DonorsChoose.org gives us a way to help teachers get the job done. A bunch of us at ScienceBlogs have set up Bloggers Challenges which will let us (and that includes you) contribute to worthy school projects in need of financial assistance...
'WHAT WILL they do to us if there is another attack? Will they intern us like they interned the Japanese?"
That is the single most common question I get when speaking about counter-terrorism policies and civil liberties to Arab and Muslim audiences. Until Wednesday, I assured them that such a response was unthinkable. The Japanese internment during World War II is now so widely recognized as morally, legally and ethically wrong, I told them, that it could not possibly be repeated.
But after a decision by a federal judge in New York, I'm no longer confident that I can be so reassuring. Dismissing a case challenging the detention of Arab and Muslim foreign nationals in the weeks after 9/11, U.S. District Judge John Gleeson ruled that it is constitutionally permissible to round up foreign nationals on immigration charges based solely on their race, religion or country of origin. What's more, he said that they can be detained indefinitely, even after they have agreed to be removed to their home countries.
In essence, he authorized a repeat of the Japanese internment - as long as the internment is limited to foreign nationals charged with visa violations (a group that at last count numbered about 11 million people).
WHEN THE Supreme Court in Korematsu vs. United States upheld the legality of the Japanese internment, Justice Robert Jackson warned in his dissent that the precedent would "lie about like a loaded weapon ready for the hand of any authority that can bring forward a plausible claim of an urgent need."
Until Wednesday, I thought history had proved Jackson wrong. Virtually every living Supreme Court justice has condemned Korematsu as wrongly decided - Justice Antonin Scalia has compared it to the Dred Scott decision of 1857, in which the court refused to recognize that slaves were "persons." Congress has formally apologized to the survivors of the internment and paid reparations for their injuries.
Yet the Turkmen decision has taken the loaded weapon out of the closet, dusted it off and handed it to federal authorities, giving them explicit permission to let prejudice and fear run roughshod over the most basic of human rights - the rights to equal treatment and liberty.
This Lieberman-Lamont race is becoming exceptionally important, because it's the most high-profile of a series of clashes between two different ways of doing politics. The bear ad, and the ad man named Carter Eskew who is the consultant behind it, unwittingly reveals a lot about what's going on in both DC and in Connecticut.
Which brings me to Carter Eskew's bear ad (at the link - G). The ad is a judgment failure on Eskew's part. The ad works on one level - it would convince Joe Lieberman to vote for Joe Lieberman, for instance. But for normal non-machine people who don't see Lowell Weicker's 1988 loss through the same earth-shattering lens, it doesn't make any sense.
For Lieberman, however, and Carter Eskew, Weicker is the opponent. Lieberman is a machine politician, and Carter Eskew is a DC machine lobbyist. Their memory is long, sharp, and out of sync. Lieberman's last real Senate race was in 1988, but that's how he won it, so that's how he'll win this one. Now, I'm not from Connecticut, so I can't pretend to know a great deal about lingering feelings about Lowell Weicker and whether the ad stings in some non-obvious Connecticut-specific way. My guess is that it doesn't, because people don't really care that much about someone who hasn't been in office for many years. Political machines, though, have long memories, and are always fighting the last war.
These K-Street Democrats have a lot of power, and they are angry at the Lamont challenge because it's a direct threat to their revenue stream. And in Carter Eskew, you can see how tied together these machine people and lobbyists really are. I know it's hip to say that Lamont is not a single-issue candidate, but it's true in a deeply fundamental way. The Lamont challenge is a direct attack on how DC does business.
...
Why does the richest Republicans and Democrats get to retain their tax cuts while Katrina victims remain homeless? Why does John Aravosis become entitled to shop for orchids while elderly people like my mother (or someone else's mother, father, or grandparent) isn't entitled to shop around for cheap medicine? Why do A-List liberal bloggers continue to use their power to repeat the same loop-de-loop over and over (e.g. Embarrass The Media, Own Republicans, Smack Democrats, Shill Shirts/Books, Cash The Check At End Of Month, Repeat From Top) when the entire edifice of the Republicans' corruption and the Democrats' complacency would crumble within a week -- a month, tops -- if the A-List liberal bloggers decided to instead post, "I can't do this in good conscience anymore so I'm going to surprise everyone by saying NO to power, shutting the blog down for a while, and take my activism to the MSM and the politicians' own front fuckin' porch and I hope you do the same"?!?
