Edward _

Alito: Designer of Our Return to Monarchy

by

by Edward_

I was thinking today as I read an anti-Roe advertisement in the Times that the battle over abortion is like the war against drugs…a farcical bit of theater that does very little to address the supposed moral issues involved and ultimately only serves to punish the poor. As this connection became clearer to me, I realized that I have been totally off-base about what I had assumed was the true danger behind Alito being confirmed for SCOTUS. Circuses like "the war on drugs" and abortion battles don’t occupy the minds of the most powerful people in the world, not once the cameras are turned off anyway. And despite his rallying cry to the anti-Roe crowds that they "will prevail," it struck me that Bush’s keen interest in Alito has nothing to do with whether or not only those who can afford a plane ticket to New York or Europe (if it comes to that) will be able to get an abortion in this country. It couldn’t.

So what then? What was driving his support for this choice that he knows will further divide the nation? I had no idea.

Andrew Sullivan has some idea, however. In a column outlining the extraordinary use of "signing statements" by President Bush ("In eight years, Ronald Reagan used signing statements to challenge 71 legislative provisions, and Bill Clinton 105. […] In five years, President Bush has already challenged up to 500 provisions…."), he illustrates why Bush has never bothered to veto a single bill during his presidency. He doesn’t need to:

Read more

OMG…They’re Coming For Us Where We Live Now!

by

Long-time readers may recall my painful confession from many moons ago that I am terrified of whales. I don’t know why, it’s totally irrational…they live in the ocean, I live inland. Or at least it used to be that way: A lost and likely sick whale swam up the River Thames past Parliament and Big … Read more

One in Hope and Doctrine, One in Charity

by

By Edward_ In visting my family at Christmas in Ohio, a hotbed of Evangelical Christian American ideology if ever there was one, I noticed a remarkable shift in the attitudes there this year. On previous trips, I had been simply bullied back to New York. The Religious Right was on the rise, and nothing was … Read more

The Case for War (Sans Smoke and Mirrors)

by

by Edward

Take out all the rhetoric…take out the insinuation…take out implied connections and hyperbole, and what do you have left? What exactly was the case for invading Iraq? If the administration had made the case for war without any exaggeration, what would they have had at their disposal to convince the nation to back an invasion?

To compare what we heard with what we now know was known at the time, here’s an honest effort to provide the facts as understood by the administration about the time Bush made his speech outlining the threat and laid the groundwork for his case for war at the Cincinnati Museum Center (October 7, 2002), a point at which it’s clear he thinks we should invade. There are possibly some anachronistic "facts" in here, but I don’t think so.

What would we have heard had Bush made the case for war using the cold-hard truth? Perhaps something like this…

Read more

The Bush Legacy: America’s Human-Rights Record Is Now A Subject of Legitimate Debate

by

by Edward The Economist has published an editorial (with such a strong title it bears repeating: "How to lose friends and alienate people: The Bush administration’s approach to torture beggars belief") denouncing the Bush administration’s nebulous-at-best stance on torure. It should be required reading in the ethics classes the President recently ordered his staff to … Read more

Libby 5; Rove ?

by

by Edward The NYT is reporting that Libby’s been indicted on 5 counts: Vice presidential adviser I. Lewis "Scooter’ Libby Jr. was indicted Friday on charges of obstruction of justice, making a false statement and perjury in the CIA leak case. Karl Rove, President Bush’s closest adviser, apparently escaped indictment Friday but remained under investigation, … Read more

“Up or Down” Dead, Dead, Dead

by

by Edward

John Cole on RedState tries valiantly to save the GOP’s right to resuscitate the recently departed talking point that all Bush’s nominees deserve an up or down vote in the Senate, but it’s the most faithless sort of wishful thinking and as such deserves debunking. In response to this post by Kos, using the GOP’s own words against them, Cole takes out his hair-splitter and tries to find a difference in how the GOP derailed Harriet’s turn before the Judiciary Committee:

When Republicans and conservatives speak of a desire for an up or down vote for judicial nominees, it is born out of the frustration of the recent past in which nominees were bottled up in committee in perpetuity, were never given hearings, were never given a vote, and simply had their nomination blocked through procedural maneuvering. In fairness, this occurred under both Republican and Democratic Presidents, and in Senates led by Republicans and Democrats.

