So, Mr. Bush has nominated an extremist to the Supreme Court. What a shocker.
If you are an unmarried woman do you have to get your father's permission to have an abortion? Obviously, if you're married, your husband will be making that decision for you.
My friend, John, with whom I share this blog, says that if Roe v Wade is overturned it is going to put the burden on elected officials who will no longer be able to say I'm against abortion but it's the law of the land. No, they are going to have to put up or shut up. And they are going to piss a lot of women off.
I am going piss some women off, too. Younger women don't seem to care about this issue. Please, tell me if I'm wrong, I'd love to be wrong. But because they came up in a country where abortion is legal, where they didn't have to get their father's permission to get a credit card, where they can get birth control (although not necessarily the morning after pill) they don't know what it's like to NOT be able to do those things. Perhaps having their rights, that they take for granted, taken away it will light a fire under them to get involved.
I am not willing to be a second class citizen; I hope young women will realize that politics are personal and their lives are affected and they need to take a stand.
I'm going to be redundant, forgive me please, but I did not defend Bill Clinton for having an inappropriate relationships with Monica Lewinski. It pissed me off. Since I volunteered for both of his campaigns I felt he lied to me personally.
Watching the Republicans, like Coryn from Texas spin the indictments against Libby makes me sick. Apparently it's just no big deal. What is wrong with us thinking that lying about outing a CIA agent matters? It's really all her fault anyway for marrying Joe Wilson.
God forbid anyone mention that Joe Wilson was our Ambassador to Iraq during the first Gulf War. You really don't want to bring attention to the fact that Bush I relied on Mr. Wilson and that Mr. Wilson got Americans out of Baghdad during the war. No, no, he is partisan. Never mind that he was a Republican until they outed his wife. Facts are pesky and don't help their cause so let's just skip 'em.
When Mr. Bush said in 2000 that his administration would not just do what is legal, they would do what is right he obviously meant it at the time. Circumstances change. We need to accept that. Just like the "shifting rationale" for the war. We went for WMD...wait no, Saddam was involved in 9 11, no, no sorry, we are spreading democracy across the Middle East.
This administration relies on us all having ADD. Sometimes I'm afraid we do.
So Libby is cooked. And Meirs is gone. And yet - it was a good week for the President. Crazy? No. Think of what COULD have happened this week - A. The ongoing fall out from the Right as Harriet moved toward hearings that would have prompted a GOP meltdown. Bush can now choose some one clearly on the far Right, get his base back, and start an entirely winable war with the Democratic minority. B. Rove could have been indicted. But Rove is still working in the west wing. If anyone can restore W to some sort of reasonably decent standing it is Rove. He is back in the saddle for now. No one is more necessary to this President.
Both of these factors lay open the possibility of a revived Bush presidency, and point up the ongoing and consistent ineptitude of the Democratic Leadership. Reid, Dean, Pelosi, and the rest have one political tactic: Let the GOP destroy itself. This is fine, provided that the GOP takes you up on the offer. However, the GOP is now past self destruct mode, and going into recovery mode. The downward spiral of W and the GOP has largely been brought on by a hurricane and the press versus the Republican leadership. The Democrats remain missing, confusing tactical silence with disappearing entirely.
The Plame outing investigation is fascinating and important. But it cannot replace a clear,concise alternative agenda from the opposition. The Democratic Party will not ride back to power in the wake of Patrick Fitzgerald. Unless it forcefully presents a plan for this country it may not come back in to power again at all.
Criminal indictment. Spiritual indictment.
The New Yorker quotes founding father Alexander Hamilton in reference to the Miers nomination. It is important, timely, and spot on. Hat tip to my friend Wendy - her professional website is linked to this one on the left side of your screen.
"However the Miers nomination turns out, the fact that Bush submitted it is an unflattering reflection on his character. In the Federalist No. 76, Alexander Hamilton writes that the Senate's role in confirming appointments is designed to make the President both ashamed and afraid to bring forward, for the most distinguished or lucrative stations, candidates who had no other merit than that of coming from the same State to which he particularly belonged, or of being in some way or other personally allied to him, or of possessing the necessary insignificance and pliancy to render them the obsequious instruments of his pleasure.
Hamilton was no naif about human nature, but in the present case his formula seems to have underestimated the Presidential capacity for both shamelessness and - well, courage isn't quite the right word. Arrogance."
--Hendrik Hertzberg The New Yorker, 10/17/05
Funny - a couple of years ago I had a number of friends who made their first babies. It is something that happens as time goes on... This year - in what might be a right of passage that happens only for people in the trenches of the not so glamorous end of Hollywood - I have 3 friends who have made their first movies. My dear friend Jay Floyd made a brilliant feature called Forgiving the Franklins - a breathtaking and hilarious take on sexuality, shame, and Southern culture. The oh so smart Tani Cohen is producing a documentary on Barry Goldwater for HBO called Mr. Conservative. I have seen a rough cut - if you are even nominally interested in American politics in the last 40 years do not cancel your HBO. And finally the kick ass Reverend Frank Fischer has produced a film on Senator McGovern's 1972 Campaign. It is called One Brief Shining Moment. Check it out. It is coming to a city near you. Get in your Volvos and go. Democracy Now's Amy Fischer is the narrator and a who's who of liberals are in it - Gore Vidal, Gary Hart, future Governor Beatty. Smugness be damned - I am blessed with the people I know...
So we all know the list of Bush disasters: Iraq, the deficit, Katrina, relentless cronyism, the most incompetent management of Government since Warren Harding...the rest of the list is simply too long for a Friday night. However, the tentacles of what may be the largest Bush catastrophe of all has barely been addressed - except Lou Dobbs - one hardly hears about the selling of the USA to the Red Chinese. It is true. It will have real consequences, sooner rather than later - and it is explained simply and artfully here.
