late night update... sort of

this isn't a serious post. I just feel bad that I haven't updated this blog of mine since last November. I've been working my tail off in a US Senate race and just haven't had the time and energy to do the kind of writing I'd be proud to publish. So now I've decided... fuck it! I'm not going to worry about posting brilliant missives on the state of our nation. I'm not even going to wory bout spel'n. I think I'll just use this forum to vent to my none existent audience. After all nothing is more private than a diary that anybody can read but no one will bother to. lol. So any ways
FUCK BUSH!

Republicans are still weak on defense

I've been known to say that for all of their tough talk conservatives are in fact weak on defense. Now it seems the 9/11 commission agree with me. Today they issued a stern rebuke to the White House for its failures to secure WMD materials and loose nukes around the world. "Preventing terrorists from gaining access to weapons of mass destruction must be elevated above all other problems of national security," was one quote from their statement.

The Bush admin has dropped the ball on so many aspects of our national defense that its hard to know where to begin, but counter proliferation is as good a place as any. The more nukes in the world the easier it will be for one to fall into terrorist hands its as simple as that. Yet Mr. Bush has consistently failed to adress the proliferation of nuclear weapons in an effective manner. Indeed, under Bush's "leadership" the US was scrapped the ABM treaty a landmark anti-proliferation agreement. This combined with our experiments into new nuclear weapons for "bunker busting" has ruined our credibility as a counter proliferation force. AS a resuklt Bush has been unable to deal effectively with proliferating states like Iran and North Korea.

The problem with conservatives is that they think defense is simply a matter of blowing up other people rather then preventing other people from blowing us up. The old "the best defense is a good offense" meme doesn't work in a counter insurgency where forceful military action only encourages support for your enemies. And the war on terror is a global counter insurgency campaign which requires political as well as military solutions. Other wise for every terrorist we kill two more will be recruited. How many times do we have to kill or capture the no. three guy in Al Quaeda before we realize that simply killing terrorists will not solve our problem.

No More Cookies for Mike Steele

For some time I've been hearing outrage over the treatment of Mike Steele in the Maryland Senate campaign. For those of you who don't follow Maryland politics, Mike Steele is the Republican Lieutenant Governor and candidate for the Senate seat that Paul Sarbanes is retiring from in '06. He is also an African American. The outrage amongst republicans arises is because some members of the black community have launched racially charged attacks against Mr. Steele calling him an "uncle Tom." In one famed event Mr. Steele was pelted with Oreo cookies after a debate. Unfortunately for the Steele campaign it now appears that event never happened.

Gov Ehrlich and Lt Gov Steele in Maryland caught in race-baiting lie over "Oreo" incident that never happened

Apparently no one outside of Steele's circle of supporters can recall ever seeing him pelted with oreos, including attendees of the debate where it supposedly happened.

There have been some ugly things said about Mike Steele by some members of the black community but the outrage on the part of Republicans has been manufactured in order to protect Steele from the legitimate criticism any black republican will face. I am confident in making that accusation because the Republican party has never been shy about using race for political gain. Indeed, their selection of Steele as their candidate is a transparent attempt to exploit the diversity of Maryland's population in the vauge hope of pealing away black votes from the democratic party.

Race has been a part of the Republican political strategy for over forty years now. After the Democratic party under Johnson embraced the civil rights movement and alienated southern conservatives the Republican party in a display of rank political opportunism embraced the racism prevalent in the south to increase their base. Richard Nixon rose to power on a "southern strategy" based on fighting civil rights legislation. Ronald Regan endeared himself to southern conservatives with his race baiting talk of "Cadillac driving welfare-queens." The Republican party's longstanding and on going promotion of "state's rights" has it's origins in the anger of southern states at being forced by the federal government to treat their black residents with the respect due all American citizens. Now the Bush Department of inJustice is suing Southern Illinios University for "reverse discrimination" as part of the Republican attack on affirmative action.

Republican strategists should know better then to expect blacks to simply forget the abuse they've suffered at the hands of the Republican party for the past four decades. They are not likely to forget that the party of Lincoln deliberately remade itself into the party of Dixie. Republican attempts to brand the small handful of black activists who are denouncing Steele as 'the real racists' is nothing more than a transparent attempt to innoculate their candidate. Any member of any community will face inevitable and legitimate criticism from within that community for supporting a party that attacks that its interests. I don't doubt that Mike Steele has what he thinks are good reasons for being a republican and supporting his party, but he would be better off explaining those reasons to the black community then hiding behind rhetorical tricks like 'calling me an uncle Tom makes you a racist.'

But I could be way off. I'm not myself a member of the black community and thus must rely on inference and supposition when discussing the black community. My insight on these matters is a product of the fact that I am a proud member of the American community. Given the harm the Republican party has done to my community recent years I have trouble understanding why any American support them. So I have some small understanding of the mistrust and resentment that members of the black community confront black republicans with.

