It's Joe Wilson's Habit

Apparently, Joe Wilson makes it a habit to label truths he doesn't like lies.

On C-SPAN, Talk of War Gets Awfully Belligerent

Facts can be such difficult things.

Donate to Wilson's Democratic opponent here: Rob Miller for Congress Because revenge really is the best revenge.

Summary only...

Pastor Asks God to Give President Brain Cancer

(h/t SANFU-ed)

Summary only...

Ron Paul, Representing the Lunatic Fringe

Ron Paul has become the latest darling of the pajama media and generated what appears to be a true grassroots following. Accounting for this are some of his atypical-for-a-Republican positions on front-line issues. The popularity of his opposition to the war policies of the Despicable Cretin, his activist support for personal privacy (including opposition to the Patriot Act and the national ID card), his supposedly "principled" defense of Constitutional limits, and his in-your-face attacks on the intellectual inconsistency of his fellow Republican candidates, have given him the 2008 "straight-talk" mantle.

But Ron Paul's attractiveness is only skin-deep. Unfortunately, for a significant portion of voters, skin-deep is as far as they go. A closer look at some of his other positions, especially on social issues, reveals a different and, frankly, disturbing picture of the candidate.

Ron Paul not only opposes the right to choose, but he opposes any federal support for family planning, including counseling, sex education, and contraceptive advice or support.

And, of course, Paul wants Roe v Wade overturned. While Paul likes to promote himself as a defender of personal privacy and liberty, he ignores the privacy and liberty issues at the heart of the abortion issue and the Roe v. Wade decision -- his support for personal liberty and privacy only extends to liberty and privacy invoked in favor of those portions of the christian mythology he has adopted. In other words -- In Ron Paul's America, your personal privacy and liberty choices are protectible to the extent that they happen to coincide with Paul's personal choices.

As with a women's right to control her own body, Paul's concept of personal liberty also requires that your civil liberties stop at his personal gag factor. Ron Paul opposes equal rights for gays. And, of course, if Ron Paul is personally opposed to queers getting married, his so-called "principled" defense of the Constitution becomes irrelevant. Thus, despite his precious Constitution clearly requiring all States to honor give "full faith and credit" to the laws of their sister States, Paul favors abandoning that provision when he and his personal mythology doesn't like what they have done.

The full faith and credit clause is what allows you to drive in New Jersey with your Pennsylvania license; it is what permits you to live as husband and wife in New York, although you got married in Florida; it is what allows you to collect a judgment against a company in Iowa issued by a Delaware court. But that same clause, Paul insists, can't be used to "force" bigots like him to recognize gay marriages because, well, because he doesn't want to. Paul supports the Defense of Marriage Act and wants to strip the federal courts of their power to apply the federal Constitution to state laws on such matters. Indeed, Paul wants to deny the federal courts the power to decide all First Amendment controversies.

Paul opposes stem-cell research because, he says, that taxpayers shouldn't have to fund projects that they find "ethically abhorrent". I haven't found "ethically abhorrent" in my copy of the Constitution. But, if that were the test, well, then, I find faith-based government programs "ethically abhorrent", I find prayer "ethically abhorrent", as well as tax-relief for churches. I know, I am in the minority. But, so are the people that find stem-cell research "ethically abhorrent". Paul's argument is just cover for his desire to impose his personal set of values, his christian mythology, on the rest of us.

Paul wants to drill for oil in ANWR and everywhere else he can. His excuse -- to reduce our dependence on Middle-Eastern oil. But, that important "principle" stops at the economic interests of corporate America, as Paul opposes strict fuel economy standards.

Ron Paul wants a christian nation, and he is willing to lie about the Constitution to convince you. Among the false statements in his little tome on christianity is that the United States Constitution is "replete with references to God". Umm, no it isn't. In fact, the word "god" appears no where in the text. Either Ron Paul doesn't know that -- which puts the lie to his pretense of advocacy for the Constitution -- or he does -- which puts the lie to him. Either way . . . .

But what would you expect from someone who says that "a separation of church and state has no historical or constitutional basis", or a guy who wants to teach creationism in public schools?

Ron Paul comes from the lunatic fringe of American society. When he speaks of his "principles", he means his dogma. When he advocates for freedom and personal liberty -- he means just as long as it is consistent with his brand of christian mythology.

