Tom Delay
political cartoons
Tom Delay
satire
The (Not So) Moral Majority
As the party of moral values begins to unravel at the seems one must wonder when the Amerian public will awaken to the collossal snow job that has been perpetrated upon them. Like the unassuming old lady who unwittingly turns over her life savings to a sweet sounding man on the other end of her telephone, will the American public still be in denial about the crimes of this current administration when they awaken to find their bank accounts and their country completely bankrupt?
The dominos began to fall last week when the White House’s senior procurement officer David Safavian was frog-marched out of his office at the OMB by FBI officials for lying about his dealings with Jack Abramoff. Then yesterday the news all Republicans were in denial about hit like bolt of lightening as Tom DeLay was forced to step down from his post as House Majority Leader under an indictment for conspiring to launder illegal corporate campaign contributions. And if this was not enough, the case of one time GOP fundraising heavy hitter Jack Abramoff is sounding more and more like a sequel to The Godfather chock full of murder, payoffs and casino deals.
With all of this as well as the overwhelming evidence of cronyism and an ongoing investigation into the outing of an undercover CIA operative by White House insiders one must seriously ask the question; what will it take for the American public to finally wake up to the fact that this country is being run by a bunch of criminals? As FoxNEW would say, “some say” that this administration is beginning to look like a criminal enterprise.
One of Two Choices
Crossposted over at Left of Center
As I ease my way back into the life of political blogging, there are some things that I find I sort of forgotten about. For example, I forgot with what disdain the basic liberal argument is held in from the unsuspecting mainstream without really understanding that argument. From “Feminazis” to “bleeding hearts” to “tree huggers” it wasn’t cool to be a liberal when I took over the UPC project, and it’s not cool now that I’m back to doing my own thing. The way I see it, if we want to make any kind of headway in this national debate, we only have two choices before us.
The first choice is to just start calling our selves “Progressives”. It’s a good solid name. I mean, who hates progress? And bleeding heart progressive just doesn’t have the same ring as bleeding heart liberal. But the problem is that would be just a quick cosmetic fix, not addressing what the true problems are.
The problems that I speak of are pretty well summed up in a little incident I was a part of just the other day.
I had written a little article called, Of Course The Numbers Matter, and crossposted it over at Comments From Left Field (that would be this very blog you’re reading right now. I wouldn’t lie to you). The content of the article was a simple analysis of the impact one could expect Bush’s approval ratings to have on the rest of his presidency. I wasn’t particularly critical of him, and actually gave the guy leeway in some areas that many other of my liberal friends won’t.
And yet, despite a comparitively neutral article, at least from me, I got this following comment:
“I’m all about accountability”…I love when the left makes jokes they don’t even know they’re making, that’s funny stuff!Mark Marco 09.25.05 – 10:32 pm #
Though an isolated incident, it rings much too familiar to ignore. Witty, snide comments, whisper campaigns, incomplete rationales, anecdotal evidence and false analogies have all probably played a more than a small role in the demonizing of the liberal argument, and personally, we need to to take every single small minute transgressions to task.
For my conservative friends, look, I’m not a big grizzly bear of debate. Seriously, I’m too lazy to really seriously in depth research, and I don’t deal too well with conflict, but I refuse to let any more of these inane arguments designed to pander to the ignorant fly anymore.
Like I said, friends, take them to task. Make them actually use a valid argument. Have them pull out stats, trends, facts. How many times have you heard that Welfare is a useless system because of “welfare mothers,” and yet you never hear a single statistic? How often do you hear an argument that sounds vaguely like “I knew a guy who did a thing, and as a result the system failed”?
I mean honestly.
I’ll tell you a story.
In my marriage, my wife is the higher educated of we two. She graduated from Old Dominion University with a bachelor’s in the IT field. Her best friend in this area is also an ODU alum, same year as my wife. Me, I’m just a high school grad who just doesn’t have the patience to get a degree in anything, even the one that I apparently don’t even have to go to school for (long story).
So, educated people, right?At about the same time Clinton hit the campaign trail with Kerry, my wife’s friend sends us one of those e-mail chain letters, this one about Bill.
Now, Bill’s my boy, so when I read the letter, I got a little miffed. Written in excruciatingly thick sarcasm, the letter listed a bunch of different things the writer was “thankful” for. Each item irked me more and more and more as it never once challenged President Clinton’s ability to govern, but were all snide shots at his affair with Monica (something I’ll never defend, but let’s honestly ask ourselves how much does getting a knobber affect policy?).
So I had vowed to answer each silly little item and send it back to her(ie.”Thank You Bill for teaching my 8 year old about oral sex.” My answer being: Bill did not teach your 8 year old about oral sex, Ken Starr did, with your help, that is, if you actually take responsibility for being a parent. I have a hard time believing the president wanted anyone to know about his blowjob, let alone your 8 year old). But I procrastinated, and finally rationalized to myself that this was an intelligent and educated woman, of course she wouldn’t be swayed by this bit of drivel.