But that is not what happened in the Miers case, and to assert otherwise is to engage in a flight of fancy. A desire for an up or down vote for judicial nominees is in no way anathema to the desire (and, I might add, right) to loudly voice one’s displeasure with a nominee.

Harriet Miers was nominated to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. She was given a date for confirmation hearings (they were to begin on November 7th), she had meetings with Senators, she was filling out questionnaires for the Judiciary Committee. She would, one could safely assume, have had a vote in the Judiciary Committee at the commencement of the confirmation hearings, and predicated on the outcome of that vote, a vote would have been held in the Senate at large.

In other words, she was going to get her ‘up or down vote.’ There were no calls to ‘blue slip’ her, there was no move to filibuster her (indeed, the Gang of 14 stated they would break any filibuster attempts), there were no attempts at procedural moves to block her nomination, and she was not going to be bottlenecked in committee forever.

What’s most laughable about this is this bit: "she was going to get her ‘up or down vote.’ " It’s laughable because web site’s had been set up and the call went far and wide that what the base wanted was not an up or down vote but her nomination to be withdrawn. In fact, on the Withdraw Miers website, they list the folks calling for the withdrawal and list the Senators who had expressed "Reservations," long before the hearings had offered Harriet a chance to answer her critics, including

Senator Rick Santorum
Senator Sam Brownback
Senator Trent Lott
Senator George Allen
Senator Lindsey Graham
Senator Jeff Sessions
Senator David Vitter
Senator John Ensign
Senator John Thune

So who exactly is it in the GOP that still believes the President has the right to have his choice, his chosen nominee, receive an up or down vote? Cole would like you to believe they never stopped believing this was the proper process, but the evidence suggests otherwise.

Read more

Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow

by

Via Harley on Tacitus US News and World Report is either desperate to scoop the rest of the MSM or being somewhat coy about what they know, but either way, apparently it’s time to buckle your seat belts: Sparked by today’s Washington Post story that suggests Vice President Cheney’s office is involved in the Plame-CIA … Read more

The Incredibly Edible Open Thread

by

By Edward NOTE: Sincere apologies for the previous version of this post with Moe’s signature. I was in the system earlier clearing out spambots and only noticed after I posted that I was logged in as Moe. Then, to make matters worse, I only noticed folks had commented when I tried to quickly delete it. … Read more

Want a Scary Peek at the Future? Look to Indiana

by

by Edward

UPDATE: As readers Mason and Kyle Hasselbacher gently pointed out in the comments, this proposed legislation has been dropped. I’ll leave my rant up all the same…feel free to wander off topic if you like though.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like the Alabama Republican State Representative who wanted to ban all books from public schools that were either written by gay authors or featured gay characters, this latest proposal by Indiana Republicans will most likely be dismissed as the sort of thing the GOP doesn’t really stand for by some, I know. And I’m sure that’s fair. It’s just that there seems to be an alarming number of like-minded GOPers getting elected these days.

Read more

What’s With This Call for A Fight?

by

by Edward In reading the ring-wing blogs and watching the Sunday pundit shows, a subtheme to the Miers debate seemed to be that whether or not Harriet would indeed vote to overturn Roe was not their only worry or source of disappointment. The other reason Pat Buchannan and like-minded Conservatives are miffed is they want … Read more

Judy Is Free! (Too bad she’s still horrid)

by

The Good News is that Fitzgerald is by all accounts likely close to the end of his investigation, and, if the rumors are right, Rove will be joining DeLay and Frist in the "I am Not a Crook" chorus. The bad news is Judith Miller is free again. OK, so that’s unfair. Miller never belonged … Read more

Don’t Throw Your Laptop, Open Thread

by

Are you trying to comment but keep getting a message saying you can’t? Well…??? Speak up!!! Oh, heh, nevermind… Just kidding. Some folks have reported a messsage saying they cannot comment, but they haven’t been banned. If that’s happening to you, please accept our apologies, we’re working on figuring out what’s causing that. If you … Read more

Ahh Love…We Value It in Foreigners

by

So I’ve been over at RedState having the same tired argument I’ve been having for years now about how insulting it is as a gay American to be told we’re not being treated like a second-class citizen with regards to the marriage issue because our right to marry is intact. We just have to marry someone of the opposite sex.

