The Re Collection

Jean Rohe, the student who took down McCain at the New School graduation, tells why she did it.

… Senator Mc Cain will tell us that we, those of us who are Americans, “have nothing to fear from each other.” I agree strongly with this, but I take it one step further. We have nothing to fear from anyone on this living planet. Fear is the greatest impediment to the achievement of peace. We have nothing to fear from people who are different from us, from people who live in other countries, even from the people who run our government–and this we should have learned from our educations here. We can speak truth to power, we can allow our humanity always to come before our nationality, we can refuse to let fear invade our lives and to goad us on to destroy the lives of others. These words I speak do not reflect the arrogance of a young strong-headed woman, but belong to a line of great progressive thought, a history in which the founders of this institution play an important part. I speak today, even through my nervousness, out of a need to honor those voices that came before me, and I hope that we graduates can all strive to do the same.

The unveiling of President Clinton’s official portrait provoked a real intellectual discussion on Scarborough Country the other night, between Joe, so-called Mr. Average, and Anna Marie Cox, who will forever be known as the former Wonkette, a gossip monger for the Beltway elite.

One of their complaints: the suit looks like it was (and — shocking! — may have been) bought at “Men’s Wearhouse” or “JC Penneys.” I kid you not. For that, disgust drips from their lips and pools around their Ferragamo-clad feet.

Taylor Marsh reacts appropriately:

As for Joe, he unmasked the contempt Republicans truly have for people like Bill, not just the president himself, but what Bill represents. You know, the Ozark, middle America, up from nothing, no father, rising to Rhodes Scholar then to president type, which is nothing short of the biggest threat to the Republican Party ever seen. The American born from nothing that makes it all the way. What it illustrates is that Republicans like to talk about being for the average man, but their contempt for Bill Clinton shows their true feelings for the men and women of middle America. Republicans are the party of the elites. They’ve just got a heck of a marketing plan.

I’m far from a Bill Clinton fan or apologist, but this is beyond contemptible in its arrogance and disrespect — not for Clinton, but for the common people, of which they most assuredly do not consider themselves a part.

As Taylor notes:

But what does the portrait really say? It says, in your face. I’m from Arkansas. I am who I am and the American people and the world think that’s good enough.

This, my Republican readers, is your party’s true colors. You have been bamoozled and the sooner you recognize that, the sooner we start getting a democratic country back.

From Daily Kos :: Comments to
“The REAL reason the press threw Colbert down the memory hole”

Why this whole thing makes me angry

I’ve been trying to figure out why it makes me so angry that the press ignored this story despite the fact that they were sitting there staring at it for what, half an hour? It’s not that they missed it, they actually consciously chose not to report it.

And I realized the reasons that makes me so mad is that:

(1) This was a once in a lifetime opportunity. Bush is perhaps more averse to criticism than any previous president, and he is allowed to hide from it 99% of the time. That Colbert was chosen to speak is something of a small miracle in itself.

(2) He nailed it. Anyone who says “but, but… it wasn’t funny” has totally missed the point. The point is: a comedian just got up and had the balls to criticize President Bush on almost every aspect imagineable - to his face. If you look closely, Colbert actually looks directly at Bush throughout much of the time he’s at the podium.

You know what I call that?? A f&cking news story!! Regardless of whether you thought his jokes were funny or not, there’s simply no escaping the fact that this is a news story because Colbert criticized Bush to his face like no one has before.

And not only did he criticize Bush, he also criticized the media itself, and the interelationship of the two. He showed a video with Helen Thomas chasing a fictional White House press secretary who was scared shitless to answer the simple question of why we invaded Iraq.

But no, that’s not news.

I keep going back to the old joke about the headline that states: “Bush says world is flat; Dems disagree”. In every other case, the press will slavishly present two sides of the story. Like in the Abramoff case when they kept wanting to call it a bipartisan scandal even though it clearly was not.

Yet now, where are the two sides? Do we get a headline that says “Colbert satire rips Bush; Repubs downplay significance”? No. We get spoiled “reporters” who simply decide the story isn’t worth running at all. I’m fed up with this.

Seeing the Forest: Colbert Affair Exposes Loss of Rights
Don Imus was the speaker at the 1996 Correspondent’s dinner and his talk insulted President Clinton along the lines of the ongoing “conservative movement” narrative. Whitewater, Susan McDougal getting payoffs, Clintons getting indicted, missing billing records… The press had a field day — coverage everywhere.