After the election, she pointed out that she had voted for Bush. When asked why, she shrugged her shoulders, and in a noncommittal tone just kind of grunted.
Of course it would be fool to say that these kind of guerilla whisper tactics are the sole reason for the liberals playing the part of the underdogs, but it is something that can’t be ignored. We cannot try and hold ourselves “above” this kind of argument.
We must engage.
We must attack.
And we must not quit until we get these people to enter the debate based on the merit of their arguments, not on how they can make you chuckle.
I Have A Bridge To Sell You…
If you believe that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist had no inside data prior to the sale of his HCA stock, the same stock that was supposedly in a blind trust but miraculously was the only portion of that trust sold, the same stock that nine days after the sale dropped dramatically in value, the same stock that he chose – for ethical reasons [ROFLMFAO] – not to sell a couple of years ago, in the same company that was founded by his father and run by his brother…then I have a bridge or two to sell you in Pittsburgh! Senator Frist, meet Martha Stewart – I think she has a jumpsuit she would likely loan you.
Pass me another Stegmaier…
to be continued….
Santorum Exit Strategy: You, Me, and Sept. 30th
Following is a message from Chuck Pennacchio.
Last Saturday in Washington, D.C. I joined 300,000 marching Americans — all of whom want a clear new direction for our country. The “Bring Them Home Now Tour” was led by military veterans and families who have lost loved ones in Iraq. I proudly stood — and continue to stand — with these veterans and families who demand an immediate end to the U.S. military occupation of Iraq and a dramatic change in a national security policy that provides us with many results. Unfortunately, security is not one of them. The radical right’s war-first policies have cost thousands of lives, wasted billions of dollars, weakened our homeland, and undermined global friendships that won us the Second World War and the Cold War.
The best way to redeem our losses in Iraq and, more recently, in the Gulf Coast region, is to beat radical right leaders like Rick Santorum and rededicate ourselves to America’s best ideals. We’ve had more than enough of the Bush-Santorum lies, failures, and war profiteering. What we need instead is a tough-minded foreign policy based on honesty, common sense, the rule of law, smart diplomacy, and military readiness. Moreover, we need a homeland security strategy that not only prioritizes critical infrastructure (e.g., levies and transportation systems) and first-responders (e.g., fire, police, and health professionals), but gives us a federal government able, prepared, and eager to coordinate help for all classes, ages, and races of Americans in times of emergency. This is, after all, the 21st century.
The right of citizen protest is vital to any functioning democracy, but now is the time to translate street action into electoral success. We need regime change in Washington as soon as possible. That effort begins with you…and me. Right now. We can’t elect a new President until 2008. But in 2006 we can replace his allies in Congress. Nobody has done more to push George W. Bush’s disastrous policies than Rick Santorum. Santorum leads Bush’s divisive agenda on Iraq, Social Security, and tax cuts for Republican fat cats, job exporters, and no-bid contractor friends. At the same time, Santorum crusades against equal rights, privacy rights, consumer rights, worker rights, and abortion rights.
Pennsylvanians and Americans want a return to democracy and decency, opportunity and security, unity and responsibility. Nothing will show that more clearly than replacing Rick Santorum with a progressive Democrat who is a proven winner. Yes, I believe in protests. But I also believe in winning, delivering, and doing what’s right from positions of authority and responsibility. In fact, my track record working with winning, effective, principled U.S. Senators (Cranston, Harkin, Wirth, and Simon) and a House member (Dellums) contrasts sharply with a Pennsylvania Democratic Party that last elected a full-term Senator in 1962.
Let’s show the “establishment” party, pollsters, and press what we the people know: politics as usual will not beat Santorum. Conviction wins. Toughness wins. Confidence wins. Believing wins. That’s why I need your help. Right now. This Friday, September 30th is the end of our third quarter reporting period. Let’s finish an amazing three months with a flurry of contributions: small. medium, and large. Please give as generously as you can: $10, $25, $50, $100 or more. And spread the word among all of your friends, family, and associates. We need an exit strategy for Iraq and for Rick Santorum. And it begins with you and me. Working together, fighting together, winning together. That’s the formula. I’m doing my part. And I know that you will continue doing your part.
Yours in Solidarity,
Chuck
Chuck Pennacchio, Ph.D.
Pennacchio for Pennsylvania
2006 Democratic Candidate for U.S. Senate
http://www.chuck2006.com
chuck@chuck2006.com
Beer and Loafing and Los Huevos
I’m starting a “comic book”. It will have covert and overt political tones to it, but in the context of the character studies and the plot. I’ll continue to do the one shot political cartoons you usually see here, but maybe not as frequently. I have been cross-posting the one shot cartoon gags at Comments From Left Field , In Search Of Utopia, Loaded Mouth, and Frank at IFlipFlop is kind enough to post the occasional cartoon. A shout out to Goose, David, Tas, and Frank!
Meanwhile, back at 67 Baker Ave….portions of this story were written by legendary underground Chicago cartoonist, Saul Chlee….we’re still trying to locate the artwork for his esoteric masterpiece, “Support The Republicans”, so we can bring some “fair and balanced” cartooning to Zencomix!