Paul also has a questionable history on race issues (and much has been made of the level of support which he enjoys from the white supremacy crowd). In 1996, the Houston Chronicle questioned him and his staff about comments Paul made in his newsletters in 1988 and 1992. At the time, neither Paul nor his staff disowned the comments. Instead, according to the article, Paul tried to explain some of them away, "saying his written commentaries about blacks came in the context of 'current events and statistical reports of the time.'"

Here, according to the Chronicle, are some of Paul's written statements based on those "current events and statistical reports":

“[O]nly about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions"

"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

"If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

[W]e are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

And they called Mike Gravel loony?

Fortunately, ideologues like this guy don't go away and he'll be around to siphon scarce Republican money, likely through the convention. Hopefully, he'll then run third-party and continue to help the Democrats.

Summary only...

Lessons From The Past

With nothing better to do, I spent some time yesterday re-reading the convention acceptance speeches of some Presidential nominees. I'll match the snippets to the candidates below the fold . . . .

Candidate One:

"To Americans of every party I pledge that on Jan. 20 next year our government will again have a cabinet of the ablest men and women to be found in America. The members of that Cabinet will expect and will receive full delegation of the powers of their office. They will be capable of administering those powers. They will each be experienced in the task to be done and young enough to do it. This election will bring an end to one-man government in America. . . .

"The present administration in Washington . . . is at war with Congress, and at war with itself. Squabbles between Cabinet members, feuds between rival bureaucrats and bitterness between the President and his own party members, in and out of Congress, have become the order of the day. In ... vital matters ..., we have become familiar with the spectacle of wrangling, bungling and confusion.

"Does anyone suggest that the present national administration is giving either efficient or competent government? We have not heard that claim made, even by its most fanatical supporters. No, all they tell us is that in its young days it did some good things. That we freely grant. But now it has grown old in office. It has become tired and quarrelsome."


Candidate Two:

"Now, we Americans understand freedom. We have earned it, we have lived for it, and we have died for it. This Nation and its people are freedom's model in a searching world. We can be freedom's missionaries in a doubting world. But, ladies and gentlemen, first we must renew freedom's mission in our own hearts and in our own homes.

"[T]he administration which we shall replace has distorted and lost that faith. It has talked and talked and talked and talked the words of freedom. Now, failures . . . . haunt the houses of our once great alliances and undermine the greatest bulwark ever erected by free nations - the NATO community. Failures proclaim lost leadership, obscure purpose, weakening wills, and the risk of inciting our sworn enemies to new aggressions and to new excesses. Because of this administration we are tonight a world divided - we are a Nation becalmed. We have lost the brisk pace of diversity and the genius of individual creativity. We are plodding at a pace set by centralized planning, red tape, rules without responsibility, and regimentation without recourse....

"Rather than moral leadership, [we] have been given bread and circuses, spectacles, and, yes, they have even been given scandals. Tonight there is . . . corruption in our highest offices, aimlessness among our youth, anxiety among our elders and there is a virtual despair among the many who look beyond material success for the inner meaning of their lives. Where examples of morality should be set, the opposite is seen. Small men, seeking great wealth or power, have too often and too long turned even the highest levels of public service into mere personal opportunity.

"Now, certainly, simple honesty is not too much to demand of men in government."


Candidate Three:

"America cries out for the unity that this Administration has destroyed. . . . America is in trouble today not because her people have failed but because her leaders have failed. And what America needs are leaders to match the greatness of her people. . . .

"When the strongest nation in the world can be tied down for four years in a war . . . with no end in sight; When the richest nation in the world can't manage its own economy; When the nation with the greatest tradition of the rule of law is plagued by unprecedented lawlessness; . . .

"And when the President of the United States cannot travel abroad or to any major city at home without fear of a hostile demonstration -- then it's time for new leadership for the United States of America."


As you might have surmised, they are all Republicans.

Candidate One: Thomas Dewey, railing against Roosevelt and his three terms in office, at the Republican Convention in Chicago, on June 28, 1944.

Candidate Two: Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican Convention in San Fransisco (of all places).

Candidate Three: Richard Nixon, accepting the 1968 nomination in Miami.

Summary only...

Hillary, meet Hillary

Continuing our lazy-ass ways, here's another video.



(A bite 'o the hoagie to Media Lizzy)

Summary only...

A Plea for Humanity

Speaking of Hitler,which some would say that the Bush family is well-equipped to do, . . .

