This is another week of long overdue additions. Take a moment and check out these great bloggers:
This is pretty amazing. Leading up to Katrina hitting the Gulf Coast, local, state, and federal officials held a series of conference calls to discuss emergency plans, evacuations, supplies, coordination, etc. The emergency manager for Jefferson Parish, Walter Maestri, recorded the calls and has given them to NPR.
On the way into work, I heard excerpts from some of the calls, which confirm that the problems were on every level of government. Perhaps the most amazing thing, however, was listening to what I think was the last call before the storm hit, during which Jeff Smith, the deputy director of Louisiana's Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (whose role is to coordinate between the Military Department in New Orleans, the Governor's Office, the Legislature, our Congressional staff, State officials, Parish and City officials, Parish Emergency Directors, individual citizens and FEMA), tells them to request everything they need on some computer program designed for that purpose, and they’ll get it. The next call doesn’t happen until Sept. 9, and when Maestri asks where the FEMA generator packs they were promised are, Smith tells him “that’s a good question,” and when Maestri then angrily complains about how FEMA ballyhooed during planning exercises that they would be ready in a moment’s notice but “now that we’re on our knees” they’re nowhere to be found, Smith assures him “there will be time for that kind of rhetoric later.” It’s really unbelievable. NPR’s got all the calls available (or will have soon).
[Note: I posted this back in March, and it got a rather lukewarm reception—lots of people saying we had to stick with the Dems no matter what. Well, six months later, I could add a helluva lot to my list of complaints, and I’m wondering what the reception will be this time, so here it is again, for your consideration and response.]
I’m going to do it. I’m going to ask the question We Dare Not Ask. And it might piss some people off, and it might inspire others to ask me if I’ve lost my gourd. But it needs to be asked, and I’m going to be the one to do it.
Why the hell are we sticking with the Dems?
I don’t know about you, but I invested time, energy, and money into the Democratic Party during the last election, and I’m not getting much of a return on my investment. In fact, lately I’ve been feeling like the party to whom I’ve been loyal for my entire life is giving me the finger.
The confirmations of Condi Rice, Alberto Gonzales, and Michael Chertoff … the slow response to broaching voting accountability legislation … the passage of a measure to limit class-action lawsuits … the bankruptcy bill … the constant move toward the center … and on and on and on. I complain about the idiocy of the Dems almost as much as I do the Republicans, and I’m starting to get more than a little pissed off.
I once wrote about how the red-staters who vote against their own best interests don’t seem to understand their leadership, but that we on the Left seem to suffer from the opposite problem—our leadership doesn’t understand its base. The problem is only getting worse; I feel increasingly alienated from the Democratic leadership in Washington, and by the looks of things across the Lefty blogosphere, I’m not alone.
If you are, like me, a true progressive, you’re being let down by the Democrats. They can’t pull together an effective opposition, they can’t deliver a concise message, and they sell out liberal interests in a heartbeat as they make a break for a muddy middle, which they inexplicably remain convinced will help them win elections. I’m finding myself increasingly required to defend positions (such as gay rights or legal abortion)—to other Dems—that shouldn’t even be in question. And to boot, many career Dems are just as beholden to special interests as the GOP and are motivated little by the needs of the people they are meant to represent.
Historically, we’ve insisted on sticking with the two-party system for understandable reasons. If we split the liberal vote, then the GOP will get control of everything. Well, look where our determined solidarity has gotten us. They control the White House, both Houses of Congress, and a large swath of the judiciary, with the Supreme Court looking to go more conservative in short order as well. So how much sense does it make, I wonder, to continue compromising on what we really want, only to end up with what we really feared.
