Oh, No He (Bush) Doesn't!!!

Bush has issued yet another signing statement that we as a people cannot ignore. This one should immediately force the Congress to bring impeachment charges against Bush/Cheney. Bush has announced his right or his intention to ignore four components of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008. The four points of law that Bush is stating that he may disregard at his pleasure include the portions of the Act outlined in the following sections:

Subtitle D--Accountability in Contracting
Sec. 841 Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Sec. 846. Protection for contractor employees from reprisal for disclosure of certain information.
Sec. 1079. Communications with the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Sec. 1222. Limitation on availability of funds for certain purposes relating to Iraq.

Whether this is a consitutional action for the president to take is fairly clear - IT IS NOT.

The following commentary on the impact of the signing statement is from the Boston Globe, "Bush Asserts Authority to Bypass Defense Act," (January 30, 2008).

"Some legal specialists disagreed with the administration's legal theory.

'Congress clearly has the authority to enact this limitation of the expenditure of funds for permanent bases in Iraq,' said Dawn Johnsen, an Indiana University law professor who was the head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel during the Clinton administration.

Bush's frequent use of signing statements to advance aggressive theories of executive power has been a hallmark of his presidency. Previous presidents occasionally used the device, but Bush has challenged more sections of bills than all his predecessors combined - among them, a ban on torture.

Bush signing statements prompted widespread controversy when his record came to light in 2006. After Democrats took over Congress in 2007, Bush initially issued fewer and less aggressive signing statements. But his new statement returned to the previous approach, observers said.

The signing statement also targeted a provision in the defense bill that strengthens protections for whistle-blowers working for companies that hold government contracts (Section 846). The new law expands employees' ability to disclose wrongdoing without being fired, and it gives greater responsibility to federal inspectors general to investigate complaints of retaliation.

In addition, Bush targeted a section that requires intelligence agencies to turn over 'any existing intelligence assessment, report, estimate or legal opinion' requested by the leaders of the House and Senate armed services committees within 45 days(Section 1079). If the president wants to assert executive privilege to deny the request, the law says, White House counsel must do so in writing.

Finally, Bush's signing statement raised constitutional questions about a section of the bill that established an independent, bipartisan 'Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan' to investigate allegations of waste, mismanagement, and excessive force by contractors (Section 841).

The law requires the Pentagon to provide information to the panel 'expeditiously' upon its request.

The signing statement did not make clear whether Bush is objecting to the creation of the commission because some of its members will be appointed by Congress or whether he is reserving the right to turn down its requests for information - or both.

Phillip Cooper, a political science professor at Portland State University, noted that Bush's statement does not clearly spell out the basis for any of his challenges. Cooper, who has been a pioneer in studying signing statements, said the vague language itself is a problem.

'It is very hard for Congress or the American people to figure out what is supposed to happen and what the implications of this are,' Cooper said.

The White House did not respond to a Globe request to explain the objections in greater detail. But the Bush administration has repeatedly insisted that its use of signing statements has been both lawful and appropriate.

Still, the signing statement makes one thing clear, according to David Barron, a Harvard law professor. The White House, he said, is pressing forward with its effort to establish that the commander in chief can defy laws limiting his options in national security matters. The administration made similar assertions in recent disputes over warrantless wiretapping and interrogation methods, he said.

'What this shows is that they're continuing to assert the same extremely aggressive conception of the president's unilateral power to determine how and when US force will be used abroad, and that's a dramatic departure from the American constitutional tradition,' said Barron, who was a Justice Department official in the 1990s.

In 2006, the American Bar Association condemned signing statements as 'contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers.'"

Here's a link to the NYTimes Op-Ed piece, The Fine Print, (January 30, 2008)

United for Peace & Justice call for Impeachment over Signing Statement (January 31, 2008)

A Rousing Rally for John Edwards

This morning I got up, checked my e-mail over my morning coffee, posted an entry to my blog that I had written the night before (see the following critique of Bush's last SOTU address), and headed out the door to a rally being held in North Tulsa at the Transportation Workers Union Local #514 Hall. The rally was being held for John Edwards. I realize that I may be perceived to be somewhat of a flip-flopper on my presidential choice for 2008. As I have explained to anybody who will listen, I know myself too well, and I know that once I choose a candidate, it will be very hard for me to switch my allegiance to another candidate come Convention time in Denver. So although I have posted entries on my blog that suggest that I am supporting Barack Obama (and I am impressed with his eloquent style, his vision of hope and unity, and his ability to inspire us to be our very best selves), and I have been vocal about my misgivings about Hillary Clinton, I am also a realist, and I know that whoever gets the nod in August from the Democratic Party is the candidate I will support in November. I have survived the ravages of a senseless, remorseless, ugly, and fear-based republican administration, and I will not in good conscience support any candidate that even hints at continuing any of Bush/Cheney's horrendous policies. So I went to hear Senator Edwards this morning, in large part to thank him for taking the time to stop and visit with a group of supporters here in Tulsa, Oklahoma (admittedly not the center of anyone's political universe), and once again and in person to applaud John Edwards' consistent message that this country has a huge problem, and at the root of the problem is a growing chasm between the ultra-rich and the very poor. John Edwards' "two Americas" theme is one that he has been espousing for many years, and it rings even truer today than it did when he first pointed it out to those of us whose situations are more comfortable than many other people's lives.

I was proud to be standing in the Tulsa Union Hall holding up a John Edwards for President sign, and I was prouder still that fellow Tulsans reserved their loudest applause and their longest standing ovation for Edwards' remarks about his plan to get the U.S. out of Iraq. It may be the "economy stupid," but here in the heartland of America, it is not completely lost on Okies that the economy here is inexorably tied to an ongoing and indefensible occupation halfway around the world. As I stepped out of the Hall after shaking Edwards' hand (twice), I was met with a very strong wind (40 mph, I later learned), and I thought that this breeze will blow clean across this country and sweep away the garbage that has piled up over the last seven years. It will sweep into power a new and better adminstration and things will change.

I just want to say to all of my friends and acquaintances who are so worried that the fight between Billary and Barack is going to tear the Democratic party apart - relax, we're Democrats, we pick and poke, but in the end we're not going to allow a republican, no matter how wealthy or devious he may be, claim the (White) House that will be ours in November. Viva la revolucion! Si se puede! Yes we can, and we will. Can't you just taste the change in the air?

Here's a link to the Fresno Bee's endorsement of John Edwards.

John Edwards for President 2008

Paul Krugman's column in the NYTimes (February 1, 2008), The Edwards Effect.

Thanks for Nothing, Dumbya's SOTU

I started out the day reading a few entries on a marvelous site put together by ProgressOhio.org entitled "This I believe is the Real State of Our Union." The overwhelming consensus of over 300 people who mostly live in Ohio (the should-have-been-swing state of the 2004 election) is that the State of Our Union Sucks - big time. People talked about the growing cost of gas, groceries, health care, and their shrinking or non-existent paychecks. They mentioned with disgust the ongoing occupation of Iraq and our collective desire to end that foreign entanglement and quit spending our children's and our grandchildren's futures in a country that never attacked us. They want to know whether there will be any safety net for them in old age, and how we will repair our shattered reputation abroad, not whether Iran may be, just may be, dreaming up a way to perhaps sometime in the future think about getting the plans to contemplate the beginnings of a civilian nuclear program... whaaaa? I wonder if the president has been briefed on the contents of his own NIE that stated clearly that Iran has ended their nuclear enrichment program over three years ago.