"Greed has poisoned men’s souls - has barricaded the world with hate - has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed." -- Charlie Chaplain, "The Great Dictator" (1940)

Summary only...

That's the Way it Works Here, Kids

Hey, thanks for checking in.

After an extended absence from the keyboard, we're hopeful that, with a little more fiber in the old diet, we'll be much more regular again.

First on the radar screen is an old story, an old story line, and just a little bit 'o irony.

For the old story, Louis "I am not a crook" DeNaples' handed out over a million bucks to Rendel and Mellow and their friends and PACs, and those purchases, err, donations, seem to have paid off. His Mount Airy Casino opens to the public on Monday and, for the time-being at least, he'll not have a grand jury probe whispering behind his back -- thanks to the peculiar brand of political justice seemingly available to every well-connected bag 'o bucks in the good old Commonwealth.

No sooner had the intrepid gambling board given Denaples the green light, notwithstanding his felony fraud conviction and "oft-denied" mob-connections, two independent probes were launched. The federal probe cost the job of a US Attorney who's office was involved into the probe of DeNaples' mob-ties, despite the fact the the US Attorney had given a secret letter of recommendation attesting to his old pal Louis' integrity.

Earlier this month, Pennsylvania Supreme Court "Justice", Ron Castille, secretly granted DeNaples' request that the grand jury be put on ice. Predictably, the secret got out and, omigosh, it was a snafu, never meant it to be a secret . . . yeah, well.

And here's the old story line . . . . The Denaples petition is an unusual one. Under the rules of the Pa Supreme Court, it is referred to a single "Justice" for decision. The "Justice" responsible for receiving those petitions rotates periodically. The DeNaples petition got to Castille's desk just as he rotated into the assignment.

Coincidence? Well, kids, this is Pennsylvania, remember? This story can't be just one slight, ru n of the mill coincidence; nope, here it has got to be a stunning, credulity-stretching, mudda of a coincidence.

The DeNaples petition was drafted and signed by his lawyer, Richard Sprague. And here comes your mudda of a coincidence -- turns out that Dick Sprague's law school roommate was (alleged) "Justice" Ron Castille. (Seems that the only one in the state who noticed that little bit of coincidence was John Baer. Thankfully, there still are a few good journalists around the state.)

Welcome to Pennsylvania.

Oh, the irony I promised?

Guess who got an invite the other day to the Mount Airy private run-through opening tonight?

I was as shocked as anyone. I've never used a slot machine before, but knowing that it is all going to charity and none to Louis "alleged" DeNaples, well, that's just sweet coincidence.

UPDATE:

A tip 'o the hoagie to John Micek for the lead on this one:

"This is Pennsylvania. Things of this nature don't happen in Pennsylvania except because of deals and corruption . . . . This is like putting out a sign to legitimate business people at the borders of Pennsylvania saying better pay up before you come to do business in pennsylvania. That's not the kind of reputation we need." -- PA State Senator --Jeff Piccola(10/21/07) on how Louis “Alleged” DeNaples got his slots parlor.

Summary only...

NYC Police Allegedly Brutalize Brutality Lawyer Trying to Stop Police Brutality

Can you say "ironic"?

The New York City police department, once headed by Rudy friend, Bernie Kerik, is now being run by the same guy who trampled the civil rights of protesters during the 2004 Repug Convention in New York City and created his "own little Guantanamo on the Hudson" to detain the protesters.

Considering the leadership of those two, it isn't surprising the the NYC police feel entirely at ease in beating the crap out of a prone, handcuffed black man in full view, and then wailing on a civil rights lawyer who objects.

Welcome to the New Order.

From a June 25, 2007 New York Newsday account:

"City and state officials are denouncing the arrests of a civil rights attorney and his wife after the couple intervened when, they said, police beat a handcuffed teen in central Brooklyn. Protesters returned to a police station yesterday to rally against the arrests and alleged brutality.

"Michael Warren, who once represented Tupac Shakur and the teens charged in the Central Park jogger case, and his wife, Evelyn, said a police supervisor also beat them Thursday after kicking the subdued teen during his arrest on suspicion of car theft.

"'They tackled him to the ground,' Warren told reporters yesterday at a news conference outside City Hall. 'They handcuffed him right away. He was not a threat.'