After the election, when the Dems decided not to push for any kind of investigation into voter fraud, Marc Sanson, co-chair of the United States Green Party issued a statement that I described at the time as a siren song for disillusioned Democrats:
If Senate Democrats allow George W. Bush's victory based on questionable numbers to stand, the Green Party will tell Democratic voters: you have wasted your votes and your campaign contributions on a party that will not defend your right to vote. Regardless of whether the recount effort or a challenge from Senate Democrats overturns Mr. Bush's 2004 election, Americans need to see that corrupt elections will not be tolerated. At the very least, a challenge will advance some sorely needed reforms: auditable paper records of all computer votes; equitable distribution of election equipment; assurance that legitimate votes aren't obstructed; removal of biased partisan officials from supervision of vote counts; clean election laws. This is what the Green Party stands for. Where do the Democrats stand?I think we’ve wasted our votes and our campaign contributions on a party that refuses to defend more than just our right to vote. Yes, there are brief glimpses of what we shorthand as “balls,” but they are too few and far between. As an entity, the Democratic Party is not serving us well.
Just go read.
I feel helpless. You know, I don't want to keep donating to disaster relief funds after disasters happen. I want to pay my fair share of taxes, and want everyone else (including corporations) to do the same, and I want that money administered well, so that disasters are prevented, if possible, and, if not, then managed safely and efficiently. And I don't understand why that concept is anathema to so many people.
As Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) "ratchets up her attacks on President Bush, some Democrats think they smell an explanation: the threat of a 2008 Al Gore presidential bid that could come at her from the left on Iraq," the New York Post reports. "The former vice president is suddenly re-emerging as a vocal and visible Bush-basher -- he's slated to star at a Democratic National Committee fund-raiser for big donors in Washington next Tuesday."(Thanks, Agi.)
"Close to a zero-percent chance."At the time I read that back in August, I wondered what percent delusional it made me that I read it and thought, He’s not saying no! I estimated that whatever slim margin separated Gore from zero percent, that was approximately the same thin sliver that stood between me and 100% delusional.
— Al Gore, quoted by Time magazine, on the probability he'll ever run for elective office again
Okay, seriously—what the fuck is wrong with the Bush family?
After more than an hour of solemn ceremony naming Rep. Marco Rubio, R-West Miami, as the 2007-08 House speaker, Gov. Jeb Bush stepped to the podium in the House chamber last week and told a short story about "unleashing Chang," his "mystical warrior" friend.(Hat tip to Elise.)
Here are Bush's words, spoken before hundreds of lawmakers and politicians:
''Chang is a mystical warrior. Chang is somebody who believes in conservative principles, believes in entrepreneurial capitalism, believes in moral values that underpin a free society.
''I rely on Chang with great regularity in my public life. He has been by my side and sometimes I let him down. But Chang, this mystical warrior, has never let me down.''
Bush then unsheathed a golden sword and gave it to Rubio as a gift.
''I'm going to bestow to you the sword of a great conservative warrior,'' he said, as the crowd roared.
"Mr. President, Iraq is sovereign," read a note handed to him as he sat listening to a speaker. "Letter was passed from Bremer at 10:26 a.m. Iraq time." The note, from national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, was signed "Condi."“No” is the answer to the question Could I have any more contempt for that family?
Bush scrolled on the note, "Let Freedom Reign!"
David Sirota wants to know: On Roberts, Who is More Pathetic: The Media or the Democrats?
[Y]ou might not know about Roberts' extreme positions both because of the sad state of American journalism, and the sad state of the Democratic Party. Both of these big players have largely given Roberts a pass on these questions and billed him as a "moderate" because he is a smooth-talking, upper-class-emanating, Chamber of Commerce-oozing corporate lawyer from the Washington, D.C. suburbs, who really does have such a nice smile and such a gosh darn nice all-American family and boy is he just so smart and well-spoken...have you vomited yet? Probably.There’s more. Oh so much more.
But even after you think you have choked on that last stubborn chunk of regurgitated bile caught in your esophagus, the nauseating declarations just don't stop, do they? As anyone who has paid even a bit of attention knows, most analysis of Roberts - by both reporters and Democrats - continues to incessantly stress (as if some sort of repetitive torture) how Roberts' "intellect" is unsurpassed, how he supposedly has "impeccable" credentials, and how cordial he is in person - as if the qualifications for assuming the most powerful legal position in America is being a nice, smart careerist, no matter how extreme one's positions are.