...
...
The 11th is a crisp fall morning with the sun glinting off the East River from a spotless hard-blue sky and a brisk nor'wester whistling through the concrete canyons, raising everyone's spirits and somehow conveying a sense of promise.
Rather like another crisp fall morning a few years back.
The UN Headquarters, one of New York's best-known national icons, is packed. Ditto the General Assembly, in session to debate a set of ultra-draconian sanctions on Iran, the only way it has left to hold back the dogs of war aka John Bolton.
Bolton and the American delegation however are in DC in 'urgent consultation' with the White House.
At 9.01.24 am, the UN Building, which has received no anti-terror funding whatsoever from city, state or DHS, explodes from four massive bombs set at its base corners - in much the same way conspiracy buffs maintain that the Twin Towers were actually brought low. Severed from its foundations the glass and concrete structure abruptly collapses. Before the 39th floor has hit the ground, the General Assembly next door, explodes also.
...
...
Lamont had publicly promised for weeks to accept any invitation to debate, but the Lieberman campaign issued a press release Friday afternoon asking, "Will Ned agree to a debate and answer questions on issues that matter to real voters?"
Swan said the press release was cheap posturing, since Lamont had accepted Channel 30's invitation on Wednesday.
...
...
Interestingly enough, it doesn't appear that Gohmert is your usual GOP Chickenhawk, having served as an officer in the U.S. Army. But once again, we see that those who have served in combat tend to be against war and those who haven't are almost always the most Rambo-like. [my em]
WASHINGTON Jun 16, 2006 (AP) - North Korea is accelerating preparations for testing a missile that has the potential to strike the United States, a U.S. government official said Friday. A test of the Taepodong-2 long-range missile may be imminent, the official said.
...
WASHINGTON - Add political banishment to the list of problems confronting Rep. William Jefferson, ensnared in a bribery scandal that fellow Democrats hope to turn to their election-year advantage.
"Democrats are determined to hold a high ethical standard," the party's leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, said Thursday night after engineering a 99-58 vote of the rank and file that stripped Jefferson of his seat on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.
...
Documents purportedly discovered in al-Zarqawi's hideout are seen to gain credibility because they outline "the same exact strategy and goal embraced by the Bush administration itself," [...]
I Wake Up Screaming: Al Qaeda in the White House
This is a joke, right? Normally, I wouldn't believe anything that comes from the U.S. government or U.S. military, or from the Iraqi National Security Adviser (which is about the same thing). The Bush administration started its endless campaign of misrepresentations, distortions and lies on the afternoon of 9/11, and it's never stopped. At this point, no one has grounds to lend credence to a single word they utter on any subject -- and that is especially true in connection with matters of war and national security.
But in this case, I can believe that this branch of the insurgency in Iraq sought to increase tensions between the U.S. and Iran, simply because it's entirely ludicrous to present this as "proof" of some dastardly, evil plan hatched by our enemies. Why do I say it's ludicrous? The answer is very simple: because this is the same exact strategy and goal embraced by the Bush administration itself.
What we have done in Iraq is what bin Laden could not have hoped for in his wildest dreams: We invaded an oil-rich Muslim nation in the heart of the Middle East, the very type of imperial adventure that bin Laden has long predicted was the United States' long-term goal in the region. We deposed the secular socialist Saddam, whom bin Laden has long despised, ignited Sunni and Shia fundamentalist fervor in Iraq, and have now provoked a "defensive" jihad that has galvanized jihad-minded Muslims around the world. It's hard to imagine a set of policies better designed to sabotage the war on terrorism.
