The motion has been “laid on the table.” Pelosi's question will not be addressed.
Dems Making Moves in the House
There’s something going on in the House. I’m watching C-SPAN live right now, and it seems that Pelosi asked a question of the privileges of the House regarding the Iraq war, and was told her question didn’t meet the threshold requirements. The Dems appealed, and now there’s a procedural vote taking place regarding whether to table the appeal. I’m not entirely sure what’s happening, but it seems as though basically the GOP is trying to prevent the Dems from raising the Iraq issue.
Luscious
I know there will be none too few Shakers thrilled with this piece of ass news: CNN has ousted Aaron Brown and replaced him with Anderson Cooper, also expanding Cooper’s show to two hours. “The realigned CNN lineup will place Mr. Cooper's program, '360,' which ran at 7 on weeknights, in the 10 p.m. time period that had been occupied for the last four years by Mr. Brown's program, ‘Newsnight.’ Mr. Cooper's program will also expand to two hours, from 10 until midnight.” CNN/US president Jonathan Klein explained that Cooper’s popularity has been growing, and the network wants to “expose Anderson…to more people.” He also noted that since his hurricane Katrina coverage, Anderson’s name “has been on the tip of everyone's tongue.” Indeed.
Good Stuff from the Mailbag
Casey from Democracy Cell Project wants to know why Karl Rove still has security clearance. (See relevant Newsweek article here.)
Jennifer at intous passes along this article from the NY Times about a surging interest in Cinderella—with a twist. The Cinderella with whom most of us grew up (Grimm’s or Disney’s) was a rags-to-riches story about rewarding goodness and humility. The new Cinderella is all about the bling, baby.
Holly of Julien’s List passes on from MSNBC the disturbing results of a recent poll on sexual habits, or, as the case seems to be, the lack of habitual questioning of partners about their STD statuses. Scary stuff.
Shaker Nikki alerts us to this article in the LA Times that notes California voters narrowly favor banning abortions for minors without parental notification, on which they will vote via a ballot initiative next Tuesday. Also covered—reaction to two prescription-drug discount measures and an electricity proposal.
Shaker Kurt points out that the conservative site Newsmax is shilling for a book on liberal hypocrisy. If the author’s dead wrong, it’s worth checking out to see what some new conservative talking points will be. If the author’s right, it’s sad.
BradBlog’s on Dumbaugh’s case for lying (yet again) about the Plame investigation.
And Cernig from NewsHog is calling all pagans. He’s working on a new project and asks, “If you are a Wiccan yourself, or a pagan in general - or even non-pagan but with an opinion on the subject - I would love to hear your thoughts. In what ways might Wicca and neo-paganism in general affect politics and the world in the coming century?” Go help him out if you can.
(As always, please feel free to use comments as a blogwhoring thread.)
Hmm...
The Shakers' FRAPPR seems to be following a familiar pattern... Where have I seen that before?
Thanks to everyone who's added their pins!
Question of the Day
Let's assume John McCain is right, and character is destiny. I've already offered what I think Bush's ultimate destiny should be (cleaning toilets in a dysentery ward); what destiny do you think his character bespeaks?
Oh Boy: McCain in 2008
If there was any doubt that McCain would run in ’08, the website for his new PAC, Straight Talk America, should put those doubts to rest. Complete with American flag imagery, a morphing banner of American landscapes, a video featuring his unique theory that we were all one on 9/11 (“there were no conservatives, no liberals…), and prominent display of his new book, Character is Destiny (puke—if that were true, Bush would be cleaning toilets in a dysentery ward), Straight Talk America has all the elements for launching the populist campaign of a former POW.
Funny—this picture is nowhere to be found:
Jerk.
Recommended Reading
Pam has an excellent post about the activism of Rosa Parks and Bernice King. Check it out.
Also, The Heretik reports the Federal Marriage Amendment has now been renamed the Marriage Protection Amendment. (Gary’s got more here.)
Please, gays, stop trying to attack my marriage with your radical homosexual agenda.
But... but... but... CLINTON!!
I'm buying stock in Pepto Bismol. Scotty's going to make me a rich man all on his own.
Did you see this coming? I didn't see this coming. No, really, I never thought they'd do this. Really.
White House Ducks Prewar Intel Questions
(bolds mine)
WASHINGTON - The White House sought to deflect politically charged questions Wednesday about President Bush's use of prewar intelligence in Iraq, saying Democrats, too, had concluded Saddam Hussein was a threat.
"If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.
