LET THE DISTRACTION BEGIN...

Lots of reasons to keep us distracted:

"Washington has decreed that Saddam would only be charged for a limited number of domestic crimes so that the truth of its own support for the dictator would not come out in open court."

from the Tehran Times:

http://www.watchingamerica.com/tehrantimes000017.html

from firedoglake on the Alito nomination...

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005/10/bush-nominates-alito-is-third-time.html

this whole post is well worth reading but at the bottom, they point to three other sites/links with specific info:

UPDATE: TalkLeft has more, and none of it is good. http://talkleft.com/new_archives/012943.html

UPDATE #2: The WaPo has its initial article up on the Alito nomination. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/31/AR2005103100180.html

Keep an eye on their Supreme Court blog, which will update continuously. WaPo has been doing a fantastic job with this, in terms of keeping up with all the statements, allegations, etc., as they hit the wires.
http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/campaignforthecourt/

UPDATE #3: Reader Craig points to this great article on analyzing the Alito nomination by comparison to O'Connor. Great stuff and well worth the read.
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2005/10/way-to-attack-alito.html

Libby to make 1st court appearance Thursday By Adam Entous
1 hour, 14 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vice President Dick Cheney's long-time chief of staff, Lewis Libby, who resigned last week after being indicted in a CIA leak investigation, will make his first court appearance on Thursday for an arraignment, a court official said. He is expected to plead innocent.

The federal judge chosen to handle Libby's case, Reggie Walton, also could set a schedule for the filing of motions, and possibly a trial date during the 10:30 a.m. (1530 GMT) court session.

Libby, who was indicted on Friday on charges of obstructing justice, perjury and making false statements, has promised a vigorous defense.

As part of his strategy, Libby is expected to argue that any incorrect information he provided to federal investigators or the grand jury was the result of lapses in memory, rather than intentional lies, according to Libby's lawyer and other attorneys involved in the case.

Libby is the only person who has been charged in the two-year investigation into the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity.

Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, narrowly escaped indictment on Friday but remains under investigation, lawyers involved in the case said. Rove provided new information last week to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald that apparently prompted the prosecutor to reconsider charging Rove for making false statements, the lawyers said.

Democrats have called on Rove to step down over his role in the leak and some Republicans have urged Bush to shake up his White House staff. Bush ignored a shouted question about whether he should fire Rove during an Oval Office appearance on Monday.

Libby's indictment was a damaging blow to the White House, which is already reeling from the mounting U.S. death toll from the Iraq war, the bungled response to Hurricane Katrina and the withdrawal of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, under fire from Bush's conservative power base.

Plame's identity was leaked to the media in July 2003 after her diplomat husband, Joseph Wilson, accused the Bush administration of twisting prewar intelligence to support action against Iraq. Wilson said the leak was made deliberately to erode his credibility.

A public trial could expose the role played by Cheney's secretive office in the leak case, which has put a spotlight on how the administration sold the nation on the war in Iraq and aggressively countered its critics.

Lawyers involved in the case said Cheney himself and other top White House officials named in the indictment could be called as witnesses.

According to the indictment, Libby learned from Cheney himself on June 12, 2003, that Wilson's wife worked in the CIA's counterproliferation division.

So they won’t be talking about Lewis Libby’s indictment, or the ongoing investigation into who else at the White House was involved in the Plame Leak.

Sometimes I just have to marvel at how stupid these people think we are…

Posted by Victoria Ellen at October 31, 2005 02:05 PM

Well, if we didn't keep falling for it, they wouldn't keep doing it. I hate to say that, but it's true.

They bombard us with so many atrocious actions - from torturing uncharged detainees for years on end, to their efforts to remove environmental protections, consumer protections and civil rights - that it's hard for people of conscience to know where to start.

Make no mistake. This is NOT about RvW. That's a cookie. The real target is the set of laws that protect our environment, our civil rights (whether it be about gender or race or privacy), our collective desire to lift children from their roots of poverty, and our right to be safe from corporate greed.

The worst thing Dems could do is talk about RvW.

Posted by: Fe at October 31, 2005 02:41 PM

What's the source? Do you have a link?

I just realized how to save this beloved nation in one fell swoop.

Overturn the ban on walking sticks in Congress.

Normally I would agree that "The worst thing Dems could do is talk about Roe v Wade"

But why? Lincoln Chaffee is up for re-election next Nov and he claims to be pro choice. So is Snowe and Collins in the next few years, they are supposed pro choice Republicans as is Specter who is from Pa the same as Alioto.Why shouldn't these so called pro choice Republicans be forced to choose b/w women's rights and the Rpublican party's dogma. Perhaps exposing their hypocrisy can be used against them in their next election.

Why should we dance around the issue. I saw Dobson and