That set the stage for the lackluster performance that George W. Bush delivered tonight. I followed his talk along with the good and fun folks at Four Freedoms Blog (thanks mucho Mondo, Raine, Liv, VJ, & Tri). It helped me to stick it out and stay the course through another uninspired talk by an uninspirational president, I had to laugh at how much disgust was registered on the blog, how so much of the disgust we have expressed is more than six years old, and weighs so heavily on all of us who care so very much about our nation and feel as if we have been watching our country sink into quicksand.

Listening to Tweety (AKA Chris Matthews) wonder out loud why the president didn't use this opportunity to explain the connections between the stock market and the economy and the sub-prime housing fiasco - the anwer is simple, Tweety, the president can't explain something he himself doesn't understand. He is a moron.

Here are some of the stupidly more memorable lines (memorable only in the sense that they made me say "WTF?"):

"Embolden[ing] the purveyors of false populism" who writes this crap?

"American troops are shifting from leading operations to partnering with Iraqi forces and, eventually, to a protective overwatch mission." (translation: according to Bush/Cheney we will be in Iraq for freakin' ever).

Here are a few of the truly memorable (in the more widely understood sense of the word) lines that came out of pundits' and politicos' mouths in the aftermath of the president's nonsense:

"The speech was like boasting about his college record and listing nine incomplete classes."
Keith Olbermann, on the SOTU 2008

"This speech is out of touch, out of touch with the American people... he is totally out of touch with where the American people are. He was just checking the box like a salesman on his last day, just checking a box."
Joe Biden, on the SOTU 2008

"No challenge has been laid before the American people. No vision. Devoid of reality... This is the most disengaged speech I've ever heard."
Joe Biden on the SOTU 2008

"It was not a very memorable speech, not any very memorable lines..."
Pat Buchanan on the SOTU 2008

Here is a link to Governor Kathleen Sebelius's (Kansas) keen Democratic Response to the SOTU.
More later, I'm sure. This is just to get you all fired up first thing this morning...

Sunday Morning Activism =)

Good Sunday Morning Activists,
I am passing on an alert that I received from a woman named Mary Francis - a fellow Oklahoman who I don't know, but I'm guessing from her message that she won't mind me passing on the valuable information that she has compiled to encourage all of us to increase our voice in the democratic process. Here is her e-mail message, with minor changes:

Time for another citizen revolt! I just left a voice message with both Coburn and Inhofe (Oklahoma's senators). They take voicemail messages on the weekend!
Tom Coburn, (R) (202) 224-5754
James M. Inhofe, (R) (202) 224-4721

FISA legislation is on the Senate floor. The vote is Monday. Senator Dodd will filibuster again, but he needs help! Isn't our privacy worth an hour of your time? Please - thank Senator Christopher Dodd [CT] Washington, DC 202-224-2823, Wethersfield, CT 800-334-5341 for what he is willingto do again ... filibuster! Leave a message with Harry Reid and as many others as you can over the weekend.

Senator Harry Reid [NV] Washington, DC 202-224-3542 (DC mailbox full), Carson City, 775-882-7343, Las Vegas, 702-388-5020 (Both take messages) Reid can stop any bill at any time - just needs a stiffer backbone. Most senators take voicemail messages on the weekend. Following please find a list with key Senators and their contact information (including homestate phone numbers).

Please call as many as you can. Please....give an hour of your time. In Washington this weekend and Monday, the telecom lobbyists are launching a full-court press for retroactive immunity. Bush/Cheney are doing everything in their power to ensure it passes. And too many Senate Democrats are ready to give the lobbyists and the Bush administration exactly what they want. Senate Democrats MUST filibuster revisions to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that would give "retroactive immunity"to the giant telecom companies for their role in aiding George W. Bush's illegal eavesdropping on American citizens. Their corporate lawyers are not stupid. They knew what they were doing was UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Please tell every Senate Democrat to do everything in her/his power - including joining Senator Dodd's efforts to filibuster this legislation - to stop retroactiveimmunity and stand up for the rule of law. The Constitution should not be for sale at any price. Here are 27 key Senators to call first: (27 x 2 min each = less than an hour of your time).

Senator Blanche Lambert Lincoln [AR] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE, Washington, 202-224-4843, Texarkana, 870-774-3106, Little Rock, 501-375-2993

Senator Mark Pryor [AR] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER, Washington, 202-224-2353, Little Rock, 501-324-6336

Senator John McCain [AZ] Needs to be pressured, Washington, 202-224-2235, Press1 for voicemail, Tucson, 520-670-6334

Senator Ken Salazar [CO] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER, Washington, 202-224-5852 (DC mailbox full), Colorado Springs, 719-328-1100 (mailbox full), Grand Junction, 970-241-6631 (press 10)

Senator Joseph Lieberman [CT] SWING VOTE, Washington, 202-224-4041 (press 1), Hartford, 860-549-8463

Senator Joseph Biden [DE] DEMOCRAT must support Dodd's filibuster! Washington, 202-224-5042, Wilmington, 302-573-6345, Milford, 302-424-8090

Senator Thomas R Carper [DE] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE, Washington, 202-224-2441 (30 second message), Georgetown, 302-856-7690, Wilmington, 302-573-6291

Senator Bill Nelson [FL] DEMOCRAT- not supporting filibuster, Washington,202-224-5274, Tallahassee, 850-942-8415, West Palm Beach, 561-514-0189

Senator John Ensign [NV] Great Guy! Needs encouragement, Washington,202-224-6244, Reno, 775-686-5770, Las Vegas, 702-388-6605, Carson City,775-885-9111

Senator Edward M Kennedy [MA] Ask him to speak on the floor against immunity. Washington, 202-224-4543, Boston, 617-565-3170

Senator John F Kerry [MA] Washington, 202-224-2742 (press 1), Worcester,508-831-7380

Senator Charles Schumer [NY] Ask him to speak also! Washington, 202-224-6542 (no answer), Rochester, 585-263-5866 (wait for beep), Buffalo, 716-846-4111, New York, 212-486-4430

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton [NY] Yeah, Yeah Yeah -- Just call her. Washington, 202-224-4451 (DC mailbox full), Albany, 518-431-0120 (One minute message), New York, 212-688-6262, Syracuse, 315-448-0470

Senator George Voinovich [OH] An Honest Republican! Needs encouragement --has broken with Repubs before on torture, Washington, 202-224-3353 (2 minute message), Cincinnati, 513-684-3265, Columbus, 614-469-6697

Senator Arlen Specter [PA] Repub. OPPOSED to IMMUNITY, has shown firm support for the rule of law, Washington, 202-224-4254 (2 minute message), Philadelphia, 215-597-7200, Erie, 814-453-3010, Harrisburg, 717-782-3951, Scranton, 570-346-2006, Pittsburgh, 412-644-3400

Senator Jack Reed [RI] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE, Washington, 202-224-4642 (press 1), Cranston, 800-284-4200, Providence, 401-528-5200

Senator Shelton Whitehouse [RI] New Senator. Newbies usually pay close attention to phone calls. Washington, 202-224-2921, Providence, 401-453-5294, Newport, 401-845-0700

Senator Tim Johnson [SD] DEMOCRAT swing vote (He supported Alito's nomination but said he was "troubled" - so by now he should have seen the light), Washington, 202-224-5842, Aberdeen, 605-226-3440, Sioux Falls, 605-332-8896, Rapid City,605-341-3990

Senator John Warner [VA] Honest Repub. NOT running again - is ranking Rep. on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Washington, 202-224-2023, Norfolk, 757-441-3079

