Quote of the Week

Steelers linebacker Joey Porter on motorcycles:

“If I fall off a Jet Ski, I hit the water, and I like my odds,” Porter said. “I’m going to get wet. What I say about motorcycles is that concrete is undefeated.”

If I was an NFL quarterback with my whole future ahead of me—MVPs, more Super Bowls, tens of millions of dollars (none of which is guaranteed, BTW)—I might refrain from activity that would jeopardize my career. And if I was compelled to ride a motorcycle, I'd wear a helmet. I guess that makes me a pussy and is reason number 4,326 why I'm not an NFL quarterback, but jeez, Big Ben, that was pretty stupid.

What is it with pro athletes doing stupid shit? A rider in every contract should include a sidekick whose sole job is to keep the athlete from doing stupid shit like: driving drunk, getting into knifefights, hosting "Cornhole contests", and sleeping with Paris Hilton.

Seriously? I hope Ben makes a full recovery, and takes the Steelers right back to the AFC Championship Game where they lose to the Patriots.

[UPDATE: Here's a great column that addresses a lot of the side issues of the accident.]

Dick of the Week: The nominees (thusfar)

President Bush—picks on blind guy. [link]
[UPDATE: video added]


[UPDATE 2: Bush apologizes

Ozzie Guillen—Goes ballistic on rookie pitcher for not hitting a guy. [links: Deadspin, South Side Sox]

"Brer" Tony Snow—On Imus: "Bush "snuck off" to visit Iraq, Carter “used to sneak off and fish on the weekends."[link]

Arlen Spector—Completely sells out. Proposes a bill that changes the Law, basically grants Bush a blank check, issue immunity for past crimes and guts FISA. [link]

J.J. Redick—Busted driving drunk. And for being J.J. Redick. [link]

I Visited Extremist Islamic Madrasas And All I Got Questioned About is a Lousy T-Shirt

While Canada is successfully rolling up actual terrorist cells and plots (see previous post), here's what the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security is busy with...

[LA Times] Arriving at JFK from Dubai recently, I was stopped at customs by an officer from the Department of Homeland Security and directed to a drab backroom filled with Arabs, South Asians and Africans. I wasn't surprised, really, having just spent six months working and traveling in the Islamic world — Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt and Pakistan. If ever there were a DHS red-flag candidate, I was it, and I assumed this was just protocol.

Four of those months were in Pakistan, and I had just spent a week with a journalist friend going to different madrasas, including one Islamic school visited by one of the bombers in the July 2005 attacks in London. Possibly I caught their attention by poking around the Karachi Marriot's parking lot, across from the U.S. consulate, where a suicide bomber's attack had killed a U.S. diplomat just two months before.

How about the hundreds of phone calls I made from Pakistan to friends and family back home that inevitably mentioned the Taliban's resurgence and criticized President Bush. Was I wiretapped? Certainly Homeland Security, whose stated mission is to "lead the unified national effort to secure America … prevent and deter terrorist attacks and protect against and respond to threats and hazards to the nation," had detained me for such a reason.

Sounds like a well-oiled machine doing exactly what it should right? Picking out the high-risk passenger for extra scrutiny? Finding out what he's been up to in the farthest recesses of the fundamentalist Islamic world?

Not quite. They grabbed him and questioned him about his history selling bootleg Celtics and "Yankees Suck" T-shirts, then let him go without a single question about his travels. Because the DHS agents wanted to catch the Mets game.

Better search through my emails and phone records again guys. Keystone Stasi indeed.

Canadian Bacon

[Started this post last week and got too busy. So it's a bit late now...]

Over the last weekend, the Canadian government busted a terrorist cell plotting to blow up a bunch of Canadian targets. It seems some monitoring of internet activity was part of the process.

Naturally, supporters of the President and the NSA going through everyone's personal lives were all over it. "See! Monitoring email, websurfing, phone calls, etc. works! These guys got caught before they could blow anybody/thing up! Liberal Democrats want to make sure the PResident and those serious about protecting our homeland don't have these tools because they are worried about protecting the civil rights of terrorists...blah, blah, blah"

That's not a quote from anyone, which by definition makes it a strawman, but I'm sure you, like me, can picture any number of righty blowhards on the internet, the radio, FOX or the White House lawn saying pretty much exactly that...

Here why that's bullshit. The Canadian government wasn't sifting through everyone's email or interent activity. Nor were they profiling people or pulling random phone records. This bust was triggered because the would-be terrorists ordered literally tons of fertilizer over the internet from the U.S. At that point, the Canadians got warrants, then monitored these guys' communications, set up a sting, and busted them.

So, let's review:

1. The Canadians stopped an attack before it happened.
2. They did it without casting a net of everyone in the country. They violated no one's rights. Didn't torture anyone. Applied for an obtained warrants. As a result have admissible evidence to charge and convict these guys in a real trial in an actual court.

How exactly is that in any way reminiscent of anything the Bushies have yet accomplished or what they want to do for the rest of our foreseeable "post-9/11" future? That's what I thought.