This is critical. So please take action RIGHT NOW!!!

Sign MoveOn’s petition and call Congress today.

More info.

It’s time for gay covenant marriage. By William Saletan

The pioneers of covenant marriage thought their followers would flock to it. They were wrong. In states conservative enough to promote it, fewer than one in 100 marrying couples has chosen this option—about 6,000 to 7,000 couples, judging from published data. Meanwhile, in states liberal enough to permit same-sex marriage or civil unions, thousands of gay couples have signed up—more than 7,300 in Massachusetts, 1,200 in Vermont (6,600 more if you count out-of-staters), and 700 in Connecticut. More than 3,700 gay couples have registered for domestic partnerships in New Jersey; another 30,000 or so have registered in California. Despite being absurdly outnumbered, more blue-state gay couples than red-state straight couples are signing up for as much commitment as the law allows. And that’s not counting gay couples agitating for marriage in other states.

Hattip to Common Sense.

Tena at First Draft takes issue with a preacher’s take on God and government:

Re: “Christians ask: Can you love thy neighbor but deport him too?” Friday news story.

I was amazed at the responses from religious organizations. Obedience to the laws of your government is, in fact, obedience to God. Matthew 22:21 states: “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” We have laws that were enacted by our government; the Christian thing to do is to obey them. God gives us government and leaders, and all are within his will. Obedience is required regardless of how passionate we feel about the subject. We cannot under any circumstances condone civil disobedience because it is contrary to God’s law.

The Rev. J. Alvin Carter, Dallas

I thought she was quite restrained in her response. But some commenters attempt to address the good reverend within his own worldview.

My guess is that the Rev. J. Alvin Carter of Dallas, Texas really worships George W. Bush and the modern Republican Party, and if actually faced with making a choice, God would be dumped in a heartbeat.

Apparently the Bush administration is confused and thinks this is the first day of April, not May.

This year’s Law Day theme, “Liberty Under Law: Separate Branches, Balanced Powers,” honors the wisdom of the separation of powers that the Framers of our Constitution established for the Federal Government. Delegates to the Constitutional Convention recognized the risks that accompany the concentration of power and devised a system in which the Federal Government’s authorities are divided among three independent branches. James Madison highlighted the importance of our Constitution’s separation of powers when he wrote, “the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

Hat tip

When someone does something nice for you without expecting anything in return, it’s only right to thank them.

Athenae’s usual astute take on how Republicans get elections despite how poorly they govern

God wasn’t on the ballot that November. God wasn’t anywhere near any of the issues that were in fact important. Just as “should the national anthem be English-only” isn’t anywhere near anything we need to worry about. But people will, and damn it if you ignore that, you ignore the political reality that for most people the thought process is: You ain’t got a job and you ain’t got no savings and your neighbor’s kid just got his ass shot off in Fallujah, but damn it, you can fix this national anthem thing right quick.

And it’s not so much a party problem as it is one of utter debasement of the national conversation, until all you need in order to consider yourself politically knowledgable is this beauty-shop gossip grasp of Today Show-type issues. All you need to know you can get from The View. Bullshit media-driven chatter about nothing, about sweaters and God and now this, as if somebody somewhere singing Oh Say Can You See really matters. Of course it doesn’t.

The Blog | Max Blumenthal: Sensenbrenner Awakens A Sleeping Giant | The Huffington Post

Holy cow! Half a mill march in LA against the draconian anti-immigration bill. Other demos in Phoenix and (I heard somewhere) Chicago. NYC next week.

Woo hoo! It’s gonna be a great summer.

Most of my posts are just links to recommended reading, but this article by Don Hazen of Alternet, AlterNet: Bring the Sixties Out of the Closet, I’m calling special attention to. I see so much on the left denegrating the actions of the 60’s, and refusing to acknowledge the many positive results that the activists of the era achieved, not the famous ones only, but all the unknown marchers and peacemakers.

In the face of this [Bush era post-election] semiparalysis, ’60s values need to be liberated to give us some inspiration and updated to fit our present day. These values don’t belong to just one generation, but rather to a historical river of ideas and ideals that stretch back into history. They are ready to be claimed by new generations and reclaimed by those who remember what it was like the first time around.

Read the whole thing.

Sweet, sweet Jane!

Jane Smiley’s smackdown is so luscious, so sharp and pointed, that if words could draw blood, these would. Another compendium of the many sins of Bushco and the band of evildoers he rode in on.