Senator Patrick Leahy [VT] DEMOCRAT- may oppose IMMUNITY, Washington, 202-224-4242, Burlington, 800-642-3193, Montpelier, 802-229-0569

Senator Bernie Sanders [VT] INDEPENDENT, Washington, 202-224-5141 (no answer), Burlington, 802-862-0697 (always busy), Brattleboro, 802-254-8732, Montpelier, 802-223-2241

Senator Patty Murray [WA] DEMOCRAT - sometimes swing vote, Washington, 202-224-2621, Everett, 425-259-6515, Seattle, 206-553-5545

Senator Maria Cantwell [WA] DEMOCRAT also a swing vote - needs encouragement, Washington, 202-224-3441(may re-record message), Everett, 425-303-0114, Tacoma, 253-572-2281, Seattle, 206-220-6400

Senator Herb Kohl [WI] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE, Washington, 202-224-5653, Appleton, 920-738-1640, Madison, 608-264-5338, Milwaukee, 800-247-5645

Senator Russell Feingold [WI] Usually does the right thing, Washington, 202-224-5323, LaCrosse, 608-782-5585

Senator Robert Byrd [WV] DEMOCRAT who should be URGED to PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION, Washington, 202-224-3954, Charleston, 304-342-5855

Senator John Rockefeller [WV] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE, Washington,202-224-6472, Charleston, 304-347-5372

Love this country....it has great potential. We must pass these rights on to our children and grandchildren.

Many, many thanks to Mary Francis, whoever and wherever you are =)

Shillary - Still Not Gracious After All These Years...

The Clintons just don't get it - we, and in that collective pronoun I am referring to progressives, liberals, democrats (both yellow and blue dog), independents and a smattering of not-too-closed-minded republicans, are sick and tired of the politics that divide us. We want a uniter and we like what we see in Senator Barack Obama. I have always admired Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg who this morning endorsed Senator Obama in the NYTimes writing that "I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans." She is, of course, referring to the man of the hour, Barack Obama.

Those of you who have been following my take on the political scene will recall that my initial objection to Senator Hillary Clinton centered around her "electability." As a resident of oh-so-red Oklahoma and a frequent visitor to even redder Indiana, I have seen first hand the kind of wrath that the right-wing reserves for the Clintons, and my fear has always been that the only true danger that lay before the Democrats in November is the prospect of a mobilized right-wing base. And I have maintained all along that no candidate can mobilize that base like Hillary Clinton, but last night after a week of questionable campaign tactics - many of them demonstrated by Senator Clinton's husband, former president Bill Clinton, I found yet another reason to support Hillary's opponents. Senator Clinton's utter lack of graciousness and her obtuse denial of the voice of the voters in South Carolina turned me off in a way that I will not soon forget. The fact that she had her husband deliver her not-really-a-concession speech, and then she gave less than a second or two to her incredible drubbing in her own speech that was delivered not from South Carolina, but rather Nashville, Tennessee, was to my eyes and ears not just a shocking lack of courtesy, but also a demonstration of poor sportspersonship that left a bitter and ugly taste in my mouth. In short, the more I see of the Clinton team on the campaign trail the less I am inclined to support them, EVEN IF THEY DO MANAGE to GET the NOMINATION. I know, I know, that kind of attitude could leave the country in the hands of a president McCain, and I vowed early on that I would work my butt off for whomever the Democratic nominee turns out to be, but I'm just saying, I may not work with such enthusiasm if the nominee turns out to be Hillary Clinton. The more I see of her and her husband during this race, the less I see them as agents of change, rather they are looking more and more like the same old, same old, politics as usual, of which I believe a majority of the country is sick and tired.

In stark contrast to Senator Clinton's snarky little Nashville speech, was Senator Obama's magnanimous speech that once again reminded me of the grand oratory that has been so sorely lacking in an American leader for the last eight years. In his speech, he spoke to the people's hunger for unity and true vision and leadership that we have gone without during the Bush/Cheney years. He spoke eloquently of an America and a wider world community of which I am once again eager to be a part (rather than a world in which travellers abroad are inclined to tell locals that they are Canadian, rather than American, in order to ensure a more positive reception).

I have officially joined the Barack Obama camp, although I still have great admiration for John Edwards, and I truly appreciate his contribution to the debates that have thus far formed this campaign. His message of "two Americas," his tireless effort to remind the better-offs that there are still those who go to bed hungry and under bridges in this great nation, his unflinching stand with unions and working people, and his ongoing reminder that the middle class is dying in this country and the enormously tragic consequences that that demise will have on our land as a whole, are all important and vital issues that the Democrats neglect at their peril. I would love to see an Obama/Edwards ticket, but I fear that Mr. Edwards having already accepted the running mate position in an unsuccessful campaign is unlikely to go down that road again.

See Frank Rich's column in today's NYTimes: The Billary Road to Republican Victory

Here's a link to coverage of Senator Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama: Obama Ready on 'Day One,' Kennedy Says (Washington Post, January 28, 2008)

Toni Morrison Endorses Obama for President

How Will You Spend Your $600?

Syndicated columnist Molly Ivins said of progressive journalist David Sirota, "Sirota is a new-generation populist who instinctively understands that the only real questions are 'Who's getting screwed?' and 'Who's doing the screwing?'"

It shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone who has been paying attention that the Bush/Cheney administration is doing the screwing and once again it is the American people who are getting screwed. The much touted "Stimulus Package" (don't you dare criticize the size of the president's package =) has been unveiled - although a quick Google search for "Economic Stimulus Package 2008" (the Plan) while listing numerous links to stories, commentaries, and criticisms of the Plan, revealed not one link to the Plan itself. Perhaps that is because Congress is not finished tinkering with the Plan, nothing is yet written in stone. The Senate still has an opportunity to add much needed relief for workers who have been unemployed for more than six months and to add food security for the neediest among us who may be going to bed hungry. However it is highly unlikely given the lack of fight or backbone shown by the Democratically-led Congress thus far. But if the Plan goes through as Bush has insisted that it must, it will represent another huge gift to big business at a time when all the previous gifts to business have gotten us where we are today. Where we are today is deep into a recession that is beginning to look like a bonafide depression to those of us who actually buy groceries, fill our cars up with gas, and try valiently to pay our bills on time.

Here's what two bloggers at Huffington Post had to say about Bush/Cheney's gift to big business:
"For seven years, the Bush administration has pandered to corporate interests, and we've seen the results: soaring profits with stagnant wages and rising income inequality. Now that the nation is facing serious economic reversals, it's time for Democrats to challenge the reasoning that every time average people get boost, businesses need one too." Nancy Cleeland and Lawrence Mishel, It's a Bad Deal! (January 24, 2008)

One of my favorite bloggers over the last year has been David Sirota, whose weekly newspaper column is syndicated by Creators.com. Sirota is the author of the book Hostile Takeover: How Big Money and Corruption Conquered Our Government--and How We Take It Back. Sirota blogs daily at Credo action. He is also a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and board member of the Progressive States Network (both 501(c)(3) organizations), and he had a few choice words for the Stimulus Package that was crafted by the White House and the now traitorous Nancy Pelosi and the spineless wonder Harry Reid:
"There's nothing inherently bad about Washington interacting with Big Business, and nothing conceptually wrong with 'stimulus' as a concept. But as this recession intensifies, there's a big problem with politicians catering exclusively to Big Business and an even bigger problem with converting "stimulus" into yet another code word for 'swindle.'" David Sirota, The Stimulus Swindle (January 25, 2008)

I don't know about you all, but if there's anything left over from my (not tax-free) rebate from a government that hasn't demonstrated the financial acuity that god gave a raisin, then I will send it to the ACLU or Planned Parenthood or the Native American Rights Fund or some other organization that really might help the people of this country. I hope that if you are not hungry or homeless tonight that you will consider doing the same.

