it noted that “The book is a recipe for ever-expanding government. When the business cycle threatens a contraction of industry, and thus of jobs, he argued, the government should run up deficits, borrowing and spending money to spur economic activity. FDR adopted the idea as U.S. policy, and the U.S. government now has a $2.6-trillion annual budget and an $8-trillion dollar debt.”

Damn you, FDR and our $8 trillion dollar debt! If only he had had the infinite wisdom of responding to Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor by invading Mexico based on cooked intelligence and cutting taxes for the rich, none of this would have happened!

Anyway…

The really interesting part comes when you read the entry for Mein Kampf, which is still a widely read text among active radical conservative groups in America today—a point that is strangely absent from the description:

Mein Kampf (My Struggle) was initially published in two parts in 1925 and 1926 after Hitler was imprisoned for leading Nazi Brown Shirts in the so-called “Beer Hall Putsch” that tried to overthrow the Bavarian government. Here Hitler explained his racist, anti-Semitic vision for Germany, laying out a Nazi program pointing directly to World War II and the Holocaust. He envisioned the mass murder of Jews, and a war against France to precede a war against Russia to carve out “lebensraum” (“living room”) for Germans in Eastern Europe. The book was originally ignored. But not after Hitler rose to power. According to the Simon Wiesenthal Center, there were 10 million copies in circulation by 1945.

Huh. For a book that registered as #2 on their list, they don’t seem to find many inflammatory things to say about it. I mean, sure, it was popular with Nazis, just like The Communist Manifesto was popular with Communists, but how come Engels gets identified as the ancestor of modern American “liberal elites,” which is a tenuous connection at best, considering that most American liberals aren’t Communists, but Hitler isn’t called “the godfather of the American white supremacy movement,” even though one of the foremost groups dealing in white supremacy are called Neo-Nazis.

Grr. None of this should surprise me from a site that runs Ann Coulter’s column, I guess. Still, it’s just amazing to see the same people who go on about liberal bias in the media (by now, well established as completely fucking imaginary) treat even a booklist with such ridiculous bias. And how scarily indicative of the true extremes of their ideological bent that they don’t really consider Neo-Nazis fair game.

Runners-up that didn’t quite make the Top 10 included: John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty, B.F. Skinner’s Beyond Freedom and Dignity, Charles Darwin’s Origin of the Species and Descent of Man, Margaret Mead’s Coming of Age in Samoa, Simone de Beauvoir’s Second Sex, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, and Sigmund Freud’s Introduction to Psychoanalysis.

You know…basically all the books that if an ignorant, conservative, red state halfwit actually read might turn them into a liberal.

(Hat tip to Nobody’s Business.)

* Before you fire off a nasty comment about how those books aren’t harmful; it’s the people who misread them who are harmful, I’d like to point out that the same could be said for any book, so shut it.

Downing Street Memo: Questions for Rumsfeld

In addition to the letter he, along with 88 members of Congress, sent to President Bush (which, if you still haven’t signed, please go here to do so), Representative John Conyers yesterday also sent a letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, questioning him about US military air attacks prior to the war in "an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an excuse for war." BradBlog reports:

This latest information on the covert way in which the Bush Administration may have pushed the world towards war is based on a new report from Rupert Murdoch's London Times which reported over the weekend that "despite the lack of an Iraqi reaction, the air war began anyway in September [of 2002] with a 100-plane raid."

In fact, the original Downing Street Memo/Minutes mention that "The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun 'spikes of activity' to put pressure on the regime."

That the US was allegedly taunting Saddam Hussein into war is, of course, quite different than what was reported to the American people by this administration (she said with all due restraint). Just as Conyers laid out specific questions in his letter to Bush that were raised by the Downing Street Memo, he does the same for Rumsfeld:

"Did the RAF and the United States military increase the rate that they were dropping bombs in Iraq in 2002? If so, what was the extent and timing of the increase?

What was the justification for any such increase in the rate of bombing in Iraq at this time? Was this justification reviewed by legal authorities in the U.S.?