President Bush is your creation. When the US Supreme Court humiliated itself in 2000 by handing the presidency to Bush even though two of the justices (Scalia and Thomas) had open conflicts of interest, you did not object. When the Bush administration adopted an “Anything but Clinton” policy that resulted in ignoring and dismissing all warnings of possible terrorist attacks on US soil, you went along with and made excuses for Bush. When the Bush administration allowed the corrupt Enron corporation to swindle California ratepayers and taxpayers in a last ditch effort to balance their books in 2001, you laughed at the Californians and ignored the links between Enron and the administration. When it was evident that the evidence for the war in Iraq was cooked and that State Department experts on the Middle East were not behind the war and so it was going to be run as an exercise in incompetence, you continued to attack those who were against the war in vicious terms and to defend policies that simply could not work. On intelligent design, global warming, doctoring of scientific results to reflect ideology, corporate tax giveaways, the K Street project, the illegal redistricting of Texas, torture at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib, the Terry Schiavo fiasco, and the cronyism that led to the destruction of New Orleans you have failed to speak out with integrity or honesty, preferring power to truth at every turn. Bush does what he wants because you have let him.

Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: The Death of Shame in our Pundit Class

It is truly difficult to understand how these same people can continue to pompously opine on these matters, and still claim an entitlement to be listened to, without at least confessing their errors. The magnitude of misinformation and deceit in which our country was drowning during that time is difficult to convey. And from the fact that 70% of the country had been falsely persuaded that Saddam personally participated in the planning of the 9/11 attacks to the way in which our media mindlessly swallowed and regurgitated outright military fiction such as the Jessica Lynch fantasies, this carousel of shame and deceit is virtually endless.

There are not many episodes in our national history which can compete with the invasion of Iraq in terms of the profound failures of every one of our institutions — failures which allowed this sort of deceit and detachment from reality to persist. But until we identify those responsible and end the influence which they continue to exert over our political dialogue, we will continue to be at risk of following them down these same deceitful, destructive paths.

Daily Kos: Bush Disapproval Map: What More Do The Democrats Want?

Let’s create a list of every idiotic thing George Bush has done in the past five years

News on the Kinky Friedman for Governor campaign, a fairly positive profile in the Austin Chronicle, and a rather disconcerting report in the Dallas Morning News (see BugMeNot to bypass compulsory registration in both papers) , in which the Kinkster is quoted as saying that he rarely goes to the polls, but managed to vote for George W. Bush in 2004.

I’ve been somewhat queasily supporting Kinky, because I think his independent candidacy can help raise awareness about the grossly unfair ballot access laws in Texas, but his going for W in 2004 indicates a real lack of moral fiber, not to mention decent judgement of people (note the “humorous” quote about how Bush is a good man trapped in a Republican body). I appreciate honesty, and I think Kinky is refreshingly honest, but being honest, and being committed to justice, are very different things. He should have sat out voting in 2004 as well — or refrained from making a selection in the presidential race.

I will try to get a fuller version of his statement on this, since it’s possible that it’s out of context, or miscontrued, or simply wrong — or disinformation from the Democratic camp or elsewhere. But I cannot responsibly support him if this is confirmed by his campaign. There may be little chance of him winning and becoming governor, but I’d like to know that the person I vote for, if elected, is a member of the “reality-based community” and no one who willfully voted for George Bush, a known quantity, in 2004, can claim to be one.

From USA Today, an editorial about the use of religion by politicians who are ever willing to play the ‘God’ card

Faith at its best, at its most powerful, stands outside of culture, Carter argues, where it can best maintain its integrity and prophetic moral force. As Carter sees it, “Religion has too often allowed itself to be seduced by the lure of temporal power, a dysfunctional and even immoral love affair that has led to much human misery and has been destructive as well of true faith.”

It’s not just secular Americans who have a strong interest in a more appropriate treatment of religion in our political tussles. Because in wielding faith like just another political tactic, opportunistic politicians don’t just discredit themselves — they give religion a bad name, too.

Hat tip to ReddHedd at FireDogLake.

Chug! Chug! Chug! Tooot! Tooot!

This morning I caught part of Richard Dreyfuss giving a kick-ass speech to the National Press Club (which doesn’t have the transcript available for non-members).