--

More analysis at Greenwald's.

The WaPo on what happens when the government gets overzealous in its prosecutions. (Hint: Suspects walk and the Fed prosecutor is under investigation)

Matt Welch wants to know where you draw the line.

Dick of the Week: Mike Lieberthal

I've been meaning to start a recurring feature like this for a while now (oddly enough, it was another dick catcher, Jason Kendall, that was my original inspiration). This will not be relegated to the worlds of politics, sports or baseball, but I have to make a concerted effort to think outside the asshole box, or Bush and Cheney will have a stranglehold on the award...



Here is Phillies catcher Mike Lieberthal going into the stands after a foul ball and swatting a little girl in the head with his big ole catcher's mitt, failing to make the play and then walking away without giving the girl a second glance. Yes he hits her. Yes, she's crying. And no, he doesn't even make the catch. What kind of a cold bastard steamrolls a little girl and then just turns around and picks up his mask...?

Runners-up? The umpire and firstbaseman also turn around and walk away, and the announcers continue to pretend nothing happened and "it scared her more than anything..." despite every replay showing Lieberthals glove clocking her right in the head. The ball is out of play now, you douchebags, would it kill you to apologize or pause for a second and see if she's okay? And Dodgers, what kind of a fucking fence is that? Who's brilliant marketing strategy was a deathwish section?

Nice job, Lieberthal you're the inaugural DOW.

Spoofiness? Truthiness? Or a Reality So Bad I want to Wretch

"Next week, the United States Senate will begin debate on a constitutional amendment that defines marriage in the United States as the union of a man and woman. On Monday, I will meet with a coalition of community leaders, constitutional scholars, family and civic organizations, and religious leaders. They're Republicans, Democrats, and independents who've come together to support this amendment. Today, I want to explain why I support the Marriage Protection Amendment, and why I'm urging Congress to pass it and send it to the states for ratification. [...]
Marriage cannot be cut off from its cultural, religious, and natural roots without weakening this good influence on society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all. [...]

In our free society, people have the right to choose how they live their lives. And in a free society, decisions about such a fundamental social institution as marriage should be made by the people -- not by the courts. [...]

Unfortunately, activist judges and some local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage in recent years.... These court decisions could have an impact on our whole Nation....This national question requires a national solution, and on an issue of such profound importance, that solution should come from the people, not the courts.

An amendment to the Constitution is necessary because activist courts have left our Nation with no other choice. [...] Democracy, not court orders, should decide the future of marriage in America."

The latest monologue from "The Colbert Report"? I wish, that's the actual President of the United States. At times it almost seems the whole thing is some brilliant, elaborate parody—a five year joke being played on the world, where "President Dubya" reveals himself to be a genius of a comedian, and all of the fools who have been lapping up his bullshit are revealed for the chumps thay actually are.

Alas, he and his cult of personality are very much reality.

For him, of all politicians, to wrap up his case with: "Democracy, not court orders, should decide..." is the best/worst part.

Excuse me while I go vomit for my country.

Miscellany

Since I just wasted my lunch hour on laser pointers, I now present far more important topics in an abbreviated compilation that belies their outrage factor...

Bush and DHS Still Don't Know Ass From Elbow
After years of criticism for doling out too much anti-terrorism money per capita or per actual threat-assessment to the likes of South Dakota at the expense of NYC, LA, DC and the like, Michael Chertoff and the DHS promised to come up with a new formula that would better distribute funds to areas actually at risk from terrorism. what did the new formula come up with? New York City officially has "zero" national monuments or icons and they slashed funding by forty percent. Feel safer yet? Read this WaPo Article if you think your blood pressure can handle it.

AP Still Swinging at Reid
The AP's bounty hunt on Harry Reid takes another sordid turn. The Carpetbagger has been all over this (parts one, two and three), along with TPM. The AP should be ashamed, and John Solomon out of a job (or at least working at FOX, which was probably what this story was an audition for...). It's hard to believe Reid is left with little or no recourse to this.

Glenn's Special Unabridged Outrage
Of course there's much more at Greenwald's than laser pointers... Is Arlen Specter just teasing us again? [link]; two posts on the latest ethics-impaired White House hire [here and here]

Whither Democrats?
A great post by Jane Hamsher on Hayden making it out of Committee. Of course, since then he was overwhelmingly confirmed. Sigh. Pooh had a great follow on that topic.

File Under: Outrageous Lawsuits
"PORTLAND, Oregon (Reuters) - An Oregon man has filed a $1.6 million "loss of companionship" claim against a neighbor who ran over his family's 13-year-old dog, Grizz." [story]

A Bone for Comic Geeks
Not outrageous, but rather enjoyable, I stumbled across a link to this old NPR piece that is relevant again with the release of X3. Which of course reminds me of this great "This American Life" episode [click "Our Favorites" on the left and scroll down to "Superheroes"].