GOP Jackals Descend on the South
“Vulnerability”. To civilized people that term conjures up feelings of nurturing and compassion. Selflessness and devotion. The good in the Samaritan who stopped to help the man left for dead by the bandits.
But apparently to the GOP, at least to its leaders, the term “vulnerability” is a Pavlovian signal to drool at the prospect of a weakness to be exploited. Like jackals descending upon a wounded wildebeest, the Right is poised to ravage the Gulf Coast, as savagely as did the merciless Katrina, before they attack the economy as a whole.
Rapacious greed knows no conscience.
Just consider the “help” that the GOP is offering the reconstruction efforts.
The Administration has suspended the Davis-Bacon rule, thus allowing federal contractors to pay workers less than the prevailing wage, while not requiring the savings to be passed on to the taxpayers — not satisfied just with profits from no-bid contracts, the Halliburtons of this country stand to make untold billions on years of reconstruction…not even counting the huge tax breaks they will receive, as will their multi-million-dollar executives, from the tax cuts Bush refuses to rescind, and as will the dynasties of their heirs, from the estate tax the Congress intends to eliminate.
The Administration has suspended affirmative action requirements for first-time federal contractors in the reconstruction zone — regulations that help minorities, women, veterans, and the disabled — despite the President’s prime-time assurance that he would do everything in his power to remedy racism and discrimination, past, present, and future, as even he admitted exacerbated the disaster.
The Administration has suspended the requirement that employers hire only documented workers. The American victims displaced from their jobs and their homes by Katrina are now being displaced from the reconstruction efforts by big businesses’ hiring undocumented workers laboring for little and living in trailers without running water and with no real power…and not just electrical hook-ups, my friends.
I swear if they thought they could get away with it, the Administration would repeal the 13th Amendment and bring back slavery — the ultimate “ownership society”.
The Administration is suspending rules right and left to protect the environment — the very environment whose rape left the city of New Orleans so vulnerable to destruction, the wetlands that act as barrier to storm surge but a shadow of their former, natural self.
The Administration is funneling public school money into private school vouchers (as they’ve been trying to do for years), while hiding behind children and parents displaced and traumatized by the storm.
The Cato Institute is clamoring again for privatizing Social Security, because “asset accumulation plays a vital role in escaping poverty.” As if “every man for himself” had not been discredited by the deaths of the masses stranded in the sewage.
Newt Gingrich calls for more cuts in federal taxes — driving us deeper in debt, as to banks overseas, and requiring more cuts in programs helping the poor — as well as for wholesale cuts in “red tape” for big business — read, less protections for workers, consumers, and the environment.
The Wall Street Journal calls not only for big tax cuts for big business but also for a flat tax on personal income — much more of a benefit for those at the top than for those at the bottom. “Why not allow the Gulf [Coast] to operate as a laboratory for a flat tax,” asks the WSJ. Why?! Because those at the top have much more than they need, while those at the bottom can barely survive!
Republican Senators James Inhofe, of Oklahoma, and David Vitter, of Louisiana, are pushing to allow the Administration to suspend any environmental law for up to a year and a half; and Inhofe goes further, wanting to prohibit any citizens from filing any lawsuits against federal contractors who despoil the environment — as if it is worthless, as if we are not living within the environment, as if we were gods.
And never to be outdone, the Heritage Foundation not only calls for eliminating all capital gains taxes in the region — as if the prospect of hundreds of billions of dollars in federal contracts, and who knows how much more money from the private sector, weren’t incentive enough to draw business to the largest construction project in the history of the nation — they also want the infrastructure — the very roads, rail lines, and other lifelines of civilization — turned over to private companies “under contract” with the government, the same government that the Right wants to never interfere with business.
The jackals feast on the guts of the beast. And we are promised by the rabid Right that this is only a preview of what is in store for the rest of the country.
So what if anything do we on the Left offer as alternatives? Contrary to all-too-fashionable criticism, we progressives do indeed have ideas — very compassionate, very practical solutions — which put the needs of the many ahead of the profiteering of the few.
Senator Ted Kennedy is creating a blueprint for a Gulf Coast Redevelopment Authority, modeled after FDR’s Tennessee Valley Authority, which successfully revived that then-flood-plagued region.
Senator John Edwards is pushing for another New Deal-inspired program, a new Works Progress Administration, called the New America Initiative, which would take displaced Americans and put them back to work rebuilding their own communities — a far cry from the Administration’s reliance on workers from outside of the country.
The Campaign for America’s Future — in addition to pushing for repeal of the bankruptcy bill, to help ruined families — is calling for re-creating yet another New Deal success, a new Civilian Conservation Corps, to put displaced workers back to work restoring — not exploiting — the environment, such as the wetlands that serve as natural protections against hurricanes.
Sometimes those in the Middle ask if there is any difference between those on the Right and those on the Left.