The benefits of Iran-hysteria to the Bush administration are obvious. Of greatest importance is the fact that, to the extent the administration can once again create an atmosphere of danger and even panic, it serves to distract attention from the calamitous consequences of their past and present actions. Interestingly, much of the American public doesn't seem to be buying the Iran propaganda -- at least, not yet. And I would find the public's infinitely more sensible and accurate assessment of the danger a cause for hope, except for the fact that the administration doesn't give a damn what the public thinks in that sense. Moreover, our criminally incompetent media have learned next to nothing from their numerous errors during the propaganda onslaught about Iraq, and they still unthinkingly parrot administration talking points. So when the administration decides to ratchet up the Iran propaganda, the media will transmit and amplify the lies just as they did before.
All in all, it is quite a spectacle: we are supposed to be horrified at the depths of evil revealed by the insurgents' plans "to escalate the tension between America and Iran" -- when that is precisely what our own government is and has been doing with absolute consistency. And at this point, and after the record of the last several years and the constantly repeated lies from the administration on every imaginable subject, I trust no one will be heard to say: "Oh, but they would never do that! How can you even think that the administration would launch an attack on Iran, when that might be the start of a global nuclear conflict that would destroy life on a scale never seen before?"
If you had even the glimmer of such a thought, I have but a single response: You cannot be serious.
And I have only these questions: Why aren't more people screaming? Why isn't everyone screaming?
Funny, we simply "must" punish "law-breakers" when they're Mexican immigrants because "it would send a bad message" showing law-breakers any mercy. But when the law-breakers are reputed Al Qaeda terrorists who have murdered American soldiers, suddenly the Republican party becomes all warm and fuzzy. So the message for Mexicans seeking amnesty is what? Go to Iraq and pick up a gun first?
Why did Bush just fight a 3 year war in Iraq again? To let everybody go after they killed 2,500 American soldiers?
"It does not require many words to speak the truth." -- Chief Joseph, native American leader (1840-1904)
"One of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the great struggle for independence." -- Charles A. Beard, historian (1874-1948)
"People who want to share their religious views with you almost never want you to share yours with them." -- Dave Barry, author and columnist (1947-)
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." -- Thomas Paine, philosopher and writer (1737-1809)
"The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready he is to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy cause. A man is likely to mind his own business when it is worth minding. When it is not, he takes his mind off his own meaningless affairs by minding other people's business." -- Eric Hoffer, philosopher and author (1902-1983)
"True religion is the life we lead, not the creed we profess." -- Louis Nizer, lawyer (1902-1994)
"The most tyrannical of governments are those which make crimes of opinions, for everyone has an inalienable right to his thoughts." -- Baruch Spinoza, philosopher (1632-1677)
"There is no pillow so soft as a clear conscience." -- French proverb
"As I stood before the gates I realized that I never want to be as certain about anything as were the people who built this place." - Rabbi Sheila Peltz, on her visit to Auschwitz
"Nature can provide for the needs of people; [she] can't provide for the greed of people." - Mohandas K. Gandhi (1869-1948)
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain, author and humorist (1835-1910)
"It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell." - William Tecumseh Sherman, Union General in the American Civil War (1820-1891)
"A great war leaves the country with three armies - an army of cripples, an army of mourners, and an army of thieves." - German proverb
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservative." - John Stuart Mill, 1806-1873, British philosopher
...
Let's set one thing straight about counterinsurgency operations. There are better and worse ways to conduct them, but there is no good way to conduct them. And you can't design a military that specializes in counterinsurgency because then it wouldn't be good at doing what it's supposed to do, which is fight and defeat other military forces.
...
A blueprint for trying to start a war between the United States and Iran was among a "huge treasure" of documents found in the hideout of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Iraqi officials said Thursday.
The document, purporting to reflect al-Qaida policy and its cooperation with groups loyal to ousted President Saddam Hussein, also appear to show that the insurgency in Iraq was weakening.
...
...
cut to just a few minutes ago. we were accepting a new slate of ads, when we noticed one about "the future of the internet." this time we watched the whole ad. yep. it was against net neutrality. so we rejected it.
we bring it up, because some other bloggers who will remain nameless have gone ahead and accepted the ad, with explanations to their readers that go something along the lines of, well, you readers are smart enough to know b.s. when you see it, and their money is as good as anyone's.
sorry, that rationalization doesn't hold water, at least not for skippy international. it's one thing to allow for all sides of a debate to be heard on your blog, it's another to enable destructive behavior.