I understand that most folks who are on the fence tend to withdraw from the argument, back into a more conservative stance, if the rhetoric gets too heated (that’s natural, I realize), but I’ve got to get this out of my system once and for all.

Again, the argument forwarded by those opposed to gay marriage when the subject turns to rights is that the state is not denying gay Americans any rights, because we’re just as entitled to marry someone of the opposite sex as the next American is.

To support this claim, however, they must then explain why it is that intimacy is not a requirement for a marriage to be considered "valid" in this country. In other words, marriages of convenience are legal, and if a gay American wants the benefits of marriage, no one will stop them from getting married (even to a stranger, even someone they have no intention of consummating the relationship with, or even living with) in order to secure those benefits.

This implies that the state places no value on the emotional commitment of the couple to each other, at least not enough to legislate against loveless marriage between strangers. And since that is legal, so the arguments go, gays are not being discriminated against.

There’s a small problem with that, however, in that the state does in at least one instance make it crystal clear that loveless marriage between strangers is not equal to marriage between a committed couple. That instance is when one of the spouses is not a citizen. In those instances, the couple must prove to the government that theirs is a "real" marriage, that they entered into marriage in "good faith":

Read more

Serious about Porn

by

I’ve admitted this before, so I’m not embarassed to bring it up again in this context: I’ve watched it. In fact, every night at 11:00 we used to turn it on. Until, well, it was replaced with something even more scandalous. I’m talking, of course, about the re-runs of "Friends" that aired at 11:00 pm … Read more

To the Old Gray Whore: Anti-MSM Open Thread

by

There are few things I loathe more than people who seem to be altruistic but end up demonstrating that they were merely pretending in order to screw someone over down the road. I’ve been around…I know how the world works, but even crooks have integrity, so long as they admit they’re crooks. Here’s a letter … Read more

Once a Nazi, Always a Nazi?

by

by Edward Now I feel foolish. I had stood up to the folks, many of them liberals, who criticized the new Pope when he was installed. I openly insisted they not call him "Pope Rat" and asked them to appreciate that although he had been a member of the Nazi party as a youth that … Read more

WMAL Fires Michael Graham

by

by Edward via a post by krempasky on Red State Although I’m happy to see him gone, I wish he would have apologized like his radio station had asked him to instead. WMAL "comedian" commentator Michael Graham has been fired. I mentioned the statement he made that caused an uproar in this post. Essentially he … Read more

Bill…It’s Harvard. They Want Their Degree Back

by

by Edward Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a graduate of Harvard Medical School, recently announced his support for teaching Intelligent Design along side evolution in public school science classes. In explaining his position he said: "I think today a pluralistic society should have access to a broad range of fact, of science, including faith," Frist … Read more

A Very Different Story

by

by Edward

After all the gigabytes folks consumed arguing that Jean Charles de Menezes, the 27-year-old Brazilian electrician, who was shot eight times last month on the London Underground, deserved what he got for essentially looking suspicious, I hope an equal number of gigabytes of outrage will be forthcoming from the same folks now that it turns out the story the British Police offered seems to be very, very different from what actually happened that day:

A Brazilian shot to death a day after botched bombings in London had walked casually onto a train before being gunned down by undercover officers, according to leaked footage that appeared to contradict earlier police reports that said the man disobeyed police orders.

Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old electrician, was shot eight times last month in front of terrified commuters on a subway train, after undercover police tailed him from a house under surveillance.