While everyday people, on the Left and the Right, have contributed record amounts to help the victims in the South, this catastrophe has brought the positions of the leaders on the Right and the Left into much sharper focus.
They are as different as greed and compassion.
Of Course The Numbers Matter
Crossposted from Left of Center.
Unless you’ve been on a more complete hiatus from current events over the last few weeks than I, then you should know that Bush is staring down some really ugly approval numbers. 40% approval does not mean that people think you are doing “one heck of a job,” Bushie.
One would like to blame this on Katrina. Particularly Bush fans I’m sure would love to say that this is just a result of unfair press reports blaming El Presidente for something that he has no control over.
But a more careful eye would have noticed that Bush’s numbers were about as bad (even worse depending on the poll) prior to Katrina making landfall. The shiney and new finally wearing off of Iraq, Karl Rove’s little scandal, the Downing Street Memo, steadily rising gas profits…er… prices (did I say that out loud?), and even a little dash of Cindy Sheehan, had all started to come together to erode the President’s support.
It was almost as though people were slowly, one by one, rubbing the sleep out of their eyes to find that maybe the guy in the oval office may seem like a nice guy, but he’s just not that great at doing his job.
Then one of the nation’s most beloved and flamboyant cities was struck with disaster, and the vote of non-confidence in our federal administration only seemed to grow.
But a pretty consistent theme I’ve been hit with when talking to my more liberal friends is that the numbers don’t matter. Bush has already been reelected, and is going to do whatever he wants to do.
So now we are confronted with two major fallacies. The first being that the president doesn’t deserve all the criticism he has been receiving since the onset of the Katrina catastrophy, and the second being that his approval ratings just don’t matter. Both are false, and I will disprove them now.
The quick and easy one is the first. Of course the president deserves much of the criticism he is receiving. Further, if he is shocked by a good portion of it, he really shouldn’t be the president at all, or at least, he didn’t really understand the scope of the job when he started.
Now, everything leading up to Katrina’s devastating land fall; all the programs, systems, and plans already in place, all that stuff, is stuff that if you are going to blame Bush, you are also, if you’re gonna be fair, obliged to blame everyone who came before him for not fixing the same thing. So I give him a pass on that. I wouldn’t play the blame game on a president I liked, so I won’t do it to a president I don’t like.
But everything after the hurricane hit, oh you bet your sweet ass the president is open season for criticism. His actions, and the actions of those below him. That’s his job. On one hand, the fact that the man was seemingly posting a gaffe a day is horrendous. There was the “you’re doing a heck of a job Brownie,” comment. There were the countless stutter steps in public appearances. The announcement that no one expected the levees to fail a day after the report from the Army Corps of Engineers hit the media like a bomb as it predicted just that. And of course don’t forget how long it took for the President to make an on the ground assessment, and what you get when you tie everything together is a president that seemed very far removed from the disaster that was occurring right in his own backyard so to speak.
At a time when a president should appear cool, calm, strong, and knowledgable, ours seemed shaken, frustrated, uninformed, and impotent. Considering the fact that one of the president’s major responsibilities is to be a figure head, we can safely say that our president failed us here.
The other spot where the president must be held accountable is for the actions of his suboordinates. Any responsible CEO, or military person who has been in long enough to hold some measure of power should understand this. In a high executive office, such as that of the United States President, it is your job to be responsible for, though you have no control, of all the members under you. It would be unfair if you didn’t know this was part of your job, but I would hope that an incoming president, let alone a veteran two termer, would know this.
That is why one hopes to put into place people who are competent at their job. Unfortunately, in the case of the recently dismissed Brown, this was not exactly the case.
But there is something that really bothers me about what is going on in this national debate to criticize Bush; the fact that this is even a debate. If you want to debate the individual accusations or arguments, then that is fine, but the idea that there is ever a time when our public servants are beyond our criticism puts into danger the very fabric of our democracy. Those who govern should govern in fear of the governed. Anything less, and you take one more precarious step toward fascism. This is never more true than in the face of crisis, as it is this crucible which determines the validity of our leaders.
—
One falsehood down, one more to go. The idea that the president’s approval ratings are unimportant is silly. Of course the numbers matter, and if you don’t think they do, you’re not paying close enough attention.
If the only thing that the president had to worry about, in regards to his approval rating, was his reelection, then yes, you would be correct in saying that a President’s approval rating in his second term was worthless. But to that way of thinking, why even take the numbers? What’s the point in conducting countless polls? The fact that pollsters still bother to measure a president’s approval rating after his reelection would lead one to believe that there is still something important about them, and that one would be right.
A small sidebar. Other people have a tendency to discount polls because they are inaccurate. Case in point, I have a friend who says that all polls are bullshit because every poll he saw leading up to the last presidential election showed Kerry winning, and we know how that turned out. But of course, I would expect someone in that position to be dissappointed. At vote casting time, there are two things to think about. First, my friend was wrong, most polls had bush in the lead, and secondly, the spread on these polls were often within the allowances for error.