...
...
the blogs we speak of are some of our favorites, and daily visits for us. we don't plan on boycotting them. and we are a little afraid they'll be pissed at us for taking this stand.
...
Nearly four years after it authorized the use of force in Iraq, the House today will embark on its first extended debate on the war, with Republican leaders daring Democrats to vote against a nonbinding resolution to hold firm on Iraq and the war on terrorism.
As a result of our efforts during this debate, Americans will recognize that on the issue of national security, they have a clear choice between a Republican Party aware of the stakes and dedicated to victory, versus a Democratic Party without a coherent national security policy that sheepishly dismisses the challenges America faces in a post-9/11 world," Boehner wrote.
"This is nothing more or less than really a charade," said Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr. (R-N.C.), who made headlines in the run-up to the Iraq invasion by changing french fries to "freedom fries" in the House dining room but has since turned strongly against the war.
There is going to be a debate today on the floor of the House of Representatives regarding Iraq. Is it within the realm of possibility to categorize a debate on the floor of the House as a war crime? Is that too much of a stretch? Leveling a war crime accusation is deadly serious business after all, and not to be bandied about like some meager political football. Given what is expected to take place today in Washington, unfortunately, such a categorization is worth considering.
What is a war crime anyway? Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention defines war crimes as, "Willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile power, or willfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly."
How many of these definitions have been met by the United States during our ill-fated adventure in Iraq and during this so-called "War on Terror" as a whole?
But all this happened during the invasion and occupation, and many of these despicable activities have been papered over by dubious legal findings generated by Attorney General Gonzales. How does a debate on the floor of the House of Representatives rise to the level of a war crime?
Simple. Awareness that war crimes are being committed, combined with a lack of action to stop those war crimes by an individual or entity holding a position of leadership, is as bad as the crime itself.
It is possible that the House debate today will break new ground, that sober minds will be able to elbow the snarling partisans into the periphery, that hard facts and real solutions will be presented, that a crack of dawn sunlight may be found in this long, terrible night, and that a step towards ending all the death and destruction and sorrow and woe may actually be taken.
Don't count on it, though. Thanks to the Republican majority and its leader, this debate will be yet another dog-and-pony show designed to do little more than frighten and divide the populace. In the process, this debate will ensure that the war goes on, and will further ensure that George W. Bush and his people are insulated from accountability, culpability and the basic need to chart a new course.
The Republicans in the House know what is happening, and know how bad things are. By framing this important debate in such simplistic, venal terms, they are absolutely guaranteeing more of the same. And that, friends, is a war crime, and you can watch it happen today on television.
Whereas American theology was born out of a hope for democracy, much of it is wedded to a picture of Christ as a benevolent dictator. Should we be surprised that a hierarchical cosmology would produce hierarchical churches and nations? Should we be surprised that religious nations that picture Christ as a loving dictator have produced conquistadors, inquisitors and crusaders?
Neither Calvin nor Luther spoke English, but they helped the Popes lay the groundwork for the view of God as a cosmic dictator. From Popes, Luther and Calvin we have some of the ugliest slurs ever recorded against women, intellectuals and those who refused the church's message. How did Christians hold slaves, oppress women and slaughter nonbelievers? Perhaps they could not see Christ in non-male, non-European, and non-Christian people because they were limited by their theology. Their "Christ" was merely a glorification of the most powerful member of their own culture.
To picture God in terms of power is also one of the great bait-and-switch gimmicks of all time. People within the power hierarchy proclaim that God is the ultimate authority, and then appoint themselves as God's interpreters and enforcers. They are God's humble bullies. It has been one of the most successful con games of all time.