Here's the most complete run-down of the Economic Stimulus Plan that I have been able to locate to date: Rebates could be in your hands by May

935 Lies and Counting...

935 Lies and Counting...

The question is "Who's counting?" and the answer is the Center for Public Integrity was and the number of lies told by members of the current administration in just under two years (2001 - 2003) was 935 lies, falsehoods, fibs, untruths, outright, blatant, boldface, prefabricated LIES, that led us into the unnecessary, illegal, immoral, catastrophic, tragic war in Iraq.

And it turns out that these lies are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to crimes committed in furtherance of the occupation of Iraq. Those are just the tally of the lies that got us into Iraq, never mind the lies that keep us there, and the lies that are being told right now that will keep the U.S. in Iraq far into the next administration. Although I would recommend that the next president's first order of business would be to cancel all previous executive orders, signing statements, and any other non-congressionally-approved arrangements that were made by Bush/Cheney - not unlike the reneging frenzy of all things Clinton that Bush/Cheney engaged in as soon as they got into office - but unlike the Bush/Cheney's reversal of course, the reversal of Bush/Cheney policy would have a positive impact on the country and the world. Just a suggestion. I hate to think that future administrations' hands will be tied by the egregious policy blunders made by the Bush/Cheney administration.

BTB, I thought that the NYTimes endorsing Hillary Clinton was a ho-hum moment, much more interesting to me was the lukewarm endorsement of John McCain, and the accurate, scathing remarks that the editorial board of the NYTimes had to say about the other Republican contenders - complete and total losers, every one. Which brings me back to a point that I've made before and I'm sure I'll make again before the Democrats hold their convention in Denver in July and that is the DEMOCRATS MUST WIN the WHITE HOUSE in November! And to that end, I am worried sick that if the Dems give the nomination to Hillary Clinton, we will be signing away our chance to take back the presidency in 2008. May I remind readers that the Clinton/McCain polls show that the race is too close to call? I don't know about you, but I don't think I can stand another nail biter of an election that may very well end up in a Supreme Court that has turned further to the right than it was eight years ago. Just my two cents, but it's change worth mentioning...

See: Long-Term Pact with Iraq Raises Questions

See: U.S. to Insist Iraq Grant It Wide Mandate in Operations

A Blogging Fool

I'm really, truly not trying to set some kind of record for new posts in a day, but damn, I guess I've just got a lot to say or show or post or something. If you don't find something that you like among the pieces that I've posted this week (from the Library of Congress's new venture with Flickr to a piece on the West Memphis Three to an announcement about a new Steph Fan Site and a new film about the punk poet extraordinaire, Patti Smith) then you and I, well we just don't live in the same world, and you probably won't be visiting this blog again, and that's okay with me.

Anyway, to cap off a busy day in the blogosphere - I end today with another MF collage. This one features my dear sweet devilish doggie Dylan (Dillie-doo-doo) who whispered into my ear a few weeks ago that he was planning on throwing his 70 pounds behind the presidential ticket of Goldwater/Miller 2008. Being an active little scallywag, he rushed out and formed a group that he calls "Hound Dogs for Goldwater/Miller 2008" and no, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are not welcome - Dillie sez, "It ain't that kinda hound dog - dawg." Anyway, he wanted me to post the collage that features his Goldwater/Miller 2008 Club House, and he also wanted me to call in this morning and ask CC and Steph what's the deal with their candidacy.

Dillie's older brother Tulsey has been parading around the house all full of himself 'cause he's for Obama. You see, Tulsey is a Momma's boy and is easily confused and when he heard "Momma's for Obama" he immediately thought that it referred to his Momma (me), and so he wasted no time jumping on the Obama bandwagon. Tulsey was insufferable after the Iowa caucus, but he has toned down his snootiness since Hillary took New Hampshire and Nevada (although Tulse is quick to point out that Obama got more delegates than Clinton did in Nevada). Our household is on pins and needles waiting to see what happens in South Carolina on Saturday. "Vamos a ver" as we say at Chez Faye... (mixing our languages as we are want to do =)

Another Shout Out to Patti

Loyal and long-time readers of this blog know that I love me some Patti Smith (see an earlier highly censored post about Patti - if you'd like to read the original post before it was gutted, feel free to e-mail me at mfh913@gmail.com and I'd be glad to share it with you =). Anyway, Patti Smith is back in the news. Patti has been at Sundance (the Film Festival) where a new documentary Patti Smith: Dream of Life is debutting. Patti also got a shout out in an exceedingly enjoyable film Juno that stars, and I do mean stars, Ellen Page as the title character (and I do mean character). Patti thanked Juno for the shout out. So I just wanted to add my own little SHOUT OUT to Patti, and say keep on rockin' grrrl - your voice gives power to the people and damn do we need that power now.

See The Carpetbagger's blog post High on Rebellion (NYTimes, January 22, 2008)

See also Reuters article Patti Smith at Sundance: “It ain’t drugs” (January 22, 2008)

New Fun Stephanie Fan Site

Here's news about a fun Stephanie Miller Fan web site designed and managed by Tim from Dallas, who is not affiliated with The Stephanie Miller Show and who apparently has too much free time. Here's the link to the site: Stephanie Miller's Future Husbands Club. Check it out and admire his photoshop skills - they rock!

Barack Obama Speaking at Ebenezer Baptist Church

Here's a link to an excellent MLK Jr. post by one of my favorite bloggers - David Sirota: Are We Ready to Rise Up Again?

John T. Vance (Oct. 12, 1921 - Jan. 15, 2008)

For the Indians: A Remembrance of John T. Vance

Mildred Pierce, John T. Vance, Jerome Kuykendall, Brantley Blue, Richard W. Yarborough

On May 20, 2001 I had the pleasure of making the acquaintance of John T. Vance, the former Chairman of the Indian Claims Commission (ICC) and a Commissioner of the same Commission for over ten years. John Vance was named to the Commission as Chairman on March 19, 1968 by President Johnson, was removed from the role of Chairman of the Commission by President Nixon, but continued to serve nobly on the ICC as a Commissioner until it ceased to exist in 1978. That simple meeting on that spring day on the University of Tulsa campus would lead to a friendship that lasted for several happy years – until John moved north, first to Montana and finally to Portland, Oregon. During the last several years I was friends with John, I witnessed him struggle to articulate a vision that I believe he brought with him to his work at the ICC and has carried with him throughout his life – a vision in which Native people of this country receive the respect and are repaid the huge debt that we as a nation owe them, not only for the very land that we walk on every day, but for the spirit of this place that we now call the United States of America. John Vance and I share a very deep regard for Native people and for their contributions to this country – from the Great Law of the Longhouse of the Iroquois that was so influential in the writing of our own Constitution to the treaties that have been systematically broken by our own government to the casinos that today provide a spark of economic possibility to those who have been left out of the “American Dream.” John’s vision of the goal of the ICC is best reflected in the words of President Harry S. Truman when he signed into law the act that established the Indian Claims Commission in 1946:

“...that this bill will mark the beginning of a new era for our
Indian Citizens. They have valiantly served on every battlefront.
They have proved by their loyalty the wisdom of a national
policy built upon fair dealing. With the final settlement of all
outstanding claims which this measure insures, Indians can take
their place without special handicap or special advantage in the
economic life of our nation and share fully in its progress.”1