"The couple said that six officers beat the teen "like a rag doll." A sergeant turned on the couple when they stopped their car to ask police what they were doing, Warren said. He then arrested the couple."

Warren told the media that when he and his wife (who is also an attorney) were told to return to their car, they did. The police attacked Warren, they both say (and the police have not denied this), after Warren began -- from inside his car -- taking down the license plate numbers of the police vehicles on the scene.

You can barely make out the bruise on Warren's face, and the swelling of his wife's face, on this video. One NYC Council member has called for an investigation, and for the arrest of the officer who arrested Warren and his wife.

(Of course, the "liberally-biased" NYTimes apparently never covered the story.)

Also last month, New York's finest rounded up hundreds of the "usual suspects" at the annual Puerto Rico Day parade in New York on charges of -- get this -- illegal assembly (they were at a parade). City officials said they were gang members, but civil rights protesters accused the cops of being heavy handed and using racial profiling at the event.

Summary only...

Tu Quoque? Too Cute.

Unable to defend the Despicable Cretin's pardon of His Grey Eminence's henchman, the Sliver -- repugs still supporting the crime family in the White House -- opt instead for (here's a surprise) misdirection. Within hours of the act, the repugs had crafted their non-response to the expected outrage -- Bill Clinton.

O. Them repugs is a clever gang. But maybe a mite too clever -- they want to force the Dems to defend the Clinton pardons as a quid pro quo for looking into the Libby pardon.

But there are serious problems with the Sliver's Defend-by-Deflection strategy: 1. In 2001, many Dems (like Henry Waxman, Chuck Schumer, and Barney Frank) were vocal in their disapproval of Clinton's last-minute pardon spree (and Democrats defending the former President were difficult to locate); 2. The repug strategy reminds us that, unlike the Despicable Cretin, Clinton waived executive privilege and encouraged his advisers to testify candidly; and 3. Whether Bush acted properly is unaffected by whether Clinton did.

The pardon power is Constitutional and Congress has no role in the process (a matter specifically debated in 1787). But, it is entirely appropriate that Congress look at whether there was improper motivation at work in the pardon issuance. Did, as it appears to many, the Despicable Cretin save Scooter from parking his ass in jail for a single day in order to prevent Libby from offering the Prosecution a last-minute recollection as a bargaining chip? Today, Adam Liptak, lawyer cum reporter for the New York Times, offers a front-page examination of the Bush pardon history which provides some objective indication of the answer which seems mighty obvious from this corner.

Divining motive is not something done by looking into the eyes to read a soul -- as our Despicable Cretin should have learned by now. Absent a confession, it needs to be inferred from the circumstances. Beyond those most obvious here -- that our D.C. ignored existing policy and procedure in making the decision to protect Libby, that Libby didn't qualify for the save, that Libby was literally on the eve of moving into a new home, that the pardon was granted without the usual consultation with the Department of Justice, that a Libby change of heart, or improved memory, would have been embarrassing, at least, or dangerous, at more, for the Grey Eminence -- the relevant evidence would be a review of how the D.C.'s actions might have departed from the D.C.'s prior conduct and statements on the issue -- when he wasn't involved in what some see as an attempt to obstruct justice by protecting an underling potentially capable of implicating the D.C. himself.

And that's just what Liptak undertook. His report offers a careful review of Bush's pardon (and, okay, commutation) record from his years as Governor of Texas, as well as Bush's own writings and statements on the subject. As President, we learn that Bush has granted only 1 out of every 1,000 commutation requests made through the Office of the Pardon Attorney.

We learn that, until the Scooter problem, the D.C. refused to consider such applications absent affirmative answers to two questions: 1. Is there considerable doubt about the guilt of the applicant? and 2. Has the applicant exhausted all legal appeals? We know this because the D.C. hisself wrote in his 1999 memoir, "A Charge to Keep":

“In every case . . . . I would ask: Is there any doubt about this individual’s guilt or innocence? And, have the courts had ample opportunity to review all the legal issues in this case?”

The 2008 edition will no doubt have an asterisk. Bush, and just about everyone else, harbor's no delusion about Libby's guilt and the D.C. hisself pretermitted the first appeal on the commuted sentence. Liptak spoke with a Texas lawyer and professor familiar with Bush's gubernatorial record on such things. The prevailing view, we learn, is that the Libby decision represented not only a change, but a radical departure in Bush's documented, long-standing approach to the clemency power:

"As governor, Bush essentially viewed the clemency power as limited to cases of demonstrable actual innocence," said Jordan M. Steiker, a law professor at the University of Texas . . . ., "The exercise of the commutation power in Libby . . . represents a dramatic shift from his attitude toward clemency in Texas, and it is entirely inconsistent with his longstanding, very limited approach."