[…]
Beyond the sheer gutlessness of all of this is the incredible fact that these same Democratic "strategists" who have run the party into the ground actually have the gall to tell reporters and the public they are "strategists" instead of simply rewriting their business cards to say "professional election losers" or "party destroyers." Remember, these are the self-important, first-ones-to-tell-you-how-smart-they-really-are dolts whose legacy is a Democratic Party that continues to lose elections, and a Democratic Party that has no official position on Iraq, energy, bankruptcy, trade, repealing the Bush tax cuts in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, and now the Supreme Court.
The National Enquirer is busting Bush for having fallen off the wagon.
Faced with the biggest crisis of his political life, President Bush has hit the bottle again, The National Enquirer can reveal…Uh, yeah.
"When the levees broke in New Orleans, it apparently made him reach for a shot," said one insider. "He poured himself a Texas-sized shot of straight whiskey and tossed it back. The First Lady was shocked and shouted: "Stop George!" …
A Washington source said: "The sad fact is that he has been sneaking drinks for weeks now. Laura may have only just caught him — but the word is his drinking has been going on for a while in the capital. He's been in a pressure cooker for months. … And now with the worst domestic crisis in his administration over Katrina, you pray his drinking doesn't go out of control."
Another source said: "I'm only surprised to hear that he hadn't taken a shot sooner. Before Katrina, he was at his wit's end…”He’s down to only one wit? Huh. I guess the booze will do that to ya.
Probably not. But hope springs eternal…
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said he urged President George W. Bush today to delay nominating a replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.Here’s the funny thing—I heard Frist quoted this morning saying he had suggested to the president they move forward right away and that the president didn’t say much but that “his body language was encouraging.” Does Bush just not say anything anymore, communicating instead through an elaborate series of smirks, scowls, slouches, and weirdly inappropriate grins left to be interpreted by those with whom he meets? Fucking hell—you’re the president, dude, not a tea leaf.
Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, said he talked to Justice O'Connor about staying on the high court. “She's prepared to do that” through the court's term ending in June, Specter said. The president “was noncommittal,” Specter said. “The body language was not very positive,” Specter said.
Specter said the delay would give Congress and the rest of America more time to know John Roberts as chief justice. “When we know a little more about Judge Roberts it's going to be easier with the next” nomination, Specter said.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee said he urged Bush to submit a name to the Senate promptly. “I feel we should proceed with the nomination as anticipated,” Frist said. If so, the confirmation process could be completed “around Thanksgiving.”
Rita is now a Category 5, and looks like she’s fixing to do some serious damage. It certainly seems as though the evacuations in Texas are going better than those a few weeks back now, but I fear the worst…
Meanwhile, everyone else, prepare to get screwed, too.
Valero Energy Corp Chairman and Chief Executive Bill Greehey said Hurricane Rita's impact on U.S. crude oil production and refining could be a "national disaster."
"If it hits the refineries, and we're short refining capacity, you're going to see gasoline prices well over $3.00 a gallon at the pump," Greehey said in a Tuesday night interview.
[…]
"It's going to be coming across the (U.S.) Gulf (of Mexico)," Greehey said. "There's a lot of oil platforms, oil rigs, (natural) gas platforms, gas rigs. It could have a significant impact on supply and prices, and then, depending on what it does to the refineries, there are still four refineries that are shut down. So this really is a national disaster."
Or, prepare to be gouged.
Mr. Shakes noted last night that those of us who depend on natural gas for heating should be prepared to pay double this year what we paid last winter. And that was before this news. Scary stuff.
I have a confession to make. You know how a bunch of blog commenting thingies have like a spam-blocker that requires a commenter to type in the letters she sees to authenticate the comment...? Okay, I suck at figuring out what those letters are.