To the best of your knowledge, was there any agreement with any representative of the British government to engage in military action in Iraq before authority was sought from the Congress or the U.N.? If so, what was the nature of the agreement?"

Conyers and the other 88 members of Congress have yet to receive a response from either the White House or the Pentagon in regard to their questions.

BradBlog’s got the entire text of Conyer’s letter; I encourage you to read it. It will hearten you to know there’s someone who’s tenaciously pursuing the truth on behalf of us all.

Sold to the Highest Bidder

So I totally need a break from the computer at this point, but just when I think I’m about to get away, some brand new insanity or other drags me back in. I feel like Boromir about to come face to face with the Balrog…What is this new devilry?

(Yes, I’m that fried; I’m quoting Lord of the Rings.)

Care of The Heretik, we find out that many of the detainees at Gitmo were sold into capture:

The U.S. Rewards for Justice program pays only for information that leads to the capture of suspected terrorists identified by name, said Steve Pike, a State Department spokesman. Some $57 million has been paid under the program, according to its Web site.

It offers rewards up to $25 million for information leading to the capture of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

But a wide variety of detainees at the U.S. lockup at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, alleged they were sold into capture. Their names and other identifying information were blacked out in the transcripts from the tribunals, which were held to determine whether prisoners were correctly classified as enemy combatants.

One detainee who said he was an Afghan refugee in Pakistan accused the country's intelligence service of trumping up evidence against him to get bounty money from the U.S.

"When I was in jail, they said I needed to pay them money and if I didn't pay them, they'd make up wrong accusations about me and sell me to the Americans and I'd definitely go to Cuba," he told the tribunal. "After that I was held for two months and 20 days in their detention, so they could make wrong accusations about me and my (censored), so they could sell us to you."

Another prisoner said he was on his way to Germany in 2001 when he was captured and sold for "a briefcase full of money" then flown to Afghanistan before being sent to Guantanamo.

"It's obvious. They knew Americans were looking for Arabs, so they captured Arabs and sold them — just like someone catches a fish and sells it," he said. The detainee said he was seized by "mafia" operatives somewhere in Europe and sold to Americans because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time — an Arab in a foreign country.

A detainee who said he was a Saudi businessman claimed, "The Pakistani police sold me for money to the Americans."

Of course, if you, like the president, believe that taking the word of prisoners who hate America is absurd, you’re probably feeling fairly dubious at this point. Well, try this on for size:

In March 2002, the AP reported that Afghan intelligence offered rewards for the capture of al-Qaida fighters — the day after a five-hour meeting with U.S. Special Forces. Intelligence officers refused to say if the two events were linked and if the United States was paying the offered reward of 150 million Afghanis, then equivalent to $4,000 a head.

That day, leaflets and loudspeaker announcements promised "the big prize" to those who turned in al-Qaida fighters.

Said one leaflet: "You can receive millions of dollars. ... This is enough to take care of your family, your village, your tribe for the rest of your life — pay for livestock and doctors and school books and housing for all your people."

Helicopters broadcast similar announcements over the Afghan mountains, enticing people to "Hand over the Arabs and feed your families for a lifetime," said Najeeb al-Nauimi, a former Qatar justice minister and leader of a group of Arab lawyers representing nearly 100 detainees.

The Heretik notes:

I expect Bush or Cheney tomorrow to discount this story. These unfortunate people who were sold by bounty hunters to U.S. forces will be discounted as people who hate freedom and hate America. Our leaders will say that with a straight face, without irony. Cheney and Bush will be right in one sense. If these unfortunate souls didn't hate America before, they will have plenty of reason to hate us now.

Sigh.

All I can say is that it feels like I have been kidnapped and awoken in another country—a crazy, brutal, careless country, which looks very much like the place I used to live, but bears no resemblance in countless other ways. There’s no other explanation for how so many things could have gone so irreparably pear-shaped in such a short amount of time.

“President Bush and those around him lied, and the rest of us let them.”

Check out Left Behind Child’s post on the Minneapolis Star Tribune’s Memorial Day editorial, which he quotes at length.

Ballz.