Permanently blind opposing free-throw shooters!*

While perusing the bevy of excellent posts over at Glenn Greenwald's, I was struck by a blogad on his site for military-grade laser pointers. Does anybody not up-to-no-good really need something like that? The blogad boasts, "Used by the US Army! Slash, Cut Tape, Pop Balloons, Ignite Matches, Light Cigarettes, Sizzle Plastic, and Start Fires!"

Yeah, as if the merely annoying laser pointers at concerts and basketball games isn't bad enough we need dangerous ones?!? I clicked through to find out more...

The site includes a chart of features (see right) with some cute little "international-style" icons for "pop balloons" and "Make holes in trash bags." Disposable 99¢ Bic lighters are bleeding you smokers dry? Not to worry, your two thousand dollar laser can light your cigarette, but be careful holding it up to your face, as it will also "melt plastic" and "heal open cuts"...

And, of course, after giving you ideas for all sorts of trouble, there is the requisite disclaimer that this product is for legitimate uses only.

To their credit, the company links to a rather funny Wired testimonial:

" Why do I need a laser pointer with a range of 14 miles that can melt a garbage bag? Look, if you have to ask, you'll never understand me, baby. I mean, I might have to give a PowerPoint presentation at the Rose Bowl. Or what if we go hiking? I could be all, "No, no -- not that alp. I climbed the other alp..."

The bright (ahem) side? The more powerful lasers that pop, melt and light stuff on fire cost $999-$3499, hopefully keeping them out of the hands of all but the most wealthy degenerates.

Have fun shooting down the giant moon at your next Bowie concert...

(*Slight exaggeration.)

Jefferson Digs In

I've been pretty hard on Nancy Pelosi for not taking a harder line on William Jefferson. It appears she has been getting quite a bit of internal fire for trying to do just that. From The Hill:

Pelosi move triggers revolt

Furious black lawmakers, rallying behind Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.), were pulled back from the brink of open revolt against House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in an emergency meeting with her Wednesday evening.

[...] Earlier this week, Pelosi approached Jefferson and told him that she thought he should resign, according to a Democratic aide. Later, at the Democratic caucus meeting yesterday morning, she took him into a side room and told him that she had prepared a letter calling on him to resign the committee seat and that she would allow him one hour to withdraw gracefully before she sent it, according to the aide. In both instances, Jefferson remained defiant.

Pelosi’s one-sentence missive to Jefferson called on him to vacate his committee seat “in the interest of upholding the high ethical standard of the House Democratic Caucus.”

Jefferson promptly refused, calling her request “discriminatory” and “unprecedented,” and suggested that she was employing a double standard by failing to ask other lawmakers facing ethics questions to relinquish their committee assignments. Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.) has come under fire for earmarks he secured through his seat on the Appropriations Committee.

“I will not give up a committee assignment that is so vital to New Orleans at this crucial time for any uncertain political strategy,” Jefferson said.

If Jefferson really wanted to helped the people of New Orleans, he would have used his tremendous balls to shield the city from Katrina.

Oh, and no word yet on whether Mollohan was caught on video accepting $100,000 in marked bills that were later found in his freezer...

I won't be surprised one bit if its discovered that Jefferson rode an Army convoy through the post-hurricane flood to get to his house in an attempt to retrieve/destroy evidence.

Jefferson is fucking dirty. Period. The CBC had better get used to that idea. I can understand some conciliatory remarks from them looking out for one of their own such as "we're witholding comment until charges are filed." Even, "Rep. Jefferson is innocent until proven otherwise." But they sould not be going after the knees of Pelosi for doing what she has to to defend the Party.

UPDATE: It should be noted that Mollohan no longer sits on the Appropriations Committee either. Jefferson should follow suit.

Hang Him Out to Dry. Now.

There were a few threads floating around a couple weeks ago about Congressman William Jefferson (D-LA). At the time he had not yet been named in the investigation, but the people who bribed "Congressman A" had...

Here was my comment at the time:

From commenter Paul at Balloon Juice:

The smart move by the Democrats would be to call a heavily televised public gathering. At said gathering, they would drag out William Jefferson and publicly demand his resignation from a) the Democratic Party and b) the congressional seat he’s in. Conclude with an open statement that the Democratic Party will not tolerate such corruption and that the Republican Party should learn by example. Once you see the popularity polls for the Democratic Party shoot up 5 points watch the GOP sweat.

[I added]: Don’t sweep dirt under the rug, take it out in the front yard and shake it out. Or even beat it with a stick. Let the Repubs try and Febreze out the stench and see where that gets them.

The Republican party is steeping in corruption right now, but people still have the old “they’re all dirty” soundtrack running in their minds. If the Dems publicly toss the dirty members of the own party to the curb now, it is not only the right thing to do, it looks good for them in the fall too.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi did a fairly reasonable job of calling Jefferson out. Reminding folks that there was a due process to occur, but if Jefferson had done anything wrong he should resign. She then called for a House Ethics investigation of a member of her own party.

Another (apparently psychic) commenter added this in response to Pelosi:

Pelosi is right. We're a nation of laws, and even if there are videotapes of Jefferson accepting bags of money with "BRIBE" written on them, he's still entitled to due process.