Police first said the shooting was related to the failed bombings on the London transit system July 21 — two weeks after four suspected suicide bombers blew themselves up in three Underground stations and aboard one double-decker bus.

Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police commissioner, called the death regrettable, but said it appeared "the man was challenged and refused to obey police instructions."

Citing security footage, a British television station reported Tuesday that Menezes entered the Stockwell subway station at a normal walking pace, stopping to pick up a newspaper before boarding a train and taking a seat.

The ITV News broadcast, citing an investigation report into the shooting, also said Menezes was wearing a light denim jacket when he was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder. Witness reports described a terrifying scene of the man — wearing a bulky jacket on a warm July day — running through the train station, being tackled by a group of undercover police officers, then being shot several times at close range.

Now here’s the thing. In the US we’re constantly pooh-poohed when we question the PATRIOT ACT and other measures that strengthen the law enforcement efforts to stop terrorism. "If you don’t do anything wrong, you don’t have anything to worry about from these laws," is the conventional wisdom. Of course, though, that only applies if you can implicitly trust the authorities.

If this report turns out to reveal what it looks like it reveals, I cannot imagine the London Police will be able to re-build their credibility for ages. At the very least, Ian Blair owes the public (not to mention Menezes’ family) one huge apology.

Read more

Fair Weather Patriots

by

By Edward Here’s a story making the rounds. Via Atrios: Staff Sgt. Jason Rivera, 26, a Marine recruiter in Pittsburgh, went to the home of a high school student who had expressed interest in joining the Marine Reserve to talk to his parents. It was a large home in a well-to-do suburb north of the … Read more

Two Heroes

by

By Edward

I realize there are those in certain quarters who will cry "what took so long?" as if there were no cultural, practical, or personal (including personal safety) obstacles, but two moderate Muslims are now clearly leading the way toward a brighter future for the followers of Islam who live in the West.

The first has been at it a while actually (and I don’t mind pointing out to those who feel homosexuals harm rather than help society, that it took a lesbian to find the courage to stand up the world and say what’s right here). Irshad Manji (whose book The Trouble with Islam Today sits on my nightstand for quick reference) voiced an opinion that I’ve long held regarding foreign-born Muslims who preach hate in adopted Western countries: they should be deported swiftly:

For a European leader, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain has done something daring. He has given notice not just to the theocrats of Islam, but also to the theocracy of tolerance.

"Staying here carries with it a duty," Mr. Blair said in referring to foreign-born Muslim clerics who glorify terror on British soil. "That duty is to share and support the values that sustain the British way of life. Those who break that duty and try to incite hatred or engage in violence against our country and its people have no place here."

With that, his government proposed new laws to deport extremist religious leaders, to shut down the mosques that house them and to ban groups with a history of supporting terrorism. The reaction was swift: a prominent human rights advocate described Mr. Blair’s measures as "neo-McCarthyite hectoring," warning that they would make the British "less distinguishable from the violent, hateful and unforgiving theocrats, our democracy undermined from within in ways that the suicide bombers could only have dreamed of."

Of course, there’s the danger that some folks will misconstrue what Blair said, and Manji applauds, and conclude "tolerance" in and of itself is a bad thing, so it bears pointing out that they’re clearly limiting their statements to a tolerance for for tolerance’s sake that forgives violence here. Any citizen of any nation can work, within the system, for change, but no one has the right to intentionally harm others in that quest. I’ve noted frequently (and long before the July 7th bombing) that the laws that permitted hate-mongering foreign-born Imams to remain in England were foolish. You don’t have to love it or leave it, but you damn well better let it live in peace or leave it. Muslims are obligated, like everyone else, to protect their nation, whether immigrants or born there.