Gannon to Take Polygraph

Good lord, for someone who was allegedly distressed by how his life was torn apart with media attention after he was outed as a gay male prostitute masquerading as a White House press correspondent with dubious journalistic credentials, Jeff Gannon sure does like to be on the ol’ telly:

Tonight's the night many (OK, at least a few) have been waiting for: The news personality formerly known as James D. Guckert takes a lie detector test -- on national TV, no less.

The man with the checkered, male escort, past rode to fame recently as White House correspondent for GOPUSA and Talon News, tossing softball questions at press briefings and then taking a hike. Tonight at 8 p.m on widely available cable channel PAX, Gannon will appear on the show "Lie Detector," hosted by Rolonda ("Inside Edition") Watts. Gannon confirms this on his own Web site.

(As a side note, Mr. Furious is madly in love with Rolonda Watts, back from the days she hosted the Rolonda! show, so I’m sure he’ll be tuning in.)

The gimmick for the show, as described on the PAX Web site: "This provocative and often surprising series examines the truth behind real-life stories ripped from the headlines, using the most powerful instrument to detect deception -- the polygraph."

Among the questions Gannon will experience strapped to the machine: Was he fed questions by the Bush administration to use as talking points at White House briefings or was he "just a man trying to overcome his past and pursue a career as a journalist?"

How about this question: Were you having sex with anyone who is employed by the Bush administration? Dunno, seems kind of obvious to me.

Other guests tonight: a man who wants to prove to his girlfriend that he no longer smokes pot; and one of Sen. John Kerry's Swift boat colleagues "who says he was threatened by a political operative, fired by his company and is currently broke because he refused to stand with Kerry at the Democratic Convention."

Wow, sounds like an episode you don’t want to miss!

Yeesh.

Big Brass Stuff

Just wanted to let everyone know who’s asking to be included that I will update the list of members as soon as I get home from work. The best way to let me know is still by email, so I will already have your email address and don’t have to go fishing through your blog for it. Thanks!

Question of the Day: Downing Street Edition

Is the Downing Street Memo important to you? Why or why not?

There are, btw, bloggers who don't believe it's important, or that it's not especially valuable for the left to be discussing it, which is why I'm asking the question. It's as viable position as my own, so I wanted to give dissenters/doubters room to express their thoughts and those who support seeking a formal inquiry based on its contents room to talk about why they feel the way they do. For me, there are a variety of reasons why I am moved to action on this issue, which can all be boiled down to this: it just isn't in me not to care.

[UPDATE: Michael Hawkins of Spontaneous Arising says it perfectly:

In the surreal Bushworld of our current nightmare, there are few opportunities to grab the reigns of sanity and work toward a rational solution to the damage that has already been done. This is one of those opportunities -- to begin a process of holding the perps accountable. The Downing Street Memo may not be the smoking gun we all hope for -- it is an informal set of opinions, even if it does indicate that Bush/Blair had decided to invade Iraq long before the U.N. legal process began -- but it is more than enough to put an investigatory process into effect. Let's see that it happens.

That's it. Thanks for letting me borrow your thoughts as my own for a bit, Michael.]

Can You Resist This Headline?

Bush Calls Human Rights Report 'Absurd'

I couldn’t. I figured it had to be taken out of context somehow. Surely, surely, he hadn’t just out-and-out denounced the Amnesty International report that compared Guantanamo to a Soviet-era gulag as “absurd,” because that would be…well…absurd.

But he did.

"It's an absurd allegation. The United States is a country that promotes freedom around the world," Bush said of the Amnesty International report that compared Guantanamo to a Soviet-era gulag.

Blink. Blink. A moment, please, while I scoop my jaw off the floor.

He also noted that the allegations were made by prisoners "who hate America." Ah, that old chestnut. I can’t imagine why those prisoners would hate a country who, at the very minimum—ignoring momentarily the allegations of abuse and desecration of their holy book—were often kept indefinitely without being allowed to speak to an attorney. Which makes another part of Bush’s press conference even more astounding:

Bush said he expressed concerns with Russian President Vladimir Putin about legal proceedings against former oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Once the richest man in Russia, Khodorkovsky was convicted Tuesday of fraud and tax evasion and sentenced to nine years in prison following a trail widely denounced as politically motivated.