Congress has justifiably asked the D.C. to explain this "dramatic shift" and decisions which is "entirely inconsistent with his longstanding, very limited approach." Those factors examined by the Liptak report, together with the departure from precedent, combined with the D.C.'s failure to follow Bill Clinton's example and to, instead, take the Presidential equivalent of the fifth (as he most certainly will do), should tell us all we need to know about whether the motive was legitimate or dishonorable.

Update: John Conyers later this am, from The Hill-- "House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) urged President Bush Sunday to waive executive privilege and let his lawyers testify in Congress on the commutation of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s prison sentence.

“We’re asking him to waive executive privilege and allow his pardon lawyers or other experts, whom it appears he did not consult, explain this in a little more detail,” Conyers said. The lawmaker has scheduled a committee hearing for Wednesday to look into presidential powers with regard to pardons and commuting sentences.

With regard to Libby, Conyers said on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” that “the suspicion was that if Mr. Libby went to prison, he might further implicate other people in the White House.

“This is why we’ve written the president, inviting him to do what President Clinton did, and namely to bring forward any of his pardon lawyers or anyone that can put a clear light on this and put this kind of feeling, that is fairly general, to rest,” he added."

Summary only...

Happy Birthday America -- Today Marks the 231st Year of Independence

That's correct, folks. For those of you not history majors (or my children, who had to listen to the story every year for the last 20+) -- Congress did NOT declare the colonies free and independent states on July 4, 1776. The resolution declaring independence was adopted without dissent on July 2, 1776. (The vote was 12-0, New York abstained, courteously, whilst awaiting instructions.)

Richard Lee and John Adams arrived at the Continental Congress prepared to argue for independence, fully aware that those sentiments may not be entirely embraced by the gathering.

In early June, Lee proposed a resolution severing colonial ties to the British: "Resolved: That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved." Adams seconded it.

Debate on the Resolution revealed a majority in favor, but a significant number of the colonies yet unsure or lacking appropriate instructions on independence. Congress was adjourned to allow time for the representatives to obtain instructions from their colonies and for lobbying.

In the meantime, anticipating adoption of the Lee resolution, a committee was conscripted to draft the argument for independence and the justification for what was, clearly, a treasonous and seditious act. In short, they were assigned to draft the Nation's first talking points memo.

Appointed were John Adams, Roger Sherman, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Livingston, and Thomas Jefferson. Franklin, concerned that Adams was a little too much the aggressive litigator, suggested that Jefferson put together a draft. The committee unanimously appointed Jefferson the scrivener. He produced a rough draft but first met with Adams and Franklin for their input. They made some changes to the document before it was sent to the committee, which approved it without further change.

Congress reconvened on July 1, 1776 and the Lee Resolution was adopted July 2, 1776.

It is thus on the Second of July, 1776 that the Colonies Declared themselves Free and Independent States. Adams famously wrote home how the date would be celebrated through history with picnics and fireworks:

The Second Day of July 1776 will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America. . . . It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires, and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more.

Immediately after adopting the Lee resolution and declaring independence from England, the Congress took up the Committee report. They reviewed, debated, and revised it in sessions on July 2, 3 and 4th. On the morning of the 4th, they adopted the Declaration of Independence.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

It was sent to the printer the following day and the first signatures were affixed in August, 1776, when most member of Congress were present to sign the document. But the last signature would not be affixed for over five years.

So, you all go off and enjoy the Fourth. I'll be raising my glass(es) to Jefferson, Lee, Adams, Franklin and the rest of the gang today. (All this and more at the National Archives.)

(Dear reader with the long memory, you have heard this before and, if we are both around, will hear it again next July 2. You see, my children, who suffered a similar repetitve fate, are no longer at the breakfast table. It is not the same, but you'll do . . . .)

Summary only...

Oh, When You Put it THAT Way

. . . . it's still bullshit.

When a politician says something incredibly stupid, offensive and just plain ugly, they have three choices. They can deny saying it, they can claim it was taken out of context, or they can apologize, profusely. Two of those three alternatives assure that their absurd comment will continue to live on and that their reputation for candor will take a hit.