He said the Clinton administration and fellow Democrats "used the intelligence to come to the same conclusion that Saddam Hussein and his regime were a threat."
Which is, of course, the evidence they used to get us into the Iraq war. Clinton's intelligence. Don't you remember? All that yellowcake stuff never happened.
It's Clinton's fault.
It was always Clinton's fault.
Everything is Clinton's fault.
Now watch this drive.
(Will it ever cross-post? Yo, I don't know.)
FRAPPR
Via PSoTD, something that totally appeals to my inveterate geekitude.
Kind of a neat application here, you can create a map of your group at frappr.com.Of course I created one for The Shakers, so go give yourself a pinpoint on the map!
Let’s Call Him “Chip”
Sam Alito, that is—since the wingers are boo-hooing about “Scalito,” it goes so well with a name like “Scooter,” and he’s determined to chip away at Roe until it might as well have just been overturned.
My favorite French kitten has a superb new article up at The American Prospect detailing how “There is more than one way to skin a precedent, and Roe's protections could be extenuated out of existence quite easily.” Seriously—go read it. There’s no one who does better work explaining the intricacies of the law than LeMew, and Alito’s confirmation, if the Dems do their job, should focus heavily on understanding how Alito has sought to undermine Roe. This article offers excellent background in expectation of that event.
As a side note, one of the peculiar inevitabilities of the kind of judicial decisions Alito seems to favor is the argument that any change to the law “probably won’t/can’t be enforced, anyway.” In a related post at LG&M, LeMew notes, then critiques, part of an extensive footnote offered by Alito as part of his Casey dissent:
In considering whether Section 3209 would impose an undue burden, I do not take into account a fact that seems glaringly apparent, i.e., that Section 3209 would be difficult to enforce and easy to evade. Section 3209 does not require a woman to provide any proof of notification other than her own unnotarized statement. Thus, if a woman claimed that she had orally notified her husband in private (the mode and place of notification to be expected in most cases), it would be exceedingly difficult in most cases for the Commonwealth to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she had not done so.Weird, eh? This—"But this is the kind of oddity that often crops up when discussing laws regulating sexual behavior and reproduction; the fact that the state isn't serious about applying the laws (even when the purported state interest is serious indeed) is sometimes asserted to be a factor in favor of the constitutionality of these laws. Of course, it's quite the opposite."—strikes me as exactly the definition of an activist judge, as such an argument can only be construed as an interest in the political repercussions of the decision, or the ability for an administration (state or federal) to claim to have won a success without intent of serious application.
Uh, excuse me? Admittedly, he says he's not "taking it into account," although this is disingenuous--why make the argument in a lenghty footnote (and the argument goes on past this excerpt) if you don't think it's relevant? Anyway, this doesn't make a lick of sense--the law's constitutionality should be looked at more generously because women can just get around it of they're willing willfully file illegal false statements? Apparently, Alito likes the fact that the law would only burden women who are honest enough to follow the law; this is just bizarre. But this is the kind of oddity that often crops up when discussing laws regulating sexual behavior and reproduction; the fact that the state isn't serious about applying the laws (even when the purported state interest is serious indeed) is sometimes asserted to be a factor in favor of the constitutionality of these laws. Of course, it's quite the opposite.
So, there you have it—a disingenuous activist conservative judge who will (quite likely) determinedly chip away at Roe until the precedent is impotent. That’s why Bush’s base loves him, and that’s why he warrants a filibuster.
(Bitch, PhD has more, including a good round-up.)
Awesome
Bin Laden Lieutenant Among Afghan Escapees
Security has been tightened at the U.S. military prison in Afghanistan following the escape of a suspected al-Qaida leader, a U.S. official said Wednesday. Indonesian anti-terrorism officials accused Washington of failing to tell them of the breakout.Security rulezzz.
Omar al-Farouq, born in Kuwait to Iraqi parents, was considered one of Osama bin Laden's top lieutenants in Southeast Asia until Indonesian authorities captured him in 2002 and turned him over to the United States.
He was one of four suspected Arab terrorists to escape in July from the detention facility at Bagram, the main U.S. base in Afghanistan. It was not clear how long he had been held in Afghanistan.
Although the escape was widely reported at the time, al-Farouq was identified by an alias and the U.S. military only confirmed Tuesday that he was among those who fled.
Dare to Discipline: Are you smoking the pot?
After Spudsy’s disgusting and irresponsible post on the hideous pot-heads in Denver, I thought we’d better spend some more time with Dr. Dobson, who, unlike the deviants writing for this sick blog, purveying their sexual and narcotic filth, cares about this nation’s children.