Well get ready for the due process to start. From an affidavit released yesterday

[Rep. William] Jefferson was videotaped accepting $100,000 in $100 bills from a Northern Virginia investor who was wearing an FBI wire [...] A few days later, on Aug. 3, 2005*, FBI agents raided Jefferson's home in Northeast Washington and found $90,000 of the cash in the freezer, in $10,000 increments wrapped in aluminum foil and stuffed inside frozen-food containers.

No mention as to whether the bags were labelled or not. Presumably that affidavit was part of the process of obtaining a warrant to raid Jefferson's Congressional office over the weekend.

An unusual FBI raid of a Democratic congressman's office over the weekend prompted complaints yesterday from leaders in both parties, who said the tactic was unduly aggressive and may have breached the constitutional separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government.

Interestingly, Congressional members of both parties are up at arms over this raid, the first one ever of a sitting Congressman.

It seems this poses serious questions about separation of powers (the FBI works for the Executive Branch).

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), in an e-mail to colleagues with the subject line "on the edge of a constitutional confrontation," called the Saturday night raid "the most blatant violation of the Constitutional Separation of Powers in my lifetime." He urged President Bush to discipline or fire "whoever exhibited this extraordinary violation."

I guess ole Newt hasn't been payin' attention. Bush has never had any regard for any supposed "Separation of Powers", nor does he ever fire anyone...

As for Jefferson? He insists he's being railroaded. I say bullshit. The party needs to cut his ass loose and do it loudly. Zero tolerance for this nonsense.

* You might have heard of this guy before. He's the same clown that shanghai'd an Army convoy to take him to his house in New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina. He apparently had some evidence to destroy or "frozen food" to retrieve.

Freedom Fries 2: Electric Boogaloo

An increasingly desperate Republican Congress has decided to rejuvenate its fortunes by buckling down and tackling the country's biggest problem—national healthcare, a potentially illegal surveillance program, an out of contol deficit...No, our lack of an official language...

Yes, hot on the heels of the War on Christmas and the gay assault on the sancticty of marriage, is the very real and terrifying threat to the English language in America.

"After an emotional debate fraught with symbolism, the Senate yesterday voted to make English the "national language" of the United States, declaring that no one has a right to federal communications or services in a language other than English except for those already guaranteed by law.

The measure, approved 63 to 34, directs the government to "preserve and enhance" the role of English, without altering current laws that require some government documents and services be provided in other languages. Opponents, however, said it could negate executive orders, regulations, civil service guidances and other multilingual ordinances not officially sanctioned by acts of Congress."

Apparently, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who pushed this idea yesterday, wanted to make English the "official" language, but couldn't muster enough votes to pass it. Instead, English has been designated the "national" language as a powerful symbolic statement of America's … English-speaking ways. Or something. It's not entirely clear.

The Inhofe proposal was a hit with Republicans, who seem anxious to prove to their conservative base that they may not be able to pass an immigration bill, but they can show how unilingual they are. Of the 34 opposing votes, there were 32 Dems, one independent who votes with the Dems (Jeffords), and one Republican who represents a state with a large Hispanic population (New Mexico's Pete Domenici). I guess the GOP didn't want to compete for Hispanic votes in the future anyway.

That's from the always excellent Carpetbagger

This is such a craven appeal to the mouthbreathing, jingo-paranoid base I'm not even sure this is a net gain for Republicans, never mind supposedly big-tent Democrats! Why any Dem would support this defies logic.

Republicans had made headway with the Latino base under Bush, and he had made appeals to that bloc with his nominees. They were even supposed to be aggressively courting the Latino vote, using pro-life and religious rhetoric to help, hoping to peel the fastest growing segment of the population away from Democrats. I even think Bush set out to propose a immigration policy palatable to Latinos...but this immigration thing is off its axis now, and the Republicans are careening out of control with it.

The wedge has been turned around on them and their own party is split. This kind of thing comes from the portion of the party that is stuck in the past and fears anything new and not white. This will cost them way more Latino votes than Alberto gonzales will gain them, and hopefully peels off embarrassed moderates as well, all to placate the 30% that they already, and will always, have locked up.

While I think it is a sad display, and I do not want to see such paranoid and basically racist stuff debated on the floor of the Senate, if it hastens the demise of this Republican majority, it's a setback I can live with.

What I can't live with is this:
Baucus (D-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Johnson (D-SD)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)

Those are the Dems that voted "Yea."

Even if you are of the opinion that English should be the official or national language, at this point it serves no purpose to lend these Republican antics any legitimacy. These dumb symbolic votes should be reflexive "no" votes for Dems, so when they are pointed out for the bullshit that they are, there is no veil of "bipartisan."

In my opinion, for a Dem to go along with this is even worse than a Republican proposing it. Nice job, you fucking clowns.

Snow's Sticky Situation

New White House mouthpiece Tony Snow had his first briefing yesterday. He was rolling along fine with the usual spin (ie: good polls matter, bad ones don't) when Snow stepped in it...