Arkansas Republican chief Dennis Milligan doesn't get it. The other day he said that, to reverse GOP fortunes, "what we need" is another 9/11 attack. We asked him about it and, well, he didn't take door number three.

We contacted the Arkansas Republican Party and asked about their new leader's comment:

"I [ABFS] am wondering if Mr. Milligan's statement, that 'we need some attacks on American soil like we had on [9/11', is something that the Arkansas GOP would like to reject or if they are endorsing their new leader's 'strategy' for a return to GOP dominance?"

Bill Smith, editor of the official Arkansas Republican Party Blog, was kind enough to talk to Mr. Milligan and get back to us with the official Arkansas Repug position:

"Dear Big Flat Slob (what a pseudonym and blog photo){yeah, we get that a lot}, We talked with Mr. Milligan. It appears the referenced comment was taken out of context by the writer of the article. Milligan was trying to express his support both for the President, as commander-in-chief, and for the support for the troops. He made the remark trying to highlight this support for the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform fighting overseas in response to our government (including Congress) decision to do so!"

It was taken out of context? In what possible context could "all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001]" be okay?

Mr. Milligan, what you said was stupid and offensive. Instead of blaming the reporter, take responsibility. Oh, I know that George Bush has never taken responsibility for any of the stupid things he's said, or, worse, done, but modeling yourself after a politician who has lost the support of every sane person in America is not a prescription for success.

(We have invited the reporter who wrote the article to respond to Mr. Milligan's claim that the report was misleading.)

(By the way, we are still waiting for the Huckabee campaign to respond to our similar request for comment on Mr. Milligan's desire for another attack.)

Summary only...

GOP Leader Hoping for More 9/11-Type Attacks

This is the perverse mindset encouraged by this current cabal of criminals.

The new head of the Republican Party in Arkansas is Dennis Milligan. Unanimously selected at the end of May, Milligan appears to be one hell of a strategist. His big idea for a return to Republican dominance in national affairs?

Hope for another 9/11.

Milligan sat down for an interview with the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, where he shared his strategy: "At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001 ], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country."

As stunningly vapid as that comment was, what struck your agape correspondent at least as much was that the reporter and editors saw nothing remarkable about Milligan's hope for another massacre on American soil -- they stuck his prescription for GOP success at the end of the article.

Imagine, just guess, what the reaction would be if, in response to Blitzer's insipid question at the Dem debate last night -- doesn't Bush get credit for us not having another 9/11 -- someone said something, anything, even remotely similar to the GOP's Arkansas Chair . . . .

We've asked former Arkansas Governor and Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee to comment on Milligan's desire to see thousands more Americans dead for the sake of a GOP victory. But we're not holding our breath for the reply.....

(h/t to Phillybits)

Summary only...

In Hell

Burning, if there's a just god.

“Grown men should not be having sex with prostitutes unless they are married to them”

“I had a student ask me, "Could the savior you believe in save Osama bin Laden?" Of course, we know the blood of Jesus Christ can save him, and then he must be executed”

“Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions”

“AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals”

“Billy Graham is the chief servant of Satan in America”

“The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country”

“If you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being”

“Textbooks are Soviet propaganda”

“The ACLU is to Christians what the American Nazi party is to Jews”

“It appears that America's anti-Biblical feminist movement is at last dying, thank God, and is possibly being replaced by a Christ-centered men's movement which may become the foundation for a desperately needed national spiritual awakening”

More, if you can stomach it . . .

“The whole (global warming) thing is created to destroy America's free enterprise system and our economic stability”

“Homosexuality is Satan's diabolical attack upon the family that will not only have a corrupting influence upon our next generation, but it will also bring down the wrath of God upon America.”

“I do not believe we can blame genetics for adultery, homosexuality, dishonesty and other character flaws”

“[Homosexuals are] brute beasts...part of a vile and satanic system [that] will be utterly annihilated, and there will be a celebration in heaven.”

"I believe that global warming is a myth. And so, therefore, I have no conscience problems at all and I'm going to buy a Suburban next time."

“I listen to feminists and all these radical gals - most of them are failures. They’ve blown it. Some of them have been married, but they married some Casper Milquetoast who asked permission to go to the bathroom. These women just need a man in the house. That’s all they need. Most of the feminists need a man to tell them what time of day it is and to lead them home. And they blew it and they’re mad at all men. Feminists hate men. They’re sexist. They hate men - that’s their problem.”