So no, polls are not exact, and if you are going to put money down on a 1 point difference when standard error is 3-5 points, well, a fool and his money…
But polls, though not exact, are still extremely useful in showing trends. For example, Bush was posting numbers in the high 80’s following the September 11th attacks. And one could, out of just purely anecdotal evidence say that that is a reasonable assessment of the national mood at the time. Hell, even such arch conservatives as Al Franken and Alan Colmes had in that post 9-11 era had praise for the President. Hell, even I liked the guy. The bullhorn on the rubble speech was masterful.
Compare that with today’s image of the guy, and you get the point.
Back off of that sidebar, and back to the main point. Polls-useful. Why? Well, other than letting you know whether or not you can get reelected, which is all moot in this case, there are several other reasons why you have to pay attention to how popular the president is. While he may be on his twilight tour, he still has a responsibility to get fellow party members elected and reelected into office. Also, there is the idea of a lasting legacy, the idea that he wants to push an agenda that will allow him to live on through legislation and policy that he champions. Finally we have the judicial nominations to worry about.
Clinton was, for much of his presidency, relatively popular, however, the Lewinsky scandal did much to destroy his ability to help get his VP, Al Gore, elected into office. Four years later when he joined Kerry on the campaign trail, he again was unable to give the new Democratic candidate the bump that he needed to win the oval office. Therefore, a scandal had prevented the eloquent and personable Clinton from becoming a political asset after his time in the White House had run out.
By contrast, it would be reasonable to assume that the charismatic Ronald Reagan had a hand in seeing his less than socially affluent vice president elected into the presidency.
As we look to the future, this recent history makes us ask the question of which two term president will George W. Bush take after? Also, with his numbers this low, what kind of movements can we see from the Republican party?
Our first indications of W’s ability to help out his party are rapidly approaching as midterm elections begin to draw near. Even now, we can see that Republicans are beginning to seperate themselves from El Presidente on a variety of issues. From his dangerous stance on Social Security to his fiscally irresponsible plan to economically recover from Katrina, more and more Republicans seem to be at least provisionally casting their own votes of no confidence in their leader.
Which is strange since the Bush style of political Kung Fu has been as good as gold in the elections since Katrina. As compassionate conservatism gets revealed to be neither compassionate, nor traditionally conservative to more and more Americans, the more we see this collective “the emperor really isn’t wearing any clothes” deal. And that doesn’t bode well for those who want to ride the coat tails of Bush and Rove.
From a more simplified standpoint, you’re thinking of running for an office. Do you want to count on the help of someone who is desperately clinging on to a 40% approval rating? If you do, please join the Republican party, and run for president. Please.
So unless Bush can pull out of his current political tailspin, you can rest assured that more and more Republicans are going to continue to seperate themselves from the Mayberry Machiavellis in an attempt to make themselves look better.
Even more unfortunately for the Bush camp, this means that his lasting legacy is also in danger. As he continues to refuse to ask for a collective national sacrifice to help ourselves out, we are treated to a stark image of his visionary ownership society. Shamanic, the writer for Simianbrain, has this most passionate must read on how the ownership society’s ugly unmentionables were made known to the public.
Social Security reform, torte reform, tax cuts, etc. are all highly dependent upon how popular the President himself is, and the effect is felt on both sides of the aisle. From the democratic side, opposition will be made easier because with a low approval rating for the president, appeals made directly to the public from external groups are likely to be less successful, thereby applying less pressure on Democratic congressmen to vote for agenda items.
On the Republican side of the aisle, you’ll find more and more Republicans less anxious to vote on Bush’s agenda items to protect their own political futures. As outlined earlier, if Bush’s numbers are high, you could pretty much count on Republicans staying lock step with the oval office. But as the president’s numbers aren’t very good, you will see more and more Republicans striking out on their own.
Freshman Republican Senator Coburn is perhaps the loudest harbinger of the old guard fiscal conservatism at the moment. Back in the 2004 campaign, Bush labeled Kerry just another “Tax and Spend” Democrat, a jibe that other conservatives willfully, hell, gleefully partook in. But now, as Coburn points out, Bush’s policy of “Spend, Spend, Spend” while initially more politically happy, has consequences, and the money has to come from somewhere.
And of course, who could forget Bill Frist’s break with the culture-of-lifers when he came out in favor of government funded Stem Cell Research?
Small as these breaks are, they’re still significant. They show cracks in the seemingly unbreachable GOP armor. Cracks that could only be propogated by a low presidential approval rating.
Finally, and here’s the biggie, judges. Judges judges judges. Since Bush first took the oval office, there has been a buzz about how conservatives could take the Supreme Court. It seemed highly likely that Bush would have the chance to name up to three SCOTUS justices, and considering his penchant for social conservatism, we’re talking about a possible overturning of Roe v Wade, a final word saying no gay people can’t get married, or hey, let’s get rid of some Affirmative Action.
Because despite what anyone says, both sides of the house want their own “activist judges”. When righties say things like “constructionists,” “constitutionalists,” etc. they may be saying they want someone that follows the letter of the law, but in truth, they’re licking their chops as they hungrily stare down that Roe v Wade decision.