In Chapter 6, “Discipline Gone to Pot,” the good doctor shares an article titled “Your Friend, Bill,” authored by John W. Carpenter, Chief of Police in that infamous hotbed of iniquity, Carpinteria, California, first published in Feb. 1970 in the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. Dr. Dobson notes that both Chief Carpenter and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover gave their permission for him to reprint the article in Dare to Discipline. I have no such permission, but I trust in the interest of counteracting the potential damage done to children in the wake of Denver’s foolishness (and since I couldn’t run this site for profit even if I wanted to), they won’t mind.
“Your Friend, Bill” is “an explicit description of how an unwitting teenager can innocently fall into the drug trap.” In section 5, “A Marijuana Trip,” describes how, after taking “Reds” and not getting caught (I guess “Reds” are the real gateway drug), combined with the peer pressure your friend Bill was putting on you, “made you a receptive subject the day Bill and his friends asked you to go smoke pot with them… Besides, there had been all kinds of newspaper articles and television interviews with people, including college professors, who said marijuana was harmless.” And thus begins your first marijuana trip.
Bill explained that you first light the end of the joint, then cup it in your hands, let all of the air out of your lungs, put the cigarette in your mouth, and inhale all the smoke you can hold. Hold your breath and keep the smoke in your lungs as long as you can. Do you remember you were not too happy about this because you and your folks had discussed smoking, and your firmly believed it was bad for your health, so you let your breath out quicker than anyone else? This concern rapidly faded, however, for the euphoric feeling hit you almost at once. You felt lightheaded and slightly dizzy, and as this feeling increased, you felt light all over as if you could float. You then took a much longer drag on the cigarette without even considering the danger of smoking.See that?! One hit off a joint and already you’re forgetting all the advice your parents gave you, you wretched little shit.
It seemed like the hands of the clock had stopped and time stood still. Do you recall how the recorded music seemed so much sharper, and you laughed when Bill described it as hearing in technicolor, wide screen, and 3-D, all rolled into one?I think our friend Bill has laced the marijuana cigarettes with our friend peyote.
You felt as if you were talking in slow motion, and when you took a step, you feet appeared to be four feet off the floor. Everyone else was just sitting around the room laughing. Everything was funny.Well, that is true. Everything does seem hilarious to a junky.
As you walked home that afternoon, you had mixed emotions.Personally, I think a mixed drink is a better chaser than mixed emotions, but to each his own. Also, I’m a wicked, wicked girl.
You felt some guilt because you had done something wrong, but at the same time you were proud that Bill’s friends had accepted you. Also, marijuana was not as bad as you had heard. In fact, you thought it was great.Shame on you. Only a traitorous heathen who hates puppies smokes pot for the first time and then realizes it’s nowhere near as bad as the oxycontin-chomping anti-drug alarmists would have you believe. Only an evil wee hellion would experience the mind-altering, parent-disrespecting effects of a marijuana cigarette and deny that a whirlwind addiction to heroin is just around the corner. For shame.
It’s a good thing we’ve got Dr. Dobson, Chief Carpenter, and J. Edgar Hoover to set us straight, that’s all I can say.
Jokey McJokerton
Via AMERICAblog:
ROUNDTABLE INTERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENTIsn’t he a cut-up? What a fucking laugh riot. I love how it’s an “inside joke” for his “team” that he doesn’t ask someone who their sources are. That joke is worth three quarters of a million dollars.
WITH FOREIGN PRINT MEDIA
The Roosevelt Room
November 1, 2005
With that, we'll start. Jorge, como yo.
Q Mr. President, in Argentina, you will have a bilateral meeting with President Kirchner.
THE PRESIDENT: Si.
Q What I want to know -- sources of the government told me that they would ask you about more cooperation on support for Argentina, you know, in the IMF fund –
THE PRESIDENT: IMF.
Q Exactly.
THE PRESIDENT: Please don't tell me that the government leaks secrets about conversations to the –
Q Well, I have my sources in the government.
THE PRESIDENT: You do? Okay, well I'm not going to ask you who they are, of course. (Laughter.)
Q No, please.
THE PRESIDENT: Inside joke here, for my team. (Laughter.)
Kind of like his little ha-ha about the missing WMDs. That joke is worth 2,000+ soldiers’ lives and $200 billion and counting.
Picture of the Day
Sent along by Shaker Michael, who notes: “This photo
Further Signs of Intelligent Life
This time, in Colorado!