Every once in awhile, I get nice, easily readable ones, but most of the time, a hugely disproportionate amount of the time, I'm stuck trying to figure out some squat squooshy wavy slanted jiggly hieroglyphic nonsense, and I can't figure out if it's a q or a g, or an h or an n, or whatever, and it makes me feel like a git. (Also, I'm dyslexic, which doesn't help.)
So there you go. Shakespeare's Sister is a dingbat, and any of you who use those confounding things now know that if I leave you a comment, I really had to work for it.
I'll give you one guess who won....
Crooks and Liars has the video, which is a must-see.
Can someone please show this to Democrats in some sort of media management class? Because this is how it's done. Cool, calm, collected. Disdain for ridiculous ideas registered with a subtly contemptuous look and a pregnant pause, bordered by a quick sigh, before an answer, ideally containing a meaningful "as you well know," is offered. Comandeering the discussion back to the points you want to make. Getting angry, but not irrational, as needed. Generally making your idiotic idea-wielding combatant look like a penis in a bowtie.
How come comedians can do this (see also: Stewart, Jon), but not the people we elect to represent us?
Strike that question. Here's a better one: Can we please start electing comedians to represent us ASAP?
Oprah Winfrey scares me. She does lots of good shit and all, but the last time I watched her show (against my will, and only because my guru, Jon Stewart was her guest), I took a good look at her as she basked in the glow of her audience members spontaneously combusting with the excitement of being in her presence, and she had the look of a woman who might secretly have genuine designs on taking over the world.
Her most recent conquest is Hermès, as you’ve unavoidably heard, if you’ve walked within thirty yards of a television set in the last couple of months, and if you want some snarkoriffic reporting on her making Hermès USA’s CEO beg for his life on her internationally televised show, head on over to TBogg’s arcade or Tart’s own pool hall.
Anyhoo, that’s not what’s got me scared (or more scared than usual). What really chills me to my bones is the report in Salon’s The Fix that Tom “Crazier Than a Shithouse Rat But Definitely Not Medicated For It” Cruise is trying to convert Oprah to Scientology, and has gone so far as to move in next door to her to win her affections on behalf of the overlord Xenu. All I can do is pray to my made-up galactic ruler, Kerbibblywinks, that Cruise doesn’t manage to weave the same zombifying spell over Oprah that he has over Katie Holmes. (Or, a better spell, I guess, since a billionaire probably can’t be quite as easily bought with shiny objects as can a half-starved ingénue as desperate for distance from a WB teen melodrama as she is for a snack.) In any case, I hope that Oprah resists, because I fear that the result of Oprah high on Scientology and shilling for the Hubnuts to millions of women nationwide may be even worse than anything Bush can do in his remaining three years as he stumbles toward his finish line.
If even half as many women tried to sell me on Scientology as tried to shove one of Oprah’s Book Club picks down my piehole, I’m telling you—this will be one miserable country.
Senator Patrick Leahy, ranking Dem on the Judiciary Committee, will vote to confirm Roberts.
If you haven’t yet read Rana’s piece on who the real single-issue voters are in the juke joint known as the lefty blogosphere, go read. Then head over to The Heretik, who hits every nail squarely on the head (in a way that will leave you saying, “Damn, lol!”), and provides some other juicy links for your perusal.
You know, I just get more and more awestruck by the impressive and mysterious powers of Bill Frist. First, he apparently managed to conjure a medical license for himself out of thin air, since he obviously didn’t attend medical school. Then, he did what others thought impossible—diagnosed a serious and complicated medical condition just by looking at someone on a videotape! (Sure, he was wrong, but let’s not quibble with inscrutability of magic.) Frist's latest trick may, however, be his most impressive. Granted, he is a hideous, useless, Republican hack, but I challenge even the most hardcore Lefty moonbats to not be impressed by his powers of prognostication. Only a great magician of Frist’s stature could have portended a 15% drop in the stock value of his own family's hospital corporation, and only (dare I say?) a great prophet would have known to sell not only every last one of his own shares, but his wife’s and children’s, too, two weeks before that price drop. Now that is some amazing shit.