Today's church lifts its arms to praise Christ wearing liturgical garments woven in sweatshops. So called "Christian America" is still a nation built on the work of slaves. We do not see them because they toil invisibly in other countries. Today's church doles out bits of charity from booty stolen from God's powerless people the world over. Anyone who claims to believe in a just God, or even in justice itself, has to know at some level that the prayers for liberation coming from third world countries will be heard and answered. At some level, people of faith have to know that unless America repents of the sin of empire we are a doomed nation.
Whether or not we can change America in time to avoid a political and ecological apocalypse, it is never too late to do the right thing. All of us can begin to plant seeds of a better future for our children's children. For Christians today, that means suffering the consequences of refusing to bow to the dictator Christ of this culture.
Iran has banned The Economist magazine for describing the Persian Gulf as merely "the Gulf" in a map published in the latest edition, state television reported late Wednesday.
Tehran believes in aggressively defending the historical term "Persian Gulf" against "Arabian Gulf," which it regards as a name dreamed up by Arab nationalists. While Iran dominates the eastern side of the waterway, the western shores are held by Arab countries.
Stewart: You're the guy--I have sympathy for you because you're the guy who has to spray perfume on these turds. You know what I mean? You're the guy that has to go out and like no matter what (garbled) It's not an easy job. I mean what happened to these guys...
Did Ken say that Afghanistan was a failed state? When an interviewer (fake of course) asks pointed questions to the Mehlman's out there; they just cave. I keep posting these clips and keep shaking my head at how these talking point junkies are so easily debunked. Stewart has that ability. Mehlman actually looked very nervous.
...
[NY Senator Chuck] Schumer said that the DSCC "fully supports" Sen. Joe Lieberman in his primary bid, and he refused to rule out continuing that support if Lieberman were to run as an independent.
There were degrees of independence, Schumer said. "You can run as an independent, you can run as an independent Democrat who pledges to vote for Harry Reid as Majority Leader."
...
Robert Donner, a character actor who specialized in playing eccentrics, including the crazed prophet Exidor on the popular sitcom "Mork & Mindy," has died. He was 75.
PHILADELPHIA - The sign contains just eight words and is hardly big enough to wrap around a cheesesteak. But here in South Philadelphia, home of the cheesesteak, the sign that Joey Vento posted at Geno's Steaks speaks volumes.
It reads: "This Is America. When Ordering Please Speak English."
For the uninitiated, a cheesesteak is a cholesterol-delivery device consisting of grilled strips of beef, melted cheese, onions and peppers on an Italian roll.
It is sometimes difficult for outsiders to order at Geno's or other local cheesesteak emporiums because of an unspoken code that requires ordering "wid" or "widout," meaning with or without onions. (One newcomer once asked "Wid what?" and was told, "Wid cheese, stoopid!") One must also specify the cheese - Cheez Wiz or provolone, as in "Cheez Wiz wid."
Given those customs, ordering a "bistec con queso" is not likely to elicit cooperation.
Now it seems to me one might have any number of reactions to news of suicides at Guantanamo, but righteous indignation is not one of them. Most of these prisoners have been held for four years now without possibility of charge, trial or parole. I should think they would be suicidal.
I'm sorry we failed to prevent it, but I'm not sure that's possible. "They hid their plans to die?" Gee, the sneaks.
If I wanted to win a global war on terror, I'd sure be concerned about what they think. I would hope the right would at least be concerned over the damage being done to the American military by this war.
Morale, my ass. Excuse me, but our government doesn't even seem to be able to pay these people on time. Not to mention stretching them past the breaking point in Iraq, leaving them without adequate mental care when they come home, endlessly extending their tours, bribing them to re-up, and so forth and so on. Then, of course, something like Haditha happens, and they all get a black eye out of it.
I think it's time the antiwar side in this country started using a few threats of its own -- specifically, about who's going to take the blame for this when it's over.
Forget the liberal tradition of forgiveness. I say, hold this grudge. (my em)
A New York high school is apologizing for Adolf Hitler quotations appearing in its yearbook.
Two students at Northport High chose quotes from Hitler's book "Mein Kampf" to appear under their senior pictures. One says "Strength lies not in defense, but in attack." The other reads "The great masses of people...will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one."