Unfortunately, the Indian Claims Commission did not achieve its goal, but that was not due to the untiring efforts of John Vance. If it had been left up to John Vance, the Native people of this country would have been paid in-full every cent that they are owed, and I do believe that John Vance would have found a way to return the sacred Black Hills to the Sioux Nation. But one man acting alone can only do so much. That is why I write this memorial with such a heavy heart – not only for the Native people who will likely never receive what they are owed, but for the efforts of one man who wanted so desperately to change the manner in which this government dealt with the Native nations of this country. As I watched John Vance’s powers diminish from the ravages of Alzheimer's – I thought that with John went a great story, a story that we may never know or understand, a story of how, in spite of great odds to the contrary, a small group of individuals tried to do the right thing. I wish that John Vance was still the vibrant, healthy man he once was, but nevertheless, his legacy of hope and “doing the right thing” lives on in the lives of those he has touched. I share his hope that someday this world will realize that the land that we call home was stolen generations ago from a group of people who have never received what they were promised for this taking. To this end, we still must fight in an effort to “do the right thing.” I thank John Vance for his efforts yesterday and his influence today to continue this struggle, and I wish those who knew and loved John the strength, hope and heart to carry on his dream.

1August 3, 1946, Public Papers of the President, Harry S. Truman, 1946, 414 (1962).

Free the West Memphis Three

A few years ago, after reading Margaret Cho's excellent screed I Have Chosen to Stay and Fight, I was prompted by a mention in Cho's book to rent the video, Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills (1996). I was intrigued by the documentary that told the story of three young men (teenagers at the time they were accused) who were arrested, tried and convicted of the horrific murders of three eight year old boys in the woods near a working class neighborhood known as Robin Hood Hills in West Memphis, Arkansas. The initial documentary was followed up four years later by a sequel entitled Paradise Lost 2: Revelations (2000).

After watching both of these films and doing a bit or research on my own, it became clear to me that these three young men had been falsely accused and convicted on little more than bias against the dark clothes they wore, the dark side of life that fascinated them (as it does so many teenagers), the music that they listened to, and the general perception in a very narrow-minded community that they were outsiders. Although this crime occured back in 1993, there is reason to reconsider this case anew, as DNA analysis of evidence, not available at the time of the trial, has shown conclusively that no DNA from any of the three accused was found on the bodies or at the scene of the crime.

Attorneys for Echols, Misskelley and Baldwin have filed a motion for a new hearing. The judge should rule on this motion by February 15, 2008 and is expected to set a date for a new hearing sometime this spring. I recommend that anyone with an interest in justice, rent and watch both of the films mentioned above and read Damien Echols book, Almost Home My Life Story vol. 1. And if you feel so moved, you might want to send a contribution to the Damien Echols Defense Fund. (Damien Echols is on Death Row in Arkansas for this crime that he did not commit, while both of his co-defendants are incarcerated, also in Arkansas - Jason Baldwin is serving life without parole and Jessie Misskelley is serving life plus 40 years).

Larry King interviews Damien Echols, (December 19, 2007) CNN, with a link to the transcripts of the interview.

Free the West Memphis Three.

Library of Congress Photos on Flickr

These are a few of my favorite photos from the Library of Congress Flickr Collection - click on the headline above to see the photos in a slideshow.

Excuse me for reverting to my other (professional) life for this one post. I am, after all, a radical militant LIBRARIAN, and yesterday as I was sitting at the reference desk - yes, the reference desk is staffed on Saturday afternoons - I discovered a fabulous web site launched by the Library of Congress in conjunction with the photo-sharing site "Flickr" that makes available online over 3000 photos mostly from the 1940s and black & white photos from the 1910s, all copyright free!!! Check them out here.

The photos from the 1940s feature many shots of real life "Rosie-the-Riveters" along with many pictures of plane, trains, smoke stacks, lovely photos of the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, and countless images of Americana. From Pie Town, NM to the rural south, the photos show a wide range of life and scenery that captures a country at war.

The black and white photos from the 1910s feature many early ball players (mostly baseball, but a few football), boxers, politicians, strikes, crowds scenes, many shots of NYC and many photos that merely depict life as it was being lived in the decade that included World War I.

This nicest thing about all of the photos is that they may be borrowed, used, reproduced, or downloaded without attribution or worry about copyright violations.

And Still the Wars Grind On

Stewart mocks Bush's Middle East 'Bucket List'
(Raw Story, January 16, 2008)

The Wars Grind On - where's the media coverage?

We are approaching the 4000th death of United States troops in Iraq, nevermind the untold thousands who have come home with life-changing wounds and mental trauma that will likely haunt them for the rest of their lives, and yet, the media seems to have bought into the "surge is a smashing success" spin that is coming out of the White House. And according to that story line, no mention is made of the fact that the Iraqi government has met none of the political benchmarks for which the surge was supposed to provide cover.

Little mention of the wars that rage on is heard on the campaign trail as the topic du jour is the "economy stupid." May I remind the news heads and political junkies out there (of which I count myself) that there have been signs that Bush's ill-advised tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans would lead us down this path from the get-go? So now the chickens are coming home to roost, and we are supposed to be surprised that the trickle down economics popularized by Ronald Reagan and the obscene spending that Bush/Cheney's foreign policies have cost us are hurting our collective bottom line at home. Those of use who live basically paycheck to paycheck could have told the powers that be - had they bothered to ask - that this recession has been in the works for the last seven years. Those of us who struggle to pay our mortgages, fill up our gas tanks, and pay unexpected medical bills could have told those insulated jerks who live inside the beltway that this country has been in a recession for at least a year.

I guess that we should be excited that the feds may send us an extra few hundred dollars (a tax refund advance that we will no doubt have to pay taxes on later) this years when we file our tax returns. But once again, Bush/Cheney have missed the point. The point is that the current administration has been spending our money like a drunken sailor on wars that produce nothing worthwhile, but have greatly harmed our reputation in the world. They've spent their way into this mess and then they propose to spend their way out - this gang is clueless until the end.

It is my contention that no economic stimulus will make a dent in our recession or outright depression until the wars are ended and troops are brought home. I still maintain that it is not too late to bring impeachment charges against Bush and Cheney. They must go. They have committed many high crimes and misdeamenors.

Bush is busy palling around the Middle East waiving swords and holding hands with kings and shieks who suppress any dissident voice that may try to point out the utter lack of freedom in their respective countries. His apparent policy is peace through weapons as he brokered a 20 billion dollar weapons sale to Saudi Arabia. His lame attempt to try to turn a warmongering administration into a legacy of peacemaking is as transparent as it is impossible. Bush/Cheney's true legacy will obviously be hatred abroad and economic collapse at home. Thanks loads =(

Robert Fisk: Bloody reality bears no relation to the delusions of this President (The Independent, January 19, 2008)

How The Arab Press Sees Bush Trip (CBS News, January 13, 2008)

Joe Conason's piece on TruthOut: What They Call "Progress" in Iraq (January 16, 2008)

Another excellent article on TruthOut: What Is He [Bush] Capable Of? The Presidential Psychology at the End of Days (January 10, 2008)

Help Pass Indian Health Care Legislation

Dear Loyal Readers of this Blog,
Excuse the recent foray into Native American issues, but in case you haven't noticed, nearer to my heart than even the Stephanie Miller Show, are all issues Native. And with the presidential election coverage in full swing, I want to be sure that voters do not forget or ignore issues that face the First Americans. To this end, I am posting the following e-mail that I sent, not to Stephanie Miller, but rather to Senators Coburn and Inhofe (two more obscene and wrong-minded individuals you are unlikely to meet). They are the senators from the state where I reside (Oklahoma) and although they are embarrassments to every thinking Oklahoman, they are our voices in the U.S. Senate, so I must contact them from time to time and attempt to remind them that they are supposed to represent all Oklahomans, not just the right-wing fringe that put them in office and whose values they carry with them to Washington D.C.