If any of you clever legal types are worried that the Amazing Fristini might face insider trading charges, don’t you worry your pretty little heads. Bush installed a crony to head the SEC, too (after Congress unanimously approved his nomination), so our magic man is safe. Frist will never get fucked by Cox. That ain’t the way the Republicans swing, baby.
(Hat tip AMERICAblog.)
Although Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has decided he will vote no on Roberts’ appointment, many of the rest of the Dems are still undecided. While the announcement of his nomination brought questions about whether he would be filibustered outta there, now the question is whether to give him a yes-vote. As I’ve said all along, I don’t think filibustering in this case would have been especially useful, especially once a second vacancy opened up. Roberts is perhaps the best we’re likely to get out of Bush, and there are a hundred more just like him (or worse) where he came from. A three-and-a-half-year filibuster was about the only option to keep Roberts et. al. off the court, so whatever—the GOP was going to win this one, if not with Roberts, then with someone else. We lost it back in November. Tough titties. That said, I’ve always believed that every last Dem ought to cast a no-vote. He’s got two years of experience as a judge, he wouldn’t give straight answers, and his interpretation of the law is in conflict with liberal beliefs. Done and dusted—a no-vote was the only option.
Unless, of course, you’re one of many elected Democrats, who apparently don’t make such decisions based on little things like integrity or principles, and instead makes a political calculation.
"I literally have not made up my mind. I really don't want to talk about it anymore," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) said Tuesday in the Capitol as she backed away from a crowd of reporters into an elevator.How about instead of trying to “juggle” voters, you just vote your conscience? Do you think he’s worthy of a vote from the Left, or don’t you? Honestly, it’s this kind of disingenuous bullshit that turns off voters across the political spectrum. Add to the list of must-haves not only a spine and some balls, but a friggin’ brain.
[…]
New York Sen. Charles Schumer has told colleagues that Judge Roberts overall acquitted himself well before the committee. But a yes vote could undermine Mr. Schumer's ability to raise money from anti-Roberts donors for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which he now heads. When asked Tuesday if he had made up his mind, Mr. Schumer answered, "Nope."
Similar battles are bedeviling Democrats not on the committee. Some moderates, such as Florida's Sen. Bill Nelson and Nebraska's Ben Nelson, face re-election next year in Republican-leaning states and are eager to pocket some centrist credentials by voting for Judge Roberts. Mr. Nelson of Nebraska said Tuesday he has "not seen anything that would cause me to vote against" the nominee. Another red-state Democrat, Max Baucus of Montana, said, "I'm inclined to vote for him."
[…]
But liberal activists are near unanimous in opposing Judge Roberts, who they say echoed the pre-appointment positioning of conservative Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. They are pressing Democrats to vote against Judge Roberts to send a message about the party's priorities. Those arguments likely will weigh heavily on Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, who both have presidential ambitions and are trying to juggle the left-leaning voters in the party's primaries with general-election voters, who might favor a more centrist approach. "I have not" decided, Sen. Clinton said Tuesday.
By backing Judge Roberts, some Democrats argue, the party will have more credibility if it takes on the president's nominee for Justice O'Connor's seat, one that arguably is more important because she has played a critical role in rulings on issues such as affirmative action and abortion rights.That the Dems believe this useless triangulation will garner them any credibility with voters is patently absurd. No matter what they do, the GOP will spin it however the hell they want come the ’06 elections. And it’s even more ludicrous if they think anything they do now will influence Bush as he nominates O’Connor’s replacement. He’s going to nominate a wingnut. He has to; his base is ready to implode, and the only conceivable band-aid he’s got at the moment is pulling a pro-war, hate-the-poor Jesus in a black robe out of his hat.