(h\t ThinkExist)

Summary only...

Weasel Words

Thanks to Think Progress:

George W. Bush, 4/9/99, Houston Chronicle:

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”

And on the specific need for a timetable:

George W. Bush, 6/5/99, Scripps Howard/Seattle Post-Intelligencer:

“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”

(Image Credit: davidstuff.com via Truthdig)

Summary only...

Tommy, Tommy, Tommy

Writing his political epithet, Tommy Thompson today told an audience at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism in Washington D.C., that,

"I'm in the private sector and for the first time in my life I'm earning money. You know that's sort of part of the Jewish tradition and I do not find anything wrong with that."

But, ma, it's okay because he immediately realized how that sounded and fixed it all up by telling the audience:

"I just want to clarify something because I didn't [by] any means want to infer or imply anything about Jews and finances and things," he said. "What I was referring to, ladies and gentlemen, is the accomplishments of the Jewish religion. You've been outstanding business people and I compliment you for that."

Yeah, that's better.

Later in the day, he was treated and released for the foot wound. The treatment was complicated because, after injuring the foot, it mysteriously became lodged in his mouth. He had to communicate with the doctors by talking through his ass.

Say "Goodnight", Tommy.

Further reading:

Shmuel Rosner (Haaretz): Friendly advice to American candidates trying to woo the Jewish vote
Wonkette: Tommy Thompson: 'Nothing Wrong With Money-Loving Jews!'
The Moderate Voice: Campaign Promise: Cashew Chicken on Every Plate
Salon War Room: Not that there's anything wrong with that
The Volokh Conspiracy: Jewish Tradition
Huffington Post: '08 Candidate Tommy Thompson: "Earning Money...A Part Of The Jewish Tradition"
Rum, Romanism and Rebellion: Thompson Steps in Macaca
Spot of Bother: The Jewish tradition
Evergreen Politics: Tommy Thompson Loses the Jewish Vote
Unlikely Words: Anti-semite? Or just an idiot?
Matthew Yglesias: Tommy Thompson
The Plank: Oh, and Al and Jesse, You've Got Great Rhythm
Cheese-O-Sphere: Tommy can't figure out how to speak to American Jews
JTA: Candidate: Making money part of Jewish tradition
HorsesAss.org: Republicans court the Jewish vote
Mike the Mad Biologist: My Hook Nose Is Swelling With Pride
Too saucy: Oy Gevalt
Political Wire: Thompson Flubs Talk Before Jewish Group
Swampland: Oy.
Is That Legal: Tommy Thompson's Joe Biden Moment
Atrios: Tommy!
Think Progress: Thompson: Jews have a ‘tradition’ of ‘earning money.’
archy: Where have these people been for the last 40 years?



(Photo Credit: MSNBC/Newsweek via William Wolfram)

Summary only...

Why the Republicans are Screwed

Just an example.

Take this quote from one of their leading candidates:

"Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."

Rudy Giuliani, while Mayor of New York. (Also reported in the WaPo.)

Oh, Rudy, PLEASE run.


(Photo Credit: Chris Hondros, Getty Images, via USA Today)

NOTE:

WE ARE MOVING!!! For now, the old Blogger address will bring you to the new location -- but that can change at any time. Please update your Blogroll, Links, and Bookmarks NOW:

www.abigfatslob.com

Click Here to Blogroll A Big Fat Slob!

Summary only...

Global Warming Already Affecting Daily Life

The harmful effects of global warming on daily life are already showing up, and within a couple of decades hundreds of millions of people will not have enough water, top scientists will say next month at a meeting in Belgium.

Int'l Herald Tribune, 3/11/2007.

NOTE:

WE ARE MOVING!!! For now, the old Blogger address will bring you to the new location -- but that can change at any time. Please update your Blogroll, Links, and Bookmarks NOW:

www.abigfatslob.com

Click Here to Blogroll A Big Fat Slob!

Summary only...

Rudy's Insufferable Self-Promotion

Those who have suffered through Giuliani's tedious tenure in New York City, beginning with his appointment as US Attorney for the Southern District of New York (Manhattan), are all too familiar with his overwhelming concern with his personal promotion and image, and lack of care and ability at actual administration.