Here's the e-mail:
I am writing to urge you to support the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (S. 1200). The vote will likely take place next Tuesday, and I encourage you to vote to enact this important piece of legislation that will help this country keep its promises to the First Americans. The treaties that we signed with Native nations are more than just pieces of paper - they are the supreme law of the land and should be honored as such. This is not a handout; rather it is an obligation that we must honor with our actions. I urge you not only to support this important legislation, but also to pass it without amendments that might weaken the bill. I would appreciate knowing how you vote - I will be following your actions and I will vote accordingly in the fall. In a state that has such a significant Native population, I hope that you will honor the Federal Government's obligations to the Native people of this state and country and pass this bill without delay.

Friends Committee on National Legislation

U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs

Bush Threatens to Veto Indian Health Care Bill

Where Were the Questions from Native America?

Once again, I am disappointed. I sat down after a 12 + hour day at work and eagerly anticipated finally having a chance to hear a question from Indian Country posed to the Democratic candidates, and I was let down again. I can only imagine how the original inhabitants of this land must have felt when they saw the white settlers come over the rise onto land that the federal government had so recently promised would be theirs as long as the grass grows and the rivers run. It is a disappointment that runs so deep in a people, that it is almost expected, it is certainly the norm. I am ashamed of the history of mistreatment of the people who were here when our forebears first arrived on these shores. I am ashamed that even today, treaty responsibilities are dishonored, legal obligations are ignored, and proud communities across this country survive in poverty without the means to provide for their families.

Last night I thought, well. at least Native Americans will have a small voice in a big conversation - a chance to ask a question at a nationally-televised debate, the focus of which was African-Americans and Hispanics. No mention was made of the over two dozen tribes that make their homes in Nevada. The candidates mentioned absent African-American fathers, Hispanic workers and even made a few passing references to Asian-Americans, but not once did I hear a mention of the Western Shoshone people (on whose traditional homeland the much-discussed Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository is located) nor any other Native nation that has been a part of this country since before we were a country. Tonight I am disappointed, angry, and sad, but it makes me vow to fight even harder for Natives' voices to be heard in the political arena. Indeed, When Indians Vote, America Wins!

Tonight's Democratic Debate - Watch It!

Tonight the Native American Network (NAN - a project of INDN's List Education Fund) in Nevada is preparing to make history for Indian Country by ensuring that the influence of Native caucus goers is THE story coming out of the nation's second caucuses. But they've already succeeded in making national political history. Native issues will, for the first time ever, be included in a nationally televised debate.

Tune in to MSNBC tonight, to see our presidential candidates debate some of the issues facing Indian Country. The debate will air at 8pm CST, 9pm EST.

After reading about an upcoming debate hosted by Hispanic and African American groups in Nevada, which will be televised live on MSNBC, State Director Louis Gray led the charge to include Native issues in the forum.

We couldn't be more excited to be making political history for Indian Country, and we want you with us. Tune in to MSNBC on January 15, and contribute today to ensure our success in Nevada and to allow us to move on to other critical battlegrounds in 2008!

On MSNBC, we'll be proving that When Indians Vote, America Wins!

A Very Dangerous Law

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board
"Let's not beat around the bush. The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by folks believed to skew Democratic."
Judge Terence Evans, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Dissenting Opinion, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board



On Wednesday, January 9, 2008 the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case captioned: William Crawford et. al. v. Marion County Election Board et. al. and the Democratic Party of Indiana et. al. This case was initiated by the Americal Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) along with the Democratic Party of Indiana in response to an onerous law passed by the Indiana State Legislature which requires that each and every voter show a government issued photo ID before casting a ballot (see: Indiana Public Law 109-2005). This may on its face, seem like a reasonable request, but it is problematic for at least two reasons: 1) the class of voter that would most likely to be burdened by this law is overwhelmingly poor, elderly, and more than likely a member of a minority group - all indicators that point to a demographic that historically has voted Democratic, and 2) the fraud that this law is meant to avoid has never been recorded nor observed in the entire history of elections in the Hoosier state or for that matter anywhere in the country.

Help America Vote Republican Act of 2002

Unfortunately the right-leaning Supreme Court gave every indication that that they would not only uphold this burdensome law, but may also sanction the party that brought the lawsuit (See: Justices Indicate They May Uphold Voter ID Rules, NYTimes, January 10, 2008). What can we do? Must we wait until someone is actually turned away at the polls and then file a lawsuit. This is the scenario that Justice Ginsburg was imagining when she made the following comment during oral arguments:“The reason they are bringing a facial challenge is because the horse is going to be out of the barn. They will have the election, and just what they are afraid of could happen — that the result will be skewed in favor of the opposite party.”

Why Elections Matter

This provides even more evidence of why elections matter. It was, after all, the Supreme Court that ended the vote counting that would have no doubt revealed that Al Gore was the true victor in 2000 and handed the presidency to George W. Bush. And the addition of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito have further skewered the court to the right, further politicizing the branch of government that arguably should be the least politicized branch of the three. Justice John Paul Stevens is still there - realizing that the balance of the court hangs in his retirement or god-forbid his death, but thankfully the Democratic-controlled Senate should be able to stave off an appointment to the High Court should Justice Stevens be unable to continue for any reason (see an earlier post on this blog: Long Live Justice John Paul Stevens).

This is just another important reason why we all need to work like hell to elect Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton or John Edwards - in other words, whoever the Democratic nominee is, to protect the judicial branch from becoming a tool of one party rather than the rarified and esteemed bench that it was intended to be.

See NYTimes Letter to the Editor: Should Voter ID Be Required?

For a complete list of links to all documents filed in this case, please see: http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/indy-dems.php.

Beyond Iowa & NH - A War Rages On...

Excuse me for not celebrating this morning, I am not really all that excited that Hillary Clinton won the New Hampshire primary. I still maintain that Hillary is not electable and that nominating her will set the country up for at least four more years of GOP horror, and it is that ongoing horror that I would like to remind readers of this morning. Billions of dollars are still going to Iraq on a daily basis, Iraqis are still dying, U.S. soldiers are still dying, and there is NO END in SIGHT.

Meantime back here in this country, we are deliberating and in many cases celebrating a primary victory of a candidate who voted not only to send troops to Iraq, but has never missed an opportunity to vote to fund the war, and to add insult to injury, this same candidate voted for the Lieberman/Kyl amendment - a most unhelpful piece of legislation that labels the Iranian Guard a terrorist organization (nothing provocative about that, is there?). Anyway, before we all decide that we prefer experience over a real change in leadership, let's consider what this experience has brought us so far. It has brought us an endless war that Ms. Clinton cannot even promise will be over after she has been in office for four years (that remark alone should give every good Democrat pause before they cast their lot with another Clinton). Speaking of another Clinton - I think that the Bush - Clinton - Bush - (Clinton?) line-up needs to be shaken up. Twenty-eight years of essentially a two-family-rule sounds downright un-American, and I think every voter should seriously consider whether continuing this tit for tat presidential carousel should be perpetuated.