Whatever he says, the more I think about it, the more I want Gore to run in 2008. We would, indeed, be a different and better country if he had been appointed by the Supreme court in 2000, instead of Bush - who has turned out to be one of the biggest disasters ever visited upon this nation.
OK - Bono is going to do a benefit for (are you sitting?) Rick Santorum.
What is that about? I get that they're both Catholic but is that enough to support someone like Rick Santorum?
I can't believe the news today; I can't close my eyes and make it go away.
This makes me sicker than the bird flu.
CORRECTION - This was reported on CNN and is FALSE, NOT TRUE, A LIE, if you will.
Bono has indeed said it ain't so!
I have only watched Queer Eye for the Straight Guy once, finding "makeover" shows of all stripes boring. This post, therefore, is NOT an analysis of the series. Don't have the time or interest to do that. However, a somewhat vitriolic thread ( is it possible to be "somewhat" vitriolic?) over on Americablog got me remembering and thinking about the one Queer Eye I watched.
In the episode the Queer Eye guys had the task of remaking - or rather MAKING - a home for a returning Iraqi war Vet and his bride to be. A military man was getting married. The last sentence is really all this post needs. It says everything that bothered me about the episode. However, let me be clear: the Vet was entirely deserving. An decent, honorable man who was now confined to a wheelchair because of a combat injury. His fiancee was also a sublimely kind woman of great integrity. And their family and friends were loving and lovely. No one deserves our time and consideration more than families in this situation. The episode was truly moving.
In the long journey from acknowledgement, to acceptance, to equal rights I wonder where these Queer Eye guys fit in. None of them could serve their country in the military without lying and none of them can legally marry someone they love, except in one state. Does this mean the episode was wrong or reactionary? Not one bit. It was heartwarming. However, the irony was overwhelming and unspoken.
Hattie McDaniel once said I can either make 50 dollars a week being a maid, or 500 a week playing one. She was a pioneer in her profession. The queer eye men may be pioneers as well. Time will tell - but until they are helping a gay marine (I know at least one) set up digs with his male spouse after their legal Texas marriage one cannot assume real progress has been made. Then again, they would also have to change the title to Queer Eye for the Good Guy with no Design Sense. Bravo - and America - aren't there yet.
The government today announced that it is changing its emblem from an Eagle to a CONDOM because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed.
thanks to the always clear headed Damon.
Right wingers worst compulsive habit is belligerence. They are prone to "my way or the highway", "we're right so shut up" response every time they get called on anything. The Left's worst habit is smugness. Too much that comes from the Left begins as legitimate criticism and then drifts quickly into a languid condescension. "How could you THINK that?" is a sure sign that a lefty is about to roll his eyes and leave the room. Both rotten habits are ugly - but whether we like it or not - on the political playing field belligerence always beats smug - as certainly as paper beats rock.
That said as a way to blast any lingering smugness out of the room, I proceed. The issuing of terror alerts for political purposes is despicable. This has occurred at least 13 times. Days of bad news for W followed by a terror alert is a pattern that is so consistent that it can not be ignored. It happened again today. I popped on the CNN websight mid day and an alarming headline about a potential terrorist threat in New York Subway system leapt off page. Of course, Rove went back to see Mr. Fitzgerald today, Ms. Miers is about as popular with the Right as a Streisand drag queen singing the Soviet National Anthem, and there just aren't enough pretty white girls gone missing to distract from the household budget busting going down at the local Chevron station.
I did, in fact, roll my eyes at the CNN headline. Then I realized just how revolting this pattern is. The W cabal plays with peoples lives to save there own asses. Millions of people are affected by this alert. And many no longer buy into them - and why should they? How do we know this one is more real than the last 12? We do not. We only know they proceed like the sun in the morning after a night of bad news for Bush. I would like to put it more elegantly than that. But I can't. The use of terror alerts for baldly political purposes is wrong. and despicable.
Al Gore made a speech with such clarity and understanding of the problems we face as a nation that there is nothing to add, please read.
While everyone in the MSM squealed today Harriet WHO? after W announced his latest Supreme Court nominee(you can always trust them to feign shock)there is not really that much to be shocked about. After 5.34 minutes of reflection there would seem to be plenty of reasons why this non judge was chosen to be a Supreme Court judge.
1. She is a Bush "friend". Loyalty is numero uno in this Prez's book. It gets rewarded pretty much without regard to consequences. One Mr. Brown, a horse showman, can attest to that. A half million Americans suffered the consequences. But,hey,he was loyal so he got FEMA. Loyalty is a fine trait. Excessive loyalty points to something else - a man who has a lot of tracks to keep covered.
2. Ms. Harriet has almost no paper trail. Never been a judge, therefore did no writing as one. The legal writing she has done has been as White House consul. How much of THAT do you suppose will be released to the Senate? I am going with none. Again - how can anyone be surprised by this? Combine this lack of available paper trail with the GOP edict that one must never ask a nominee how she might vote on any particular case and what one has is: a damn simple hearing.
Senator A: so you have not been a judge, we can't see your WH legal opinions, I dare not ask about how you would vote on Roe V Wade. So, hmm, let's see - Ms. Meyers, do you promise not to take too many sick days?
Miers: I do
Senator A: Good. Your in.
3. The ever present Bush F*** You factor. W LOVES letting everyone know you can't tell HIM what to do. It would seem that the conservatives took the hit this time. A number of far Right Wing judges were "passed over". When will the social conservatives get, once and for all - they are USED by the GOP. They are glorified cash machines and envelope stuffers. When the real rubber hits the real road they are thrown to the street.
Who knows what kind of judge Miers will end up being? Not this blogger. But pretending to be shocked about something like this pick is just plain silly.
|
|