"Here, you're innocent until proven guilty and it appeared to us, at least people in my administration, that it looked like he had been judged guilty prior to having a fair trial," Bush said. "We're watching the ongoing case."

Uh…okay. Can someone please define unmitigated temerity to this guy tut suite? (I trust that noting Khodorkovsky’s profession of choice isn’t even particularly necessary.)

Another gem from this morning’s Rose Garden news conference was his urging, in response to questions about stem cell research, that:

…the extra embryos created during fertility treatments — estimated to now number around 400,000 — should be adopted.

"There's an alternative to the destruction of life," he said.

Does he seriously think that most people want to donate the embryos of their biological children to other couples? Most couples, right or wrong or neither, don’t like the idea of another couple raising a child that is biologically their own. It’s their decision, not his, so he can suggest “adoption” all he wants, but if the owners of those embryos don’t want to put them up for donation to another couple, then it’s a moot point. Most couples would likely prefer to donate the embryos for stem cell research, which I might point out is, in fact, an alternative to destruction, which is their only option as long as donation for stem cell research isn’t an option.

And not to get all V.C. Andrews about it, but the thought of 400,000 children being born into the gene pool, all of whom have biological siblings out there that they don’t personally know, is just a weirdfest waiting to happen.

Finally, Bush responded to questions about his bike ride not being interrupted when a plane inadvertently came too close to the White House, prompting evacuations in the area, by noting he was “comfortable” with the decision not to notify him. Whatever.

Noting that his wife, Laura, has said he should have been told of the potential threat, the president joked, "She often disagrees with me."

Yeah, I’m not so sure that’s a joke. However often she disagrees, though, it can’t possibly be enough.

Cartoonies!

Check out the current I Drew This for a Downing Street Memo 'toon.

Deep Throat Revealed?

As The All Spin Zone, reporting on the Downing Street Memo, notes, “The Watergate scandal started life as a third rate burglary, worthy of no more than a couple of sentences in the Washington Post,” so it is particularly timely, what with all the writing being down on the Downing Street Memo today (round-ups here and here), that a key Watergate figure, the informant known as Deep Throat, should allegedly reveal himself:

Vanity Fair magazine said on Tuesday that Mark Felt, a former FBI official, had revealed himself to be "Deep Throat," the legendary source who leaked Watergate scandal secrets to the Washington Post and brought down President Richard Nixon.

Unmasking the identity of "Deep Throat," a key source for Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, would solve one of the greatest political and journalistic mysteries of recent history.

The magazine said Felt, now a retiree living in Santa Rosa, California, had admitted his role in the scandal to his family and had cooperated with the story. It is the first time a major potential source has claimed to be "Deep Throat."

Don’t know if it’s true, as there doesn’t seem yet to be any confirmation from Woodward and Bernstein, but it’s interesting nonetheless.

Now This Is What You Call An Activist Judge

When a judge interprets a state or the federal Constitution in a way that annoys the Right, he or she is, as we are all painfully aware, automatically damned as a liberal activist judge, even if all evidence (such as being an admitted Republican) points to the contrary. So what exactly do you call a judge like this?

A Kentucky judge has been offering some drug and alcohol offenders the option of attending worship services instead of going to jail or rehab — a practice some say violates the separation of church and state.

District Judge Michael Caperton, 50, a devout Christian, said his goal is to "help people and their families."

"I don't think there's a church-state issue, because it's not mandatory and I say worship services instead of church," he said.

Does that mean that if the offenders decide to go worship the female form at a local strip club, it would count? Because I can’t think of any other place that offers worship services besides religious institutions, also known as places of worship.

David Friedman, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, said the option raises "serious constitutional problems."

"The judge is saying that those willing to go to worship services can avoid jail in the same way that those who decline to go cannot," Friedman said. "That strays from government neutrality towards religion."

Huh. Ya think?