The principal says the school "failed miserably" in not catching the quotes.
A spokesman for Senator John Kerry (D-MA) has launched an unusually personal attack on presidential adviser Karl Rove, RAW STORY has learned.
The move comes one day after Rove called plans to exit Iraq proposed by Senator Kerry and Representative John Murtha (D-PA) "profoundly wrong" "cut and run" strategies. "They may be with you for the first few bullets," Rove said, "but they won't be there for the last tough battles."
"The closest Karl Rove ever came to combat," said Kerry spokesman David Wade, "was these last months spent worrying his cellmates might rough him up in prison. This porcine political operative can't cut and run from the truth any longer."
Thousands of pounds of armor added to military Humvees, intended to protect U.S. troops, have made the vehicles more likely to roll over, killing and injuring soldiers in Iraq, a newspaper reported.
"I believe the up-armoring has caused more deaths than it has saved," said Scott Badenoch, a former Delphi Corp. vehicle dynamics expert told the Dayton Daily News for Sunday editions.
An analysis of the Army's ground accident database, which includes records from March 2003 through November 2005, found that 60 of the 85 soldiers who died in Humvee accidents in Iraq -- or 70 percent -- were killed when the vehicle rolled, the newspaper reported. Of the 337 injuries, 149 occurred in rollovers.
"Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth." - Alphonse Elric, from Fullmetal Alchemist.
Statement of Christopher Wolf, Proskauer Rose LLP, Counsel for Ambassador Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame Wilson:
We have become aware of the communication between Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Luskin concerning Karl. Rove's status in the criminal investigation. We have no first-hand knowledge of the reason for the communication or what further developments in the criminal investigation it may signal. While it appears that Mr. Rove will not be called to answer in criminal court for his participation in the wrongful disclosure of Valerie Wilson's classified employment status at the CIA in retaliation against Joe Wilson for questioning the rationale for war in Iraq, that obviously does not end the matter. The day still may come when Mr. Rove and others are called to account in a court of law for their attacks on the Wilsons.
End of Statement
Common oversights by close minded people living in fear
4. Personal Responsibility: A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multinational corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.
5. Religious Hypocrites: Jesus loves you, and he shares your mindless pointless hatred of homosexuals (which in reality is actually self loathing).
6. Support Our Troops: The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay, and by putting stickers on your car while never actually thinking about them, and by wearing yellow ribbons that mean nothing while denying the truth and not paying benefits to over 7,000 families of US troops.
7. Sex Education: If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex. (Ignore the problem and it will go away)
...
Her previous career may have been launched by a wilingness to coarsen political discourse by talking about the things she inserted into her rectum, but at Time she seems to have changed positions. TBogg alerts us this morning that her new stint seems to be on her knees:
...
...
Hm, sounds like "the center" is actually a creature called "corporate interests". I think most people in America would be awfully surprised to hear it.
Then again:
...
MOGADISHU (Reuters) - Islamist militiamen shot in the air to disperse hundreds of Somalis protesting early on Saturday against moves by sharia courts to stop them watching the World Cup in the capital Mogadishu, residents said.
Similar moves by Islamist militia to close cinemas and video stores in Mogadishu last November triggered heavy fighting that killed at least 12 people and wounded more than 20.
Leaders of the capital's influential Islamic courts oppose Western and Indian films which they say promote immorality in the mainly Muslim nation of 10 million people.
However, the World Cup ban stirred resentment among locals, already weary of the fighting in Mogadishu that has killed 350 people in three months.
"The residents of this area are very sorry about the way the Islamic militia is behaving toward the people at a time when our society needs peace and stability," said Moallim Hussein Abdi, a teacher.
One teenager was defiant.
"We do not accept the Islamic militia stopping us from watching the World Cup," Ahmed Yusuf, 19, said. "We'll continue demonstrating until they relent."
If I had to be relegated to the Dustbin of History, I'm glad it was in Vegas.
I, Old Media, came here to attend a New Media convention of progressive political bloggers aiming for a technological revolution that would dispatch mainstream media to the tumbrels. It was the journalistic equivalent of mingling with your own pod replicant in "Invasion of the Body Snatchers."