A reporter asked Snow about why the White House was reluctant to talk about the NSA's phone-record database program. Snow said:

SNOW: Having said that, I don’t want to hug the tar baby of trying to comment on the program, the alleged program, the existence of which I can neither confirm nor deny.

Um, excuse me, Tony?

We all know what Snow meant, and there was no racist intent or context going on there. But, you would think any seasoned journalist and TV personality would, in effect, have scrubbed that phrase from their vocabulary…

Maybe Tony should consider having this play in the background during his briefings from now on if he's going to be busting out the folklore...

It might just be because I first heard the phrase tarbaby in its derogatory context, but I always find it jarring when I hear it used like this.

It also makes me question the mindset of a person who would use the phrase. Clearly Snow is technically correct in his usage, but when experienced speakers like Snow choose to use a touchy phrase like that, there is a reason—even if subconscious—in my opinion. Especially when you consider he's fresh from FOX.

This usage strikes me as a deliberate use of a politically incorrect phrase in a situation where the speaker can then defend himself for being correct, innocent, and beyond reproach, while accusing his attackers of being "overly politically correct." It's not really about race, it's about scoring points on "sensitive" liberals and others that will be tweaked by this. Limbaugh has made a nice living doing exactly this.

Unless you are telling the story of Brer Rabbit, one should avoid "hugging the tar baby" of hugging the tar baby, but no tough FOX manly-man is going to follow those rules... Can't you just picture Hannity or O'Reilly getting all indignant and try to project over something like this? "I used the term correctly. Maybe you have a problem and that's why you heard it a different way..."

Problem is, Snow doesn't work at FOX anymore.

Good. His blood is already in the water as far as I'm concerned…

[h/t The Carpetbagger Report]

UPDATE: It hasn't been that long since a much less-public figure than the White House Spokesman used this phrase and had to apologize for it [link]. How 'bout it Brer Tony?

Hmm. I like that. From now on, I think I'll refer to Snow as Brer Tony, and maybe throw that old timey fiddle in as a hotlink too...

Link(s): People make fun of '70s clothing, but that's only because they blocked out the food...

The best thing about the internet is that it serves as a forum to make fun of the most random shit imaginable. Like those 70s recipe cards. You remember, they came with their own attractive file box...

Then there's James Lileks' site.

[The Comics Curmudgeon got this started]

Bush Screws Up Everyone's Night, and His Presidency

I think this speech is going to go down as a watershed moment for this Presidency...

The moment when even his casual base* looked at him and said:

"What is he talking about?"

"Is he serious? National Guard to defend against Mexico?"

"Anything about WMD from Tijuana?"

"Come on, you are really messing up the TiVo for my season finales."

He took a bad plan, and took it public in a big way. And I don't think it fooled anyone.

--

* By "casual base" I mean those who reflexively support the President, put magnets on the cars, etc, but don't pay close attention to everything. He unmasked himself to those people last night, and I think he is going to pay. Hopefully the Congressional Republicans pay right along with him.

2006 Word of the Year: Kakistocracy

Every year a few of the big dictionaries and dialect experts determine the "Word of the Year." A couple years back it was "blogs." Somehow, inexplicably, last year Merriam-Webster tapped "Integrity" over runners-up "Tsunami" and "Hurricane" among others—I suppose picking a word meant chopping off the "lack of" to be official...

Anyway, I want to kick off the campaign for this year's word right now.

kakistocracy (kak·is·toc·ra·cy) n.
Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.

I wonder if you can guess my inspiration?...

Housing Sec. Canceled Contract Because Contractor Criticized Bush, Apparently Violating Law
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson publicly admitted that he canceled a government contract with a business because the CEO was critical of President Bush. From the Dallas Business Journal:

“He had made every effort to get a contract with HUD for 10 years,” Jackson said of the prospective contractor. “He made a heck of a proposal and was on the (General Services Administration) list, so we selected him. He came to see me and thank me for selecting him. Then he said something … he said, ‘I have a problem with your president.’

“I said, ‘What do you mean?’ He said, ‘I don’t like President Bush.’ I thought to myself, ‘Brother, you have a disconnect — the president is elected, I was selected. You wouldn’t be getting the contract unless I was sitting here. If you have a problem with the president, don’t tell the secretary.’

“He didn’t get the contract,” Jackson continued. “Why should I reward someone who doesn’t like the president? [...]”

Jackson’s conduct appears to be in violation of federal law. From the Federal Acquisition Regulations, 48 CFR 3.101-1:

Government business shall be conducted in a manner above reproach and, except as authorized by statute or regulation, with complete impartiality and with preferential treatment for none. Transactions relating to the expenditure of public funds require the highest degree of public trust and an impeccable standard of conduct.

Jackson has admitted that this particular contract was not awarded with “impartiality.” The business that would have been awarded the contract was excluded because of the contractor’s political views.

The Competition in Contracting Act (41 U.S.C. 253(b)(1)) details the six circumstances in which a particular contractor can be excluded. Needless to say, political views are not on the list.