Impeach Rove

Though it has mainly been used against sitting Presidents, impeachment is not reserved for that highest of offices.  The constitution allows for the impeachment of “all civil officers of the United States.”  What constitutes a “civil officer” is not, to my knowledge, well defined but could be interpreted to include the office White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy.  Which brings me to the point of this essay, congressional Democrats should immediately begin submitting resolutions of inquiry into the involvement of Rove in the White House leak case, the manipulation of prewar intelligence and whether his conduct on the White House Iraq Group violated federal anti-propaganda laws.  Resolutions of Inquiry are always the first step in an impeachment case and this resolution should be made explicitly as part of a call for Roves impeachment.  

The President promised the American people that anyone involved in the leak case would be fired.  Rove is clearly involved, but the President as to date refused to fire him. Indeed, Rove still possesses a security clearance that he clearly can’t be trusted with.  Many republicans have begun calling for his resignation and the words “cancer on the presidency” are being thrown around by the media in stories involving him.  Though the Republican leadership would dismiss a call for his impeachment as a “political stunt” some Republicans would support it in order to pressure Rove to resign or to pressure the President to fire him.  

Though the success of a move to impeach Rove would be uncertain at best, Democrats spearheading such an effort would be drawing a clear distinction between themselves and the Republican party that they will need to win in 06.  Indeed, even if defeated, such a move would play in the Democrats favor by energizing the Democratic base and revealing republicans as corrupt obstructionists.  “Respect for the Law,” can be and should be a major theme in the 06 races and Democrats can easily capitalize on the inevitable resistance by the Republican leadership to any move against Rove.  More over such a move will help further aggravate the internal divisions afflicting the Republican party by pitting the handful of republican moderates against their conservative leadership and by pitting the few genuine “law and order” republicans against the party loyalists who want block any investigation into the conduct of the administration.  

Alito Helps Prove Conservatism Unpopular

Gallup: New Poll Holds Warnings on Alito Nomination

This EP article proves yet again that the country’s rightward shift is a lie.  Public opinion research continues to show that Americans are moderates, and are increasingly distrustful of conservatives.  A recent Gallup poll illuminates profound misgivings amongst the majority of Americans over Judge Alito’s extreme conservatism.  The key findings:

--“If it becomes clear Alito would vote to reverse the abortion ruling Roe v. Wade, Americans would not want the Senate to confirm him, by 53% to 37%.”--“If most Senate Democrats oppose the nomination and decide to filibuster against Alito, 50% of Americans believe they would be justified, while 40% say they would not.”

The fact is that abortion is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Alito.  This is a man who said it was ok for police to strip-search a woman and her ten-year-old daughter without a warrant specifically authorizing such a search.  This is a man who ruled against the family and medical leave act.  This is a man ruled for racial and disability discrimination.  This is a man who has dissented from numerous decisions supporting the fundamental rights of Americans.  

Finally, and the most damning thing, is his disregard for judicial ethics.  In 2002 he sat on a panel considering a case that involved Vanguard Group, in which he has extensive investments.  Despite the obvious conflict of interest this represented he refused to recuse himself from the case.  As a result the decision reached by the panel he sat on had to be set aside and the case retried by a different panel, an inexcusable waste of the court’s time and the taxpayers’ money.  

No One To Blame But Themselves

In a bold move yesterday the Democratic leaders in the Senate demanded a closed session to discuss the fact that the Republican majority on the Senate Intelligence committee has been obstructing a promised investigation into the manipulation of prewar intelligence by Bush administration officials.  Now conservative Republicans are howling about the fact that the Dems didn’t warn them ahead of time.  Majority leader Bill “SEC’s most wanted” Frist called it a slap in the face.  You know what?  I agree! It was a slap in the face, and he had it coming.  

The chairman of the Senate intelligence committee promised us this investigation “after the election.”  Well tomorrow it will have been a year since the last election and nothing has been done.  The Democrats aren’t complaining that the investigation is taking to long, or claiming that it is a whitewash. They’re pointing out that there has been no investigation at all.  Hearings haven’t been scheduled.  Witnesses haven’t been called.  Subpoenas haven’t been issued.  Nothing has been done!  Today the Democratic leadership stood up and struck a blow for the American people and the constitution of the United States.

The current lack of comity in the senate is a direct reflection on its current leadership.  It was conservative Republicans who threatened a “nuclear option” to illegally rewrite the Senate filibuster rules.    It was conservative Republicans who dragged the senate into the private affairs of the Schaivo family.  It was conservative Republicans who, in the run up to the failed Iraq war, attacked any voice of reason or dissent as unpatriotic.  