This is not the end of the war in Iraq nor the political war here in this country. I'm hoping that the real war (Iraq) ends sometime soon, because no true reconciliation can even begin to happen here at home without addressing conflicts/differences in a more constructive way abroad.

See AlterNet's article: Beyond NH: Campaign Promises Are Empty Until the War Ends.

Exporting Democracy - Bush/Cheney Style

"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its people. The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves."
Henry Kissinger, Secretary of State under Richard Nixon, about Chile, prior to the CIA overthrow of the democratically elected government of socialist President Salvador Allende, 1973.

Something struck me as I lay in bed this morning listening to NPR and it begin to grow into a potential post after I heard stories about apparently stolen elections in Kenya and Georgia, and it struck me as obvious that the state of democracy around the world has been marred by stolen elections and outright power grabs (I'm talking about you, Vladimir Putin). In all fairness, the 2000 election was not the first election ever stolen on American soil - there was the 1876 "Fraud of the Century" in which Republican Rutherford Hayes beat out Samuel Tilden, Democrat, by one questionably earned electoral vote (Tilden had clearly won the popular vote), but here in the 21st century, there are most certainly the Bush vs. Gore and four years later the Bush vs. Kerry contests that bring to mind stolen elections. This seems to be a pattern not only here in the United States, but also abroad - see references to Kenya, Georgia, and Russia. So where did all of these despots get the bright idea to rig an election? Well, we need not look any further than our last two elections here in this country to see where this idea may have taken root and flourished.

Granted, the United States did oversee the coup that unseated and murdered Salvador Allende and put in place the despot, Augusto Pinochet, back in 1973, but the memory of the world is short, and we are firmly ensconced in the 21st century. So I believe that the 2000 and 2004 elections here in this country hold enormous sway over elections in the rest of the world. I am not saying that the United States sets the standard for democracy around the world, rather I think we lost that claim in large part because of our stolen elections in 2000 and 2004. We are clearly not living in a functioning democracy, rather we are all living in an imperial kleptocracy, but we have a chance, one that comes along every four years, to return our country to something that may more closely resemble a democracy. That is, if all of the votes are counted and the office is awarded to the person who gets the most votes.

One of the obstacles to achieving this straightforward goal is one that we have faced every presidential election since the founding of this country and that is the Electoral College. The Electoral College is an arcane institution that should go the way of prohibition and other outmoded institutions. The electoral college makes a mockery of the one person/one vote claim that is the foundation of our democracy. There are those who may want to remind me at this point that John F. Kennedy would not have been elected president had the popular vote held sway, but that would miss this digression for the distraction it truly is. It is neither here nor there as far as my argument goes today. Rather it is the aim of this post to point out obstacles to our democracy that face us here and now and beyond the electoral college. It is the very nature of our system of voting that provides the biggest hurdle to the United States reclaiming a measure of democracy in this next election. It is the false flag of voter fraud rather than wholesale election fraud that should be foremost in our minds. I recommend that readers check out BradBlog.com or Greg Palast's excellent post, Fear of Chavez is Fear of Democracy.

Why are we not all out in the streets screaming that Diebold voting machines (which have been hacked with ease by high school kids) be banned? Probably for the same reason we are not all out in the streets demanding an end to this god-awful occupation in Iraq. Is it that we lack conviction? I don't think so, I know how strongly fellow Democrats believe that this election must bring about a sea change of leadership or, or, or, what? We will all move to Canada or the Netherlands or Costa Rica? Why don't we all get on the phone tomorrow and call our local election board and find out how our vote will be recorded on November 4, 2008. And if the answer is that the vote will be counted on an electronic device that can be programmed or hacked or otherwise manipulated, then file a complaint and demand paper, verifiable ballots.

This may seem like an odd post on the heals of the delightful Democratic victory in Iowa (and please remember, kids, that Iowa was an overwhelming victory for democracy and Democrats) - the numbers alone bear this out (see Rolling Stone, Iowa by the Numbers). This is all to say that the race is the Democrats to lose and believe you me (a curious expression that I picked up from my grandmother who died over 30 years ago), I will not breathe a sigh of relief until January 20, 2009 when the new (Democratic) president is inaugurated into his/her office. I am not an optimistic type who thinks that the Dems will have a cake walk to the White House, nor do I put it past the devious and dastardly republicans to try to steal another election, but as the idiot-in-chief said in one of his more famous bungles "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, well, you can't get fooled again..." Wanna bet?

BTB, did anybody else notice the way that Hillary was sizing up Bill Richardson during the debate last night - think he might be on the short list for VP? Just wondering...

Mother Jones Article on our broken voting system.

NYTimes Op-ed piece (January 7, 2008) on the need for a paper trail when we vote.

Check out Jeffrey Toobin's article in the New Yorker on the Supreme Court's review of an odious Voter ID Law (out of Indiana).

See the New York Times Magazine, Can You Count on Voting Machines?.

BREAKING: Steph and Dan Abrams Wed!

Breaking News: Stephanie Miller and Dan Abrams tied the knot in a simple ceremony at an undisclosed après-ski club in Telluride, Colorado. The bride wore a skanky sleeveless gown and the groom was manly and casual in a Ralph Lauren jacket and a Jerry Garcia tie. Max, Ms. Miller's 170 pound puppy, flew out to serve as the ring bearer, while Katie Holmes was drafted to be matron of honor (apparently Barbara Boxer was otherwise engaged). The bridegroom's party was not disclosed, but rumor has it that Tom Cruise may have served as the Best Man (as Tom apparently wouldn't let Katie off of her leash) while Suri filled in as flower girl (as neither Chris Lavoie nor Rebekah Baker could be reached on such sudden notice).

Readers may wonder about an earlier article that appeared in this blog in which Ms. Miller was rumored to have said "I do" to one, Mr. Keith Olbermann. Well, this stealth reporter has learned that hours before the ceremony Ms. Miller served Mr. Olbermann with delusional divorce papers (citing "irreconcilable psychosis") thereby annulling their mythical marriage, and thereby freeing Ms. Miller up to pursue her delusional relationship with Mr. Abrams.

We wish the happy couple well, and if this doesn't make Stephanie a permanent unsavory element on MSNBC, we're not sure what it will take. Bon Chance, Buena Suerte, Best Wishes, Kids!

Disclaimer - This blog post is as serious as the Goldwater/Miller 2008 Presidential Campaign (i.e. it is a parody posted for entertainment purposes only =)

Caucus Hangover

Oh Momma -
it's Obama!

Dear Stephanie,
I know, I know, you are technically still on vacation (seems like a coon's age since you entertained us in the morning), but you didn't think that your official radical militant librarian could pass the day without dropping you a note and applauding your efforts on behalf of your favorite candidate, Mr. Barack Obama. Did you sneak into Iowa and flip the switch for Barack?

Do tell us, what is your secret? It doesn't really matter, I think that Barack's strong showing bodes well for Democrats in general and that is what we all care about, after all, isn't it? It also makes for an interesting (read "good") fight that should keep people across the country focused on the change that we all so desperately want and need. Way to go Iowa! Way to caucus! Way to get out the vote! Keep up the momentum and we'll storm the White House in November and move in in January 2009!!!


Of course, Tulsey has been insufferable, prancing around the house with that maddening "I told you so," look on his face, while poor Dillie is wondering what happened to his presidential team - Goldwater/Miller (we had that "talk" again last night), but alas Dillie just can't accept that his choice of presidential candidates is nothing but a pair of cheap publicity skanks, and he vows to go ahead with his "Hound Dogs for Goldwater/Miller 2008" group, sure that they will rebound in New Hampshire. Give 'em hell, Dill!!!