But Bush got snubbed his first term in office. Despite there being some crusty old folks on the bench, none of them had the common courtesy to retire or shuffle off this mortal coil.
Then came this, his first year of his second term, and boom. Justice O’Connor retires, and before the nominee to replace her is even through committee, Chief Justice Rhenquist passes away. At this point, I want to slow the tape down a little bit.
When Justice O’Connor announced her retirement, we all had this idea that her replacement would be Judge Edith Brown Clement, a 5th circuit judge. Edith isn’t exactly the most liberal judge out there. I mean, to her, protecting the habitats of endangered species is unconstitutional, and minority rights? Who needs them. So what if an insurance agency charges black people more for the same identical plans offered to whites? Well call it the extra “colored folks” fee.
But at the last second, Bush pulled the rug right out from under all of our feet when he elected the handsome, mild mannered, Roberts. The idea, I’m convinced, was to nominate a softball with no real record to speak of, and therefore no seriously negative past to warrant a filibuster, and thereby soften up the field for a more conservative judge the next time around. A gambit that would work if Bush had the numbers to bolster his side of the story.
Check out this sidebar from the latest issue of Time magezine:
The Roberts Effect
As John Roberts sailed through his confirmation hearings, conservatives stepped up pressure on George W. Bush to choosehis next Supreme Court nominee more squarely in the strict-constructionist, Antonin Scalia mold. Another Roberts, according to conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly, would be a “betrayal.” Why? Because Roberts left it unclear whether he would uphold Roe v. Wade, and Schlafly and others want a sure vote to reverse it.
Conservatives redoubled their opposition to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, seen by some as too squishy on abortion. “It’s really sad,” said a former associate White House counsel Brad Berenson, “that the conservative groups seem to have so little faith in the President and the Attorney Gerneal.” …
So what we are seeing is Bush being pulled in two directions. If his numbers had been there, I’m sure he could have pulled off a second nominee that would keep Schlafly very happy. But as they aren’t, he doesn’t have that huge bargaining chip called the American people to go to when he’s selling his nominee, so on one side, you have the Schlaflies demanding a super conservative judge, while the Arlen Specters are trying to tell George to keep things toned down.
Which brings us to the final question. We know that El Presidente’s poor numbers are going to severely inhibit his ability to help out fellow Republicans in elections, push for legislation that will solidify his legacy, and put into place SCOTUS justices that will ensure a severe conservative bias for years to come. What we don’t know is where does Bush think he himself stands? He doesn’t have the political capital he once had, or at least thought he had, but does he know this? I couldn’t tell you, but I do know that our biggest indicator is just around the corner. When he announces O’Connor’s replacement (again, for the under the rock people, Robert’s nomination got bumped up to Chief Justice when Rhenquist passed on), while the hard left and the hard right battle it out, as they will no matter who he picks, we’ll be able to see where Bush thinks he stands by who he picks. If he tosses out another Roberts, then we know he realizes that this early into his second term, his presidency is not doing so hot. If on the other hand he nominates Clement, or some other Scalia wannabe, then Bush has absolutely no clue what is going on around him politically, and I say heaven help him.
Scratch that, after five years of this guy, I say he deserves whatever he gets.
Biblical prophecies from the "right"
Nothing more pleasurable than sharing the profound comments of my Republican colleagues. So here goes… Apparently, these increasingly torrential natural disasters are the result of the “end” nearing. Yes, you heard it here first! God is wiping out people all over the globe in preparation for human salvation. It makes sense too. Isn’t it easier to empty a building’s major contents before it’s demolished? This strategy will save God lots of additional blood shed. And since we’re all sinners, we deserve it…
These same Republicans were on a massive campaign in blaming the Governor of Louisiana and the Mayor of New Orleans for the devastating human tragedies after Hurricane Katrina. Oddly enough, the disastrous evacuation in Texas is in no way related to the execution of Governor Rick Perry’s evacuation plan. This is different. Why? Because it’s Texas and Perry is Republican! After all – the Lone Star state is home of the Bush royalty.
Last evening’s horrible tragedy of a bus explosion and thousands upon thousands (still) stranded on Texas highways proves one thing. None of our government entities have a solid execution plan for disaster. Easier said than done.
Ahhhh well…back to our daily dose of war and catastrophes. (Remember the good ole’ Clinton days when all we had to worry about were cigars and stained dresses?) Thank God the end is near…
Porn Wars
I’ve been a little busy trying to tie together some old ideas with some new ideas. This image was going to be artwork for a comic book I started in 1994, but never finished. The back cover art would be on the right, so that when you fold the page in half, the image on the left would be the front cover. When I started my blog, I considered having “Brave Nude World” for a name, but apparently an “erotica” site already has it claimed. I hesitate to call it porn, now that Alberto Gulages is forming his Porn Squad. Anyways, I’ll be starting to incorporate stories into the mix of political snark here at Zencomix…
Miserable failure?