It is also highly unusual for a cabinet secretary to be involved in the awarding or cancellation of a particular contract. More on this story soon.

Now I am certainly not naive enough to believe that contracts are awarded with "complete impartiality." What gets me is not the cronyism and favoritism—it's the brazen manner in which this Administration conducts it. I mean, the Cabinet Secretary went out and bragged about cancelling a contract—a contract that had already been awarded—because the guy didn't like President Bush. By that standard, I guess that means the government will only be soliciting contacts from 30% of the country from now on...

Seriously though, this was completely wrong and appears to be a violation of the law, as well as this business owner's First Amendment rights. Jackson should be removed. Now.

So it starts here and now. Let's spread it like a dialectic pandemic. Far and wide across the country. I want it on the Daily Show (God, that would be great) Kakistocracy. What makes this even more fun, is that this word is pretty obscure, let's make it known and make it synonymous with the Bush Administration.

[h/t: Otto Man for the story, and IRod (in the comments) for the word.]

UPDATE: The official defense of Jackson has been released — he was lying. Yes. That's really what they are serving up as the cover story, "He made it up."

UPDATE 2: From a commenter at Kos:

Kakistocracy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Kakistocracy is derived from the Greek kakistos, the superlative of kakos (κακός) meaning bad. The word literally means "government by the worst elements of society." It can refer to any system of management controlled by the least competent, least qualified, most unreliable, or the most evil members of a society.
Kakistocracy is not used to describe governments run by persons whose primary motivation is graft---the word for that is kleptocracy. However, the two are not entirely mutually exclusive, as it is possible to be both bad and greedy.

You bet. George W. bush works hard to prove it every day!

UPDATE 3--06/06/07: Last week during the Scripps National Spelling Bee, there was a young girl from Madison, WIwhose profile revealed that her favorite word was "kakistocracy." Needless to say, from that point on, she was the one I wanted to win—even though there was a kid from the town I grew up in (Avon, CT) still in contention!

Twelve year old, already politically aware, badass rebel girl vs. a bunch of über-nerd boys? No contest. My girls are going to follow in her footsteps...

Welcome to anybone else who clicks over from a Google "kakistocracy" search. Look around a bit, there's a few years worth of me ranting about all sorts of stuff.

The 9/11 Movie

United 93 opens in theaters this weekend and I have my thoughts about the fact that this movie is coming out, but I need to spend a bit more time sorting them out before I can put them down in a coherent post.

In short, I don't think this movie right now is a good thing. I don't particularly want to see it (certainly not in a theater). And I don't think we as a country are ready for it.

There's a short "Look Inside" video here, and it's compelling. I don't doubt the sincerity of many of the people involved in making this film. I also don't question the desire of many of the families to have the story told. They might be ready for it. they might need it, but that doesn't mean the rest of the country is ready or needs it.

It may have been five years since the events took place, but they are still much to enwined in the politics of today. We are still reminded daily of "the lessons of 9/11" by those who exploit it. I fear that this film will do more towards those ends than actually offering a healing experience. That dishonors those people and their families far more than this film could possibly honor them.

There's a good thread on this over at The Oh Really Factor. Check it out.

More to come from me later.

Desert Island—Circuit City Edition

From Otto, who got it from Shakes, who picked it up somewhere else I'm sure...

You know you are about to get dumped on a desert island. There will be a complete home entertainment center—solar-powered? Made of coconuts ala the Professor? 5:1 surround?—Doesn't matter. It works, and you have to select the following things to keep you going the rest of your days.

Album
Book
Film
Complete television series

What'll it be?

Friday Random Ten

They opened a new library branch here in Ann Arbor, and outfitted it with all new stuff. New books, new DVDs, and best of all, new CDs. I have been burning a hole in my library card and ripping discs like a madman over the last couple weeks. It's like they tasked a college radio DJ wih stocking the shelves...MC5, Big Star, Killers, Modest Mouse, Fallout Boy...the list goes on and on.

Unfortunately, those tunes still reside on my hard drive and haven't made it into the Pod yet. Here goes...

1. "She Gave Me Love" - Getaway People
2. "Rose Colored Glasses" - School of Fish
3. "My Doorbell" - The White Stripes
4. "Silverfuck" - Smashing Pumpkins
5. "Monkey Man" - Rolling Stones
6. "Deaf, Dumb, Blind'" - NRBQ
7. "Louder Than A Bomb" - Public Enemy
8. "Oddfellows Local 151" - REM
9. "Girl From a Pawnshop (live)" - Black Crowes
10. "Colorful Revolution" - Red Walls

Proceed to the comments for the director's cut...

Master and Commander. Of the Titanic.

In a brief column well worth reading, Greg Mitchell tries to prod the press into acknowledging the impending crisis that is three more years of Bush...

Our president, in a time of war, terrorism and nuclear intrigue, will likely remain in office for another 33 months, with crushingly low approval ratings that are still inching lower. Facing a similar problem, voters had a chance to quickly toss Jimmy Carter out of office, and did so. With a similar lengthy period left on his White House lease, Richard Nixon quit, facing impeachment. Neither outcome is at hand this time...