My second hero is new to me, but precisely what the UK needs. Meet Shahid Malik:

Read more

Is My Child Becoming Homosexual?

by

By Edward You’ve probably seen this on Fafblog already, but just in case, be sure not to miss these helpful hints for determining whether your pre-pubescent son is turning queer before your very eyes, compliments of Dr. Dobson and those thoughtful folks at Focus on the Family. Do any of these behaviors describe your 5 … Read more

US Muslims Make it Clear

by

by Edward we interrupt our self-imposed hiatus to bring you the following rant: Despite the likes of the so-called comedian Michael Graham, who still refuses to apologize for calling Islam a “terrorist organization” on his radio show, US Muslims are responding to the growing tension since the attacks in London with restraint, maturity, and a … Read more

Give Truth a Chance

by

by Edward John Kerry, in a New York Times op-ed piece titled "The Speech the President Should Give," really doesn’t offer anything of the kind. Instead he runs through, once more, the laundry list of complaints against the way the Iraq invasion’s been handled. Oh, he suggests here and there a variance to the current … Read more

Art and the End of China’s Cultural Revolution

by

You have no idea how happy this makes me: Not so long ago Chinese authorities were in the business of closing down contemporary exhibitions. Curators and artists organised shows furtively: at the 2000 Shanghai Biennial, for example, the official State-subsidised exhibition was accompanied by a crop of impromptu “underground” shows in warehouses and basements, most … Read more

The (Not So) Thin Line Between Love and Hate

by

by Edward

The story of "Zach" is getting lots of play around the blogosphere. He’s allegedly a 16-year-old blogger whose parents sent him to the Christian rehabilitation center called the Refuge because he told them he was gay. The Refuge is run by a larger organization called "Love in Action" (btw, dig the almost pink triangle logo…way to appropriate!).

Supposedly (I’ll keep qualifying the reports because a leading gay news site notes they were unable to confirm his identity, although other online sources aren’t being so tentative) Zach saw an email from the camp to his parents that "clients" aren’t supposed to see. It included the rules (some secret) for the Refuge, and those are stirring up quite some controversy. Among my favorites are

  • The clients may not wear Abercrombie and Fitch or Calvin Klein brand clothing, undergarments, or accessories.
  • Men must remove all facial hair seven days weekly, and sideburns must not fall below the top of the ear (the top of the ear is defined as where the ear meets the face below the temple). Clean business-like haircuts must be worn at all times. Hair must be long enough to be pinched between two fingers.       [actually, this is one of the rules that makes me a bit suspect of this list, see this "success story" of the program…he hardly fits the enforced look.]
  • LIA wants to encourage each client, male and female, by affirming his/her gender identity. LIA also wants each client to pursue integrity in all of his/her actions and appearances. Therefore, any belongings, appearances, clothing, actions, or humor that might connect a client to an inappropriate past are excluded from the program. These hindrances are called False Images (FI¹s). FI behavior may include hyper-masculinity, seductive clothing, mannish/boyish attire (on women), excessive jewelry (on men), mascoting, and "campy" or gay/lesbian behavior and talk.
  • Clients may have no contact with anyone who has left the program prior to graduating without the blessing of the staff to do so. Clients may address off-limit persons they inadvertently encounter with a polite "hello" only.
  • [Here’s where it gets really scary] All new Refuge clients will be placed into Safekeeping for the initial two to three days of their program. A client on safekeeping may not communicate verbally, or by using hand gestures or eye contact, with any other clients, staff members, or his/her parents or guardians. In case of a practical need, Safekeeping clients may write down their question or request and show it to another client, staff member, or their parent or guardian. Writing may only be used when absolutely necessary. Parents and guardians must enforce their child¹s safekeeping status at home or in their temporary lodging. [and…] Any client may be placed into Safekeeping at any time, at a staffworker¹s discretion.
  • Encourage women to accept the more comfortable seats in a room. Men should consider offering a woman their chair when there are none left in the room.
  • Clients are expected to maintain a committed pursuit of a positive and thankful attitude.
  • [And here are a few doozies from the astronomically frightening "Group Norms" behaviors expected] 1. Be honest, authentic, and real. […]9. Say "I love you _____" after each person is finished relating. […and my favorite…] 5. Maintain strict confidentiality of everything discussed in group. "What is seen here, what is heard here, remains here!" [Oh, so, it’s just like Las Vegas….sign me up!]