Yesterday, I had the distinct pleasure of enjoying a cup of TCBY yogurt on a beautiful sunny day, while sitting on the patio of a strip mall. Three young ladies pulled up and were on their way in to the yogurt store when I overheard one of them say, “If you Google ‘miserable failure‘ George Bush appears.” They went on and were soon out of my site. Admittedly, I chuckled to myself thinking the young girl’s statement was an expression of her frustration with the President, more than the possibility of it being factual.
Later, after hours of being completely saturated with the ever increasing bleak and daunting news for the day, I escaped to the more reliable internet for information. Testing the theory of the young lady near the ice cream place, I entered the words ‘miserable failure’ into the Google home page. Sure enough, the first hit turned out to be “The Biography of George W. Bush.” In fact, most of the results focused on the Keebler Elf himself, President George W. Bush! Our fearless leader who’s primary concern at a recent meeting of world leaders was his potty break! How will history judge this time period? It almost seems surreal…
SATURDAY – MARCH ON WASHINGTON – END THE WAR IN IRAQ!
Dear Readers,
Your humble guest blogger, Doug Drenkow, is bringing the following to you, verbatim from the United for Peace & Justice website, simply as a public service — coverage of a newsworthy and blogworthy event.
Personally, I fear that if we were to pull out of Iraq tomorrow, then we would be leaving behind a breeding and training ground for Al Qaeda, a new Afghanistan if you will (or even if you won’t) — for deadly example, at least some of the London subway bombers trained in the Sunni Triangle.
And that threat did not exist before Bush invaded Iraq (except in the minds of those brainwashed by Rove et al. into believing that Saddam Hussein had something to do with September 11th).
We’ve got a tiger by the tail. Lord, help us.
Regardless, blessed are the peacemakers…
Saturday, September 24
Massive March, Rally & Festival
The GOP Drowning in Their Own Hypocrisy
The problem with hypocrisy, other than those bothersome niceties of honesty and integrity, is that your words are betrayed by your actions.
Case in point: Last week, at long last, President Bush won some praise in many quarters, French and otherwise, for his having explicitly raised the problem of poverty, often race-based, as a big contributor to the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans before, during, and after Hurricane Katrina.
Bush told us in his prime-time audience: “We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action.”
“Finally!” we bleeding-heart types rejoiced, “The Right has gotten the message that we on the Left have been preaching — from street corners and weblogs to TV and DC, for as long as anyone alive can remember — that we’re all in the same boat together, whether on the swamp that had once been and would one day again be the Big Easy or aboard the ship of state sailing upon the currents of history. People helping people — Americans helping Americans — is what made this country great and would re-build the Gulf Coast to its former greatness. Government can be part of the solution, more than the problem, in rebuilding the zone of national disaster and in confronting the national disgrace of poverty.”
The Reagan Revolution, which had vexed us on the Left for the past quarter century, was making its final curtain call; a new New Deal would now be dealt.
But not so fast. It’s one thing to talk about working to end chronic poverty; it’s another thing entirely to pay for it…and the hundreds of billions of federal dollars that will be required so that the South, the deep South, will rise again.
Enough to make a grown fiscal conservative cry.
But tears or no, the bills will have to be paid: The Port and its City of New Orleans are the gateway to the agricultural and industrial heartland of our great nation.
As Bush himself said, “there is no way to imagine America without New Orleans…”
So where then will come the hundreds of billions of dollars required to rebuild?
The very next day, Bush offered his solution to this most daunting of problems: “It’s going to cost whatever it costs…But I’m confident we can handle it, and I’m confident we can handle our other priorities. It’s going to mean that we’re going to have to cut unnecessary spending.”
Putting aside for the moment that that wouldn’t even come close to freeing enough revenue to rebuild the Gulf Coast, we have to ask, wouldn’t these cuts fall hardest upon the very poorest, the very ones our Great Leader professed to the nation he would do everything to help (while protecting the tax cuts benefiting the richest, who would be most able to help)?
Hypocrisy, thy name is Bush.
And this call of the Lame Duck, echoed throughout the halls of the Capitol by the truest of Right Wing believers, is already a dead duck, shot down by the masses who’ve watched the horrors for our people here at home as intently as they’ve watched the horrors for our people overseas.
According to the latest Gallup poll, 54% of Americans believe we should cut our spending on Iraq to pay for our spending on the Gulf Coast; only 6% of Americans believe we should pay for the reconstruction by cutting domestic spending (Almost equal numbers, about 15 or 17%, believe we should pay for the rebuilding by deficit-spending or tax increases).
In effect, most Americans are following the lead of the Cindy Sheehans of this world; only a handful, the leadership of the President and his Grand Old Party.
And all the King’s horses, and all the King’s men (including overseer of reconstruction, none other than Karl Rove), could put the King’s reputation together again.
The Porn Squad
Looks like this administration is looking to turn back the clock once again, this time they are going after consenting adults and their vices.