This Blog Endorses BamaWardSon

On the eve of the Iowa caucuses, this blog is finally prepared to endorse a candidate and (drum roll please) it is BamaWardSon (that is Obama/Edwards/Richardson), in other words, I am following the lead of our fearless leader, Howard Dean, and endorsing whichever Democrat gets the nod at the convention in Denver in July. For those of you who were eagerly anticipating a John Edwards endorsement, or even better a nod for Barack Obama, may be shaking your heads at this blogger, but, hey, I'm nothing if not a realist, and I am prepared to endorse whoever earns the nomination in July, whoever gets the nod in Denver. In other words, I am so thrilled by the field of Democratic candidates, that anyone of them would be such a huge improvement over the current occupant of the White House, that I will work my butt off for any of them.

You may notice that Hillary Clinton's name is not a part of the jerry-built name I cobbled together. I may be a realist, but I am also fiercely loyal, and once I make up my mind, I am not easily dissuaded. And long about this time last year, I had had enough of Hillary's triangulating, her waffling on the most important issue of our time (the war in Iraq), and in spite of her charming husband, William Jefferson Clinton, I cannot betray myself or my guts by including Hillary in an endorsement by this blog. Sorry, Roxie, you gotta love my stubbornness, although I prefer to think of it as steely resolve. There you have it, loyal, yellow dog Democrats, my presidential endorsement for 2008. Rock on friends and this time with a skosh more feeling =)

P.S. And, yes, I still read and occasionally enjoy Maureen Dowd's column.

The Year in Steph 2007

Jim Ward, Chris Lavoie, Stephanie Miller & Rebekah Baker receive a BLLOTY Award 2007

Loyal readers of this blog, you all may remember that this blog wasn't even a month old last year when we welcomed in 2007. It was a difficult, in many ways an ugly year, yet thanks to our fearless talk radio host, Stephanie Miller, and her esteemed crew of the Mooks (Jim Ward and Chris Lavoie) and recently named Mookette, Rebekah Baker, we weathered a year to which many of us are glad to say good-bye. It may have been a personal train wreck of a year for Momma (AKA Stephanie), and we were witness to her insomnia, mercury toxicity and the loss of her beloved Poo Bear, although details of her personal stress were not shared with her listeners (and for that we thank you, we guess, Momma). One of the bookends of 2007 that ended on a happy note was the demise of Columbus' WTPG (the only progressive station in the Columbus market) in January 2007, and the ultimate revival of progressive radio in Columbus, Ohio on WVKO - AM1580 in December 2007. In no small way it was thanks to a cadre of loyal SMS listeners (among them Ohio Majority Radio and Non-Stop Radio). Just goes to show the power of Stephanie and crew =). See the following stories that covered this saga as it unfolded: Rally Set for Monday in Columbus, Save Progressive Radio Drop, Power to the People.

Another exciting development for the SMS grew out of Don Imus well-earned firing, and that was the amazing return to television for Stephanie, accompanied by Chris Lavoie's adorable TV debut, (Jim Ward has been on numerous TV shows and his voice work has been featured in many more shows). That's right loyal fans, the MSNBC appearance led to the occurrence now known as the "Epic Sweating Incident," in which Ms. Miller failed to heed warnings sent to her by loyal fans to "keep her arms down," thereby exposing her damp arm pits to almost a million viewers. All in all, it was an excellent, if not exhausting, week for Steph fans (see links to SMS on MSNBC: Stephanie and the Boyz do MSNBC, Let Dan Abrmas Know that You Love Steph, Clip of Steph on MSNBC on YouTube).

Another memorable moment of the year in Steph 2007 included the launching of Stephanie's vice presidential campaign (October 1, 2007). Along with CC Goldwater, Steph is recreating the 1964 Goldwater/Miller ticket in an attempt to make a serious political point - the point being that neither Barry nor Bill would recognize the current right wing version of the republican party into which their erstwhile party has evolved. The campaign is also a shameless publicity stunt to promote Steph's radio show and CC's DVD "Mr. Conservative: Goldwater on Goldwater." In spite of my lack of support for the imaginary ticket, Dylan (my younger and more gullible dog) has endorsed the Goldwater/Miller team for 2008. (see the following posts for more of my opinion of the mythical Goldwater/Miller 2008 ticket: Steph throws her well-worn ball cap into the ring, Goldwater/Miller Rally in Phoenix, Two Thirds of RML's Household Split Endorsements).

In any case, we say a big "Good Riddance to 2007," and we launch into 2008 with great expectations. Here are a few things that this blogger and loyal fan of the SMS would like to see/hear in 2008 - more Stephanie impressions (we especially can imagine and would love to hear Kay Rooney inviting Susan Estrich in for a glass of rye, Roseanne grilling Hillary on her stand on the war in Iraq, and Joan Rivers returning to the red carpet for any of the upcoming award shows), we would also like to see Steph become a permanent unsavory element on MSNBC (I think that she has earned her place, if not in Dan Abrams heart, then certainly on his show), we also eagerly anticipate the birth of Momma's third child (doggie) and wonder what mischief this puppy will get into. All in all, I just want to send a HUGE THANK YOU to Stephanie, Jim, Chris and Rebekah for whatever measure of sanity to which I can lay claim. Here's to 2008, a new year, a new administration, new hope, and new promise. Let's all work for Justice and Peace - Happy New Year Everybody!!!

Benazir Bhutto (1953 - 2007)

Benazir Bhutto
(June 21, 1953 - December 27, 2007)

I was driving back to Tulsa from Jamestown, Indiana. I was about halfway through Missouri when I turned on NPR and heard the news that Benazir Bhutto had been assassinated by a suicide bomber after delivering an impassioned speech at a rally in Rawalpindi. My heart dropped and I drove on stunned that another fighter for democracy had fallen. I was immediately transported back to my fifth grade class when our principal, Mr. Edwards - a kindly, grandfatherly sort - came to our classroom to comfort us over the death of Martin Luther King Jr. who had been shot and killed in Memphis the evening before. This confirmed in my young mind that all great men (they had all been men up until that time) would sooner or later be shot and killed by an angry gunman who would deprive the country of a brave and valuable leader. More than that, in the case of JFK, MLK and Bobby Kennedy, the country was robbed of its future, of its visionary, of the one who had been anointed to take the nation into tomorrow and beyond.

It is this anguish that I imagine the people of Pakistan are experiencing today, this feeling of being cheated by a lone lunatic (or a group of mad fundamentalists who may or may not have the support of the military mad man, Pervez Musharraf, who is currently the head of the Pakistani state) out of a future that they could almost envisage, a future that dangled so tantalizingly close. Like JFK, MLK, and Bobby, Benazir Bhutto was not a perfect politician and was not without shortcomings as a leader, but like JFK, MLK, and Bobby, she inspired her fellow countrywomen/men to dream better dreams, to dare to believe that a country mired in chaos and ruled by a despot could achieve a measure of democracy. She will be missed, not only by the grief-stricken Pakistanis, but by a world that wants so badly to believe that the war-torn regions of the world are populated by more than warring tribes that give way to terrorism whenever the people become so disgruntled with their lives that they put down their plowshares and pick up AK-47s. Or perhaps worse, strap explosives to their bodies and detonate them in a crowded market or next to a car in which a courageous leader is riding.

Ms. Bhutto - go in peace, the peace that you were never able to realize on this earth. Let us all work toward the goal of peace with all our might.

The Guardian's coverage of Bhutto's assassination.

David Frost's inteview with Benazir Bhutto (November 2, 2007).