Protests have been staged in front of the camp, prompting its leader to hold a press conference. A press statement from the organization seemed (to me at lease) to imply they don’t understand why the protesters are upset:

“LIA is calling upon the community to extend open-minded consideration and tolerance towards young people with same-sex attraction who are currently undergoing the organization’s youth program called Refuge,” according to a press statement from the organization.

(Uh, er, it’s not that they’re not open-minded toward the young people with same-sex attractions, it’s you brain washers they’re not so keen on.) You can read more about the press conference here.

Ironically, despite their name, Love in Action’s mission statement doesn’t include the word "love" once:

Read more

The Accidental Isolationists

by

By Edward The irony of President Bush’s willingness to charge boldly ahead, leading the world into an era in which democracy flourishes and tyrants scramble into the shadows, is that if/when we reach that horizon we’re likely to find that the path we chose there has left us isolated, with only gold-diggers for friends. It’s … Read more

Who is Tamika Huston?

by

By Edward

Via Drum
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Who is Tamika Huston? She’s what’s been dubbed a "Damsel in Distress" or DiD by MSM critics lately. A young attractive woman who’s missing, and whose family is appealing to the media for help in finding her. Hilzoy pointed to this excellent satire on the phenomenon by the Poor Man (but that site is experiencing heavy traffic, so you might have trouble getting through).

Unlike the runaway bride Jennifer Wilbanks, Laci Peterson, Elizabeth Smart, or Natalee Holloway (missing in Aruba), though, Tamika, who’s been missing over a year, did not get her beautiful face plastered all over the airwaves and tabloids. Compared to those other women, she’s barely gotten any attention at all.

Here’s a photo of Tamika:

Read more

Stigma and Hunger

by

by Edward

Today seems to be a day for painful confessions, so I’ll share one of mine. My first two years of high school (before I was old enough to get a job and make money of my own), my father was struggling financially (the steel mill was perpetually laying people off, he had a chunk of debt, and he was paying alimony). Because of our status, the city allowed my brothers and sisters and I to buy a subsidized lunch at school. For 25 cents we could get the same standard lunch other children paid a few dollars for, but we would have to stand in a special (highly visible) line with all the other children whose parents were struggling.

I’m nothing if not a stubbornly proud s.o.b. I took the quarter my father gave me each morning and bought my lunch in the same line and vending machines my friends did. That bought me a small milk and pack of Oreo cookies (things were cheaper back then). And that’s what I ate for lunch for over two years. I didn’t realize it at the time, but somehow the experience translated into an overall aversion to food. For me, food equaled shame.

There’s a photo of me in swim trunks in my sophomore year yearbook. I’m so frightfully emaciated in that photo, to this day I can’t stand to look at it. Imagine photos of children from famine-stricken countries, and you’ll be very close to how I looked. Someone on the yearbook staff cut it out and posted it on the bulletin board of the offices with a little speech bubble above my head reading "Feed me." I don’t recall being hungry back then (I’m still quite thin and have a fast metabolism, although love handles are settling in now), but clearly I was malnourished.

This is a long-about POV-providing introduction into this post:

Read more

Are Homophobes Born or Made? Open Thread

by

It’s a popular meme among gay marriage proponents, the idea that because the strongest opponents of giving marriage rights to America’s gay and lesbian citizens are those in the 65 years old and over category, all we have to do is wait until they pass away (charming, I know). In fact, California Democrat Assemblyman Mark … Read more

When Is It Right to Remove a President from Office?

by

Oddly, it would seem that’s not a rhetorical question. I mean, according to the Constitution, The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. That seems pretty straightforward: the president should be removed … Read more

Why Are Conservatives People Afraid of Books?

by

UPDATE: Slartibartfast, who I have a great deal of respect for, was offended by this column (apparently missing the smiley face at the end of it). I don’t think it’s appropriate to edit the text, but I will concede, as others have pointed out, that liberals have been known to call for books to be … Read more