That is indeed a problem. And since Bush's primary motivation over the remainder of his tenure will likely be split between dodging scandals, gutting regulations and enriching himself and his cronies, there is little hope for any good to come of President Dubya regardless of the midterms. Mitchell then directs us to his canary in the media coalmine:

So let’s assume, as Nixon might put it, that we do have George Bush to kick around for another almost-three-years. How worried should we be about the possible damage he might inflict -- and what can the press do about it?

Consider Thomas Friedman’s column in The New York Times today, and its implications.

Friedman, who still supports the Iraq war, opens by declaring that given a choice between a nuclear Iran and an attack on that country engineered by the White House, he would choose the former. That’s how little he trusts the diplomatic and military chops of Bush, Rumsfeld, Condi and Co. He cites “the level of incompetence that the Bush team has displayed in Iraq, and its refusal to acknowledge any mistakes or remove those who made them.”

But then he goes on: “I look at the Bush national security officials much the way I look at drunken drivers. I just want to take away their foreign policy driver's licenses for the next three years. Sorry, boys and girls, you have to stay home now -- or take a taxi. ... You will not be driving alone. Not with my car.”

The problem -- the crisis -- is that Bush and Co. likely WILL be driving the “car” for 33 more months.

The fact that Friedman is right doesn't stop me from wanting to throw him around an alley filled with garbage cans like a renegade cop (or Easter Bunny) for coming up with this conclusion four years too late.

Bush's (and Rumsfeld & Cheney's) unique blend of stubborn incompetence and arrogance was readily apparent before we went into Iraq, and Friedman was among the biggest War cheerleaders. Just because a few pages of your "Flat Earth" book were interchangable with some PNAC binder does not mean these guys ever gave a shit about the greater good of the Middle East like you purport to.

So, Tom, nicely-made points taken, but your "told you so moment" never materialized—you were as wrong as Bush himself for believing in him. Now sit down and shut the fuck up. Okay?

Stopping McCain

There's been a bit of a debate over the last week or so between some on our side about John McCain and what he truly represents. There's a lot to digest on McCain, but the more I see him, the more it is apparent he is an orthodox Conservative in Progressive Maverick clothing. In many, many ways a McCain Presidency would be nothing more than a slightly improved extension of the Bush Administration. We all know we cannot afford that. A commenter responding to Ezra's post at The American Prospect pretty much nails it:

If bloggers on the same liberal site can't agree on whether or not McCain's a conservative, then it's clear that a Democratic nominee wouldn't be able to effectively portray him as out of the mainstream--which is all the more reason why we need to hope he loses in the primary. The good news is that despite his fondling of Falwell the fundies still don't trust him.

Yup. We cannot really hope to beat McCain in the general election. Unless the Republican Party becomes completely radioactive by 2008 (unlikely), I can see McCain mowing down anyone the Dems send up to bat against him. He needs to be derailed in the primaries or he will be the next President.

More Reading: Greg at The Talent Show, Kevin Drum and the Chait TNR story that advances the notion McCain is a closet liberal...

Ezra on Malkin. And McCain. And Lots of Other Stuff...

Ezra puts together one of the best, and most thoughtful, posts about the whole Malkin v. college protesters dust-up, here. He also takes on the topic of John McCain this week, continues his string of good posts on U.S. healthcare, and some other stuff too. Just go to the top of the page and scroll...

Easter's Over . . . Watch Your Ass!

[h/t Otto Man]

With [Same] Sex You Get Egg Roll

This is excellent.

Gay, lesbian parents to line up for Easter Egg Roll tickets
The White House Easter Egg Roll has been a Washington tradition since the mid-19th century.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Hundreds of gay and lesbian parents hoping to take their families to the annual White House Easter Egg Roll plan to start lining up Friday evening to make sure they get tickets for the Monday event.

Thousands of tickets -- an estimated 16,000 last year -- are given away on a first-come-first-served basis beginning at 7:30 a.m. Saturday.

National Park Service officials said Wednesday that children of all ages may attend as long as there is at least one child 7 years old or younger, and no more than two adults per group.


First lady Laura Bush's office issued a statement saying all families are welcome to attend.

Really, Mrs. First Lady? All families?

[...] Some say the gay and lesbian parents are playing politics.

"I think it's inappropriate to use a children's event to make a political statement," said Mark D. Tooley of the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

[...] The egg roll has been a Washington tradition since the mid-19th century. Children use spoons to push colored eggs through the grass in a race. Past events have included petting zoos and White House staff members in bunny costumes.

The president sometimes makes a brief appearance, and the first lady often reads a story. The White House has not announced plans for this year.

Something tells me that if the lawn is populated with gay families, George and Laura will find themselves otherwise occupied. Afraid of the gays or afraid of their base—it's all the same—they are chickenshits.

But good for the families making a statement. If coming out into broad daylight and enjoying something everyone else can do should be considered making a statement...