Old media and new circled each other "like kids at a seventh-grade dance," said Jennifer Palmieri, a Democratic operative.
Technology has enabled the not-meek to inherit the earth, and Democrats and others who refuse to drink the cyber-Kool-Aid will, Mr. Moulitsas said, go into the old "dustbin of history."
The fast-talking former Army artillery scout with the boyish demeanor and dark brown buggy eyes is no one to take lightly. Some may think the Internet messiah who put Mr. Dean on the map in 2003 is "a fame hound, a loudmouth nerd at the back of the room," as The Washington Monthly wrote. But others, including adoring conventioneers who called the scene at the debut YearlyKos gathering "magic" and "a rock concert," see him the way Ana Marie Cox, nee Wonkette, described him this week in Time.com: "He's the left's own Kurt Cobain and Che Guevara rolled into one."
Mr. Moulitsas assured me he didn't see himself as a journalist, only a Democratic activist. "I don't plan on doing any original reporting - screw that. I need people like you," he said, agreeing that since he still often had to pivot off the reporting of the inadequate mainstream media to form his inflammatory opinions, our relationship was, by necessity, "symbiotic."
Were the revolutionaries simply eager to be co-opted? Mr. Moulitsas grinned. "Traditionally it was hard to get your job," he said. "Now regular people can score your job."
Fine. I'll be at the Cleopatra slot machine pondering a career in blogging, which will set me up to get back into mainstream media someday.
If you are an American citizen with skills and expertise in any field relevant to the operation of the legislative, judicial or executive branches of the American government Uncle Sam wants you.
The People are currently seeking men and women with talent and competence in any area who are willing to work forty eight weeks a year at the People's business, keep their hands out of the cookie jar and themselves out of the beds of those who would corrupt the government to serve their own interests.
...
They got him -- the big, bad, beheading berserker in Iraq. But, something's gone unreported in all the glee over getting Zarqawi...who invited him into Iraq in the first place?
If you prefer your fairy tales unsoiled by facts, read no further. If you want the uncomfortable truth, begin with this: A phone call to Baghdad to Saddam's Palace on the night of April 21, 2003. It was Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on a secure line from Washington to General Jay Garner.
The General had arrives in Baghdad just hours before to take charge of the newly occupied nation. The message from Rumsfeld was not a heartwarming welcome. Rummy told Garner, Don't unpack, Jack -- you're fired.
What had Garner done? The many-starred general had been sent by the President himself to take charge of a deeply dangerous mission. Iraq was tense but relatively peaceful. Garner's job was to keep the peace and bring democracy.
Unfortunately for the general, he took the President at his word. But the general was wrong. "Peace" and "Democracy" were the slogans.
"My preference," Garner told me in his understated manner, "was to put the Iraqis in charge as soon as we can and do it in some form of elections."
But elections were not in The Plan.
The Plan was a 101-page document to guide the long-term future of the land we'd just conquered. There was nothing in it about democracy or elections or safety. There was, rather, a detailed schedule for selling off "all [Iraq's] state assets" -- and Iraq, that's just about everything -- "especially," said The Plan, "the oil and supporting industries." Especially the oil.
General Garner, watching the insurgency unfold from the occupation authority's provocations, told me, in his understated manner, "I'm a believer that you don't want to end the day with more enemies than you started with."
But you can't have a war president without a war. And you can't have a war without enemies. "Bring 'em on," our Commander-in-Chief said. And Zarqawi answered the call.
If I were a potential presidential candidate looking for a way to jump start my campaign, get a bit of news, and get a bit of blogger support what I would do is be the first big name to endorse Ned Lamont.
...
A surge in small, individual contributions is lifting Democratic campaigns this year and is helping close a Republican fundraising advantage that has existed for years in national politics, according to Federal Election Commission data.
Democratic House and Senate candidates and their two major campaign committees are enjoying stronger grass-roots support than at any time since the GOP took over both chambers of Congress in the 1994 elections, according to strategists from both parties who have reviewed the most recent FEC data released this spring.
...