For years now the conservatives ruling the republican party have waged a bitter ideologically war on both Democrats and moderates in their own party.  Whenever they have been presented an opportunity to reach across the isle, unite the nation and build a consensus they’ve chosen instead to pander to their extremist followers and further divide the country.  Indeed, one refrain I have heard disturbingly often from political historians is that America under George Bush is more divided than it has ever been in its history, including the years leading up to the Civil War.  This is no accident.  

Conservatives have to divide people to get elected.  Public opinion research consistently shows that their policy positions on substantive issues like retirement, education, the environment and healthcare are extremely unpopular.  To get elected conservatives have to demonize their opponents and exploit “wedge issues” like abortion and gay marriage.  The fact that they now have the gall to complain about partisanship is just another demonstration of the fact that their hypocrisy know no bounds.

My only regret about yesterday’s events in the Senate is that it has taken the Democrats so long to wake up to the fact that the Senate isn’t what it used to be.  It used to be, “the worlds greatest deliberative body,” now it’s an ideological war zone, because that’s what conservatives have turned it into.  The fact that the Dems have finally decided to start fighting back is actually a relief.  Let the conservatives bitch all they want.  When it comes to the breakdown of civility in public discourse they have no one to blame but themselves.

'Bout Friggin' Time!

Democrats Force Senate Into Iraq Meeting



Before the 04 elections the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Commitee promised to look into the manipulation of intelligence by the Bush administration and since then has blocked all efforts to actually move that investigation forward. It seems that the DEmocratic leadership has finally learned that going along to get along with conservative republicans just gets you screwed. They seem to finally realize that it's high time to fight.

uber rare morning post

I am by nature a night owl and generally despise morings, but here I am up at 8 am. Why? Because there's something wrong with this country and the only solution is to back candidates who can turn it arround. So I'm hauling my butt out of bed to go to a campaign meeting for Maryland senate candidate Allan Lichtman. Check out his campaign website to find out why.

The Perfect Solution

Over the past few years, radical conservatives have launched an unprecedented assault upon our liberties.  The Patriot act was an understandable, knee-jerk reaction to 9/11, but through it our constitutional safeguards were eroded.  The only things now standing between a free America and an American police state are the restraint of law enforcement officers in the use of their new powers under the Patriot act and, of course, the power of the Supreme Court to rule the act, in whole or in part, unconstitutional.  With Mr. Bush’s nomination of Samuel Alito the radical right has revealed its intention to undermine the last line of defense the American people posses for their rights and liberties.  

Fortunately I have stumbled across a perfect solution: a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the American people a right to privacy.  For years now conservatives have been attacking the right to privacy that the Supreme Court found in Griswold v. Connecticut, because it became the basis for Roe v. Wade and undermine all other conservative attempts to impose their idea of morality on the American people.  They have derided it as “the so-called ‘right to privacy.’”   Indeed, conservative complaints about Judicial activism and the need for “strict constructionists” who won’t “invent new rights” or “legislate from the bench” all come back to Griswold and its impact on Roe.  Their reasoning is spurious, but that’s no reason we can’t use it against them.  They claim the constitution contains no right to privacy, fine, let's add one.

A moderate-liberal coalition pushing a privacy amendment would put the conservatives on the defensive.  It would, I believe, enjoy broad public support.  It would shift the focus of the abortion debate away from the rights of the un-born to the rights of the living.  It would force them to explain why the movement that argues, “government should get off of peoples backs,” supports government intrusion into our private lives.  If passed it would protect Roe and de-fang the patriot act.  Which is why conservatives will fight it.  Which force them to try to explain to the American people why they oppose privacy.  Making a Privacy amendment an issue in 06 is a sure winner for moderates and progressives and a sure looser for conservatives.

Here’s my first draft:

“The American people shall hence forth posses an explicit Right of Privacy protecting them from the scrutiny of, and interference by, the government or any other legal entity regarding their conduct in their homes or other private settings, their personal communications, their intimate relations with others, their family affairs, and medical decisions, excepting that a warrant is issued, upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing a crime under investigation, and the persons or things to be examined.”

I’m no legal or constitutional scholar, I cobbled that together by cutting and pasting bits from the bill of rights and adding my own thoughts, so the real thing should be done by someone else and would likely be very different.  But you get the general idea.  So long as it includes a bit specifically protecting communications and medical matters the patriot act would be blown out of the water and Roe would be engraved in stone.  Write your congressmen and demand a constitutional Right of Privacy today!

Dems need to fight

"If you don't want to fight for the future and you can't figure out how to beat these people then find something else to do."  Former President Bill Clinton, Oct 29, 2005.

Clinton to Dems: Don't Fear Tough Issues

It would finally appear that some Democratic leaders are waking up to the fact that they need to fight for Democratic values, but Bill should really be talking to congressional Dems like Ben Cardin (D - Md.) about their ineffectual “opposition” to the conservative agenda.