While US Attorney, criminal defense lawyers there will tell you, he routinely held up indictments, sometimes for months, until he could find time in his busy schedule of self-promotion, for a press conference announcing the indictment. This grand-standing served no legitimate prosecutorial purpose, and was, in itself, a cruel treatment of defendants, left in limbo and delayed in the ultimate clearing of their names (take a look back at the Giuliani indictments of the Wall Street arbs during his rein, and compare that to the jury verdicts he secured -- you'll be surprised at the ineffectiveness of his administration).

His relentless pursuit of press coverage didn't stop when he became Mayor, nor with 9/11. Remember that he asked for an extension of his last term in office? The Giuliani legend was so strong in his own mind that, in the 9/11 aftermath, he couldn't conceive of anyone else running the City, nor of anyone wanting anyone else to run it.

In biting words, Al Sharpton and others called him on it:

Al Sharpton slammed Mayor Giuliani for hogging too much credit for uniting the city, saying "Bozo" could have done as much. Two days after Green and Republican Michael Bloomberg accepted, and Ferrer rejected,Giuliani's pitch for a three-month term-extension, Sharpton - a major Ferrer booster - sharply criticized Giuliani for trying to stretch his term. "We elected you mayor, not Messiah," Sharpton said at his Harlem headquarters during a rally attended by Ferrer. "You didn't bring us together, our pain brought us together and our decency brought us together," Sharpton said. He added, "We would have come together if Bozo was the mayor."

Run, Rudy, Run.


(Photo Credit: Richard B. Levine, Newsweek)

Summary only...

Sadly, This Didn't Surprise Me

Washington, DC — Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. . . . “In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology,” stated PEER [Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility] Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is ‘no comment.’”

The report goes on to discuss that, after rejecting dozens of scholarly scientific books and articles for sale at the Grand Canyon National Park, the sole new item approved for sale was a book claiming that the Grand Canyon was suddenly cut out into the earth by Noah's flood.

(h/t to A Spork in the Drawer)

Summary only...

Protest Rally at Caltagirone Office Tuesday

As you have likely heard by now, Democratic Representative Tom Caltagirone of Berks County has announced his intention to support Republican John Perzel for the position of Speaker of the House. His own statement confirms that this is the result of a deal he cut with Perzel.

In the midterms, the voters in Pennsylvania opted for a change in direction, and gave the Democrats a one-vote majority in the state House. Caltagirone is, in the words of State Dem Chair Rooney, a "power-hungry politician", leveraging his deciding vote in order "to feather his own nest by selling out the party".

On Tuesday, the State Democratic Party is planning a protest rally at Caltagirone's office in Reading, at 3 pm. His office is located at 645 Penn Street in Reading. (The timing is curious -- it is after the reconvening of the House on Tuesday, when the vote will take place, and Caltagirone will presumably be in Harrisburg on Tuesday.)

If you cannot attend the rally, (or even if you can) email Caltigrone at tcaltagi@pahouse.net.

Caltagirone, you might recall, was minority leader when Hazleton's Tom Stish switched parties (from D to R) to deprive Caltagirone of the majority leader position. Stish was thrown out of office in the very next election.

His contact info:
Hon. Thomas R. Caltagirone
645 Penn Street, 2nd Floor
Reading, PA 19601
(610) 376-1529
Fax: (610) 378-4406

Hon. Thomas R. Caltagirone
Room 106 Irvis Office Building
PO Box 202127
Harrisburg, PA 17120-2127
(717) 787-3525
Fax: (717) 772-5401

{Ed note: In their rush to get the email out, the State Dems misspelled Caltagirone's name as Caltigirone. I picked up the same error and have now fixed it in my post.}

{UPDATE: Demonstrating the ineptness and sloppiness endemic to the State Democratic Party, and no doubt not a little responsible for the difficulty in holding power, it seems, subsequent to the email that I received from the Party, on which this post was premised, they issued a revised release in which they corrected the spelling of Caltagrinone's name and changed the rally date.

The rally was changed from the original Tuesday to Monday, the 1st. Unfortunately, the change came too late for me to change the blog entry and misdirect both readers (actually, that particular entry received numerous hits). No doubt thanks in part to the Democratic screw-up in the email notice, the rally attracted only about 50 people (most of whom apparently had been planning the trip for unrelated purposes anyway).

Nice going, TJ.}

Summary only...