Early last month, the bureau’s Washington Field Office began recruiting for a new anti-obscenity squad. Attached to the job posting was a July 29 Electronic Communication from FBI headquarters to all 56 field offices, describing the initiative as “one of the top priorities” of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and, by extension, of “the Director.” That would be FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III.The new squad will divert eight agents, a supervisor and assorted support staff to gather evidence against “manufacturers and purveyors” of pornography — not the kind exploiting children, but the kind that depicts, and is marketed to, consenting adults.
Dig it baby!
The Definition of "Rove"
political cartoons
Karl Rove
satire
A Most Unusual Job Application
September 2005
The United States Senate
The United States Capitol
Washington, DC
Dear Senators:
My name is John G. Roberts and I am a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. I understand that there are currently two openings on the United States Supreme Court that you are trying to fill. I would like to apply for the position of Chief Justice of the United States. Please allow me to tell you why and outline my qualifications, as detailed in my enclosed resume.
I believe that the most important qualification for becoming a Justice of the Supreme Court, and in particular Chief Justice of the United States, is sound judgment — the product of a brilliant mind applying principles of fair-mindedness to a thorough examination of all the evidence.
I hope and trust that you in the Senate, in your Constitutionally mandated role of providing “advice and consent”, will likewise apply sound judgment in considering my application for this position of great moment and consequence.
Just please don’t ask me about any of my opinions, passions, or prejudices; I just don’t have any. Really. I’m not an ideologue; I’m a…uh…um…
All that stuff I wrote for other people — you know, the legal opinions against abortion rights, civil rights, workers’ rights, consumers’ rights, defendants’ and prisoners’ rights, First Amendment rights, environmental protections, all that sort of stuff — I just did it for the money. I mean, it was just a job. Uh, what I mean to say is, I really think it was a honor working for two presidents and those big corporations and Right Wing interest groups; and everything they stood for was great and all. But just don’t think I really meant any of those things I wrote for them. I did everything I could to get to work for them, but I really didn’t want to work for them. I’m not saying they put a gun to my head to write those things; but who would write such things, you know?
And anyway, I was just a dumb kid back then. I’m much more mature now. Just listen to how I tell you only what you want to hear, or double-talk, or nothing at all. Now that I’m older and wiser, I know how to play the game…so I can wind-up umpiring the games. It is a game, isn’t it?
I mean, if you knew what I really believed and how I really thought, well…
Just please don’t ask me what I really believe or how I really think about anything in particular…at least anything in the last half century: I mean, that might actually give you a hint about how I’d rule on something. That wouldn’t be fair now, would it? That Brown v. Board of Education thing was a good decision — “separate” isn’t “equal” with segregated classrooms — just pay no attention to my writing on behalf of the Reagan Administration in opposition to the strengthening of the Voting Rights Act that you can’t strike down laws just because the effect is discriminatory; you have to prove intent (yeah, like that’s gonna happen, uh…). Hey, I respect the right to privacy — well, in some cases, but let’s not get down to cases — so how’s about respecting mine? I promise not to bring any of my personal baggage to the bench. Really I do.
I mean, what has “justice” got to do with any of the personal and political peccadilloes that make each of us unique human beings? Why, when you think about it like that, you could get a supercomputer to do this job.
Uh, just kidding.
But seriously, Sen’s, just take a look at my work history as a judge: A full (well, almost full) three years on the Appellate Bench and ah, um, uh…it was a LONG three years (well, almost three). There was that french fry thing. And the toad.
I’m sure I could do a real good job for the rest of my life. And yours. And your kids. And your grandkids. And…
And I promise to take those goofy looking stripes off the sleeves of the robes. Maybe go with a paisley motif or something.
In any case, I’m confident that after you think it all over, you’ll come to the inescapable conclusion that of some 300 million Americans, I’m the very best man, er, person for the job.
Don’t forget, that’s the opinion of my top professional reference, President George W. Bush. And if anyone is a good judge of good judgment it’s President Bush: Why, just look at all that his sound judgment has done for Iraq, New Orleans, the environment, the budget, the price of gas, the…
Uh, maybe you’d just better look at my resume. It’s got a nice font. Not too conservative. I mean, if you like conservative fonts it is pretty darn conservative; but…um, if you don’t like conservative fonts it’s…uh…
You say potato; I say uh, no Roe. Let’s call the whole thing off.
Respectfully yours,
Judge John G. Roberts
P.S. Whatever you do, don’t click here — it’ll take you to a webpage where, with just one click, anybody can send a personalized message to each of their senators and, if they’d like, a letter to the editor of their nearest newspaper opposing my confirmation as Chief Justice. And I’m too charming (and cagey) to go the way of Robert Bork. Aren’t I?
Donate to CFLF
Blogroll
Pennsylvania Blogs
The Liberal Media
Blogging Liberally
Advertising
Comments From Left Field is a member of...
Memeorandum
Archives
- 2010: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2009: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2008: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2007: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2006: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2005: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2004: J F M A M J J A S O N D
- 2003: J F M A M J J A S O N D
Blog Stuff