Denver Voters OK Marijuana Possession
DENVER - Residents of the Mile High City have voted to legalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana for adults. Authorities, though, said state possession laws will be applied instead.
With 100 percent of precincts reporting early Wednesday, 54 percent, or 56,001 voters, cast ballots for the ordinance, while 46 percent, or 48,632 voters, voted against it.
Under the measure, residents over 21 years old could possess up to an ounce of marijuana.
"We educated voters about the facts that marijuana is less harmful to the user and society than alcohol," said Mason Tvert, campaign organizer for SAFER, or Safer Alternatives For Enjoyable Recreation. "To prohibit adults from making the rational, safer choice to use marijuana is bad public policy."
They also gave Jay Leno monologue material for about a week.
It's about time that someone realized that marijuana is not the bugaboo that Nancy Regan would have us believe. When you consider the time, money (especially money) and resources spent on busting people for having a little pot in the house, this is a really good move. I'm sure we'll hear a lot of "what about the children?" wails, and a lot of pulpit thunder, but kudos to the voters in Denver for voting intelligently. Getting in hysterics about the dangers of pot use while ignoring the damage caused by alcohol use is ridiculous.
I just hope they put a "no bogarting" clause in the law. Thank you! I'll be here all week! Goodnight!
(Up in cross-posts, that's where my money goes...)
Question of the Day
Actually, this is the second question of the day. Tart’s very cool question earlier got buried beneath all the Senate madness, so if you haven’t seen that one, be sure to check it out.
I was thinking yesterday about an old friend who broke up with his boyfriend over a Halloween costume. (At least, that was the straw that broke the camel’s back, anyway. He was supposed to arrive at the party as Marc Antony; instead he showed up clad as a half-assed dalmation, resulting in one very annoyed Cleopatra.) So today’s question is: What’s the dumbest reason you’ve ever broken up with someone? Or, failing that, what’s the dumbest thing that’s ever caused an argument between you and a partner?
I’ve never broken up with anyone for a dumb reason, unless you count discovering that someone was a slack-jawed moron as a dumb reason, so I’ll go with the dumb fight. Mr. Shakes and I never fight about big things. On the rare occasions we do fight, it’s always about some piddly shit, like leaving the fucking bathroom light on all the bloody time! or picking up those fucking clothes on the floor before I puke! (I’ll leave you to discern which was directed at whom, though I assure you there was one of each.)
Quite a Day Indeed!
Trent Lott runs away from Rove on Hardball. Video here.
Matthews: Is [Rove] good for American politics? Should he stay at the White House?ATTENTION ALL RATS: Abandon ship!!!
Lott: …Look, he has been very successful, very effective in the political arena. The question is should he be the deputy chief of staff under the current circumstances? I don't know all that's going on, so I can't make that final conclusion. But, you know, how many times has the top political person become also the top policy advisor? Maybe you can make that transition, but it's a real challenge, and I think they have to -- I do think they need to look at bringing in some more people, you know, old gray beards that have been around this town for a while, help them out a little bit at the White House.
Matthews: Do you think it's a little unseemly to have Svengali on the payroll? Do you think he should go?
Lott: Well, I didn't say that. I mean, I said, you know, is he in the right position? I mean, a lot of the political advisors, in fact, most presidents in recent years have a political advisor in the white house. The question is, should they be, you know, making policy decisions. That's the question you've got to evaluate.
Harry Reid’s Press Conference
Video here. Man, he is pissed.
He took Frist’s whining about the Senate close-down being a slap in the face, and threw it right back at him, describing the GOP’s unwillingness to investigate why we went to war as “the real slap in the face…a slap in the face to the American people.” He answered a question about Frist’s claim that no one ever talked to him about frustration with the stalled investigations with “unless someone is deaf” they’d know about the ongoing discussions between Rockefeller and Roberts. And then, the coup de grace:
This Republican Senate does no oversight… It’s all part of a plan. They obstruct, they take orders from the White House, they do nothing without getting orders from the White House. The Separation of Powers doctrine is something that does not exist in this town.Quite a day.
Senate Back In Session
And guess what? Reid’s ploy worked. From his office:
For more than two years we have been seeking this investigation. Finally thru the course of this closed session we were able to get the attention of the majority and lock in (with a timeline) the commitment of the senate intelligence committee to investigate how intelligence was manipulated and manufactured with. Its an investigation we desperately need.So let’s see where we go from here. It’s a start.