UPDATE: Well I was prepared to offer Bush some credit for showing up with Laura to kick off the Egg Roll, even posing for pictures, but it might be premature to do so. It seems the Bushes were long gone before the gay and lesbian families were allowed in. Despite getting the first tickets and waiting the longest, those families were given tickets for admission 11:00 a.m. — hours after the opening ceremony the Bushes attended. I'll find out more and get some links later...

->POP!<- Bubble Bursts

Bush has been venturing outside the protection of his invite-only, ass-kiss events and taking some unscripted questions at events open to anyone lately. I'll give him credit for that. At a time when he is truly embattled and hampered by the lowest numbers of his Presidency (yet--they're about to get lower), it is to his credit that he is facing the public. I'd honestly have expected him and Rove to retreat to full protection and propaganda mode.

There's a risk for Bush doing this, someone might actually call him out. And it happened to him yesterday...

Q: [from audience to Bush] You never stop talking about freedom, and I appreciate that. But while I listen to you talk about freedom, I see you assert your right to tap my telephone, to arrest me and hold me without charges, to try to preclude me from breathing clean air and drinking clean water and eating safe food. If I were a woman, you’d like to restrict my opportunity to make a choice and decision about whether I can abort a pregnancy on my own behalf. You are –

THE PRESIDENT: I’m not your favorite guy. Go ahead. (Laughter and applause.) Go on, what’s your question?

Q Okay, I don’t have a question. What I wanted to say to you is that I — in my lifetime, I have never felt more ashamed of, nor more frightened by my leadership in Washington, including the presidency, by the Senate, and –

AUDIENCE MEMBERS: Booo!

THE PRESIDENT: No, wait a sec — let him speak.

Q And I would hope — I feel like despite your rhetoric, that compassion and common sense have been left far behind during your administration, and I would hope from time to time that you have the humility and the grace to be ashamed of yourself inside yourself. And I also want to say I really appreciate the courtesy of allowing me to speak what I’m saying to you right now. That is part of what this country is about.

THE PRESIDENT: It is, yes. (Applause.)

That was a North Carolina man named Harry Taylor. You should watch the video. He got off a pretty good shot at Bush, and managed to get quite a few topics in as well.

An how did Bush handle it? With some awkward bady language and one of his chuckling-at-himself jokes. Bush's joke was rude and completely innappropriate given the seriousness of this guy's comments, but it masterfully lightened the mood and impact of anything this guy was going to say for his supporters in the Hall and watching the video. He also squints and shields his eyes while listening to the comments—I think an attempt to diminish this guy's stature, making him seem small, insignificant and distant. In Bush's full response (transcript at the link) he further diminshes the guy, implying that his comments were unwelcome to most people... All in all, I'd say Bush weathers it fairly well, and goes into his stock rhetoric to "answer" the guy's "question", when it was really not a question but an indictment. It's unfortunate that Taylor looks like a wussy liberal straight from Central Casting, but he's got some stones behind those baggy pleats.

Anyway. Go watch the video and raise your glass to Harry Taylor tonite. He got his chance to say something to the President and he did. For all of us, and all of us to see.

Quick Opening Day Thoughts

I know it's officially been spring for a couple weeks, and we just passed the screw-job that is turning the clocks ahead, but I don't feel like it's really spring until I do some work in the yard, and I get to listen to the game while I do it.

I did the yard-work part this weekend, I look forward to the accompaniment of an AM broadcast next time out...

I really like the Sox this year. I know lots of people are boo-hooing over the departure of Johnny Damon, but I think Coco Crisp will be much better over the next four years than Damon will be.

Wily Mo Pena is just what Trot Nixon needs, a bashing right-handed platoon partner, and Keith Foulke looks like he's back to his old not-quite-dominating, yet somehow successful self.

It's hip to pick the Yanks this year, especially after signing Damon, but if you look at it, it's really just another past-the-prime free agent signing—the kind that has never worked for them yet...

Go Sox!

NOTE: Schilling will lose (hard) today in Texas, and the Sox bandwagon will get some more elbow room as people jump ship. That's fine by me. I know Schilling will be fine, and the Sox will prevail over thhe long haul. As an aside, knowing that Schilling is such a Republican, Bush-loving jackass, really makes it hard for me to like him.

--

This is crap. Jimmy Rollins might be a nice guy, and normally, I'd be happy to root for any Yankee-held record to fall, but I'm sorry, picking late August to start your hitting streak is just bad timing. As far as I am concerned, that streak ended when the 2005 season did.

Part of what makes the 56-game hitting streak an impressive and as yet unattainable record is the grind of having to get a hit every day for two months. Joe Dimaggio didn't get a 180-day break in the middle of his hitting streak. Tony Gwynn never got credit for hitting .400 even though he did it over a 162 game period (more than once, I believe). He had to hit .400 for the season, not just a hot second-half rolling over to a hot first half.

I cannot even believe that people are going to count this streak.

--

My new go-to baseball/Sox guy Chad Finn has a good season preview up.