I have it on good authority that Dreyfuss is a pompous jerk to, say, people like wait staff at posh LA eateries who grow up to be event promoters in Florida. But, if I might take the liberty of speaking on behalf of all service personnel everywhere: all forgiven, now, for this speech, which was an impassioned plea for understanding, accountability and for saving this nation before it is too late.

He should run for president; unlike the other actor who did so, he was once on the Hollywood A-list.

There are causes worth fighting for even if you know that you will lose,” Dreyfuss said during a speech at the National Press Club. “Unless you are willing to accept torture as part of a normal American political lexicon, unless you are willing to accept that leaving the Geneva Convention is fine and dandy, if you accept the expansion of wiretapping as business as usual, the only way to express this now is to embrace the difficult and perhaps embarrassing process of impeachment.

If any reader knows where the full transcript of this speech might be accessed, please let me know.

Jeanne of Body and Soul exposes yet another disgusting example of the immaturity — and counter-effectiveness — of the little boys who are running things in this country. Just pathetic. And 39% of people in this country think they are just the keenist kids on the playground.

The Galveston County Daily News
A new American Bar Association poll contains a frightening number.

The poll says 18 percent of Americans believe the president should be able to suspend constitutional freedoms any time he “thinks it is necessary to protect the country.”

Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: Do Bush followers have a political ideology?

What it takes to make someone a “conservative” in Bozell’s eyes is the same as what is required in the eyes of all Bush followers — a willingness to support Bush’s actions because they are the actions of George Bush.

[snip]

People who self-identify as “conservatives” and have always been considered to be conservatives become liberal heathens the moment they dissent, even on the most non-ideological grounds, from a Bush decree. That’s because “conservatism” is now a term used to describe personal loyalty to the leader (just as “liberal” is used to describe disloyalty to that leader), and no longer refers to a set of beliefs about government.

That “conservatism” has come to mean “loyalty to George Bush” is particularly ironic given how truly un-conservative the Administration is. It is not only the obvious (though significant) explosion of deficit spending under this Administration – and that explosion has occurred far beyond military or 9/11-related spending and extends into almost all arenas of domestic programs as well. Far beyond that is the fact that the core, defining attributes of political conservatism could not be any more foreign to the world view of the Bush follower.

As much as any policy prescriptions, conservatism has always been based, more than anything else, on a fundamental distrust of the power of the federal government and a corresponding belief that that power ought to be as restrained as possible, particularly when it comes to its application by the Government to American citizens. It was that deeply rooted distrust that led to conservatives’ vigorous advocacy of states’ rights over centralized power in the federal government, accompanied by demands that the intrusion of the Federal Government in the lives of American citizens be minimized.

Is there anything more antithetical to that ethos than the rabid, power-hungry appetites of Bush followers? There is not an iota of distrust of the Federal Government among them. Quite the contrary. Whereas distrust of the government was quite recently a hallmark of conservatism, expressing distrust of George Bush and the expansive governmental powers he is pursuing subjects one to accusations of being a leftist, subversive loon.

Indeed, as many Bush followers themselves admit, the central belief of the Bush follower’s “conservatism” is no longer one that ascribes to a limited federal government — but is precisely that there ought to be no limits on the powers claimed by Bush precisely because we trust him, and we trust in him absolutely. He wants to protect us and do good. He is not our enemy but our protector. And there is no reason to entertain suspicions or distrust of him or his motives because he is Good.

Sig heil, anyone?

Educators face blowback for protesting Iraq war in schools

Just over three years ago, as the nation readied for war with Iraq, elementary school teacher Deb Mayer stood in front of her class and uttered the word that would get her blacklisted from her profession.

It was a word that got her deemed “unpatriotic” by an angry parent. A word that led to her termination from the Bloomington, Indiana school district. A word that got her labeled as a potential sex offender and ruined her chances of finding work elsewhere.

That word was “peace.”

Radical Russ at Pam’s House Blend has compiled Fifty Questions For Compassionate Christian Conservatives. Brilliant!

You gotta think some radical shift is underway in D.C. when the Moonie rag Washington Times publishes an article that says:

1) Bush is spying on Americans talking to Americans inside the United States, even when neither of the two Americans are members of Al Qaeda or an affiliate.

2) Bush’s domestic spy program is totally ineffective and unnecessary as Al Qaeda stopped using the phones and email a long time ago.

3) The Bush team knows of specific Al Qaeda members in the US at the moment, but because of Bush’s incompetence he has been unable to find them.

Hat tip: AMERICAblog: Because a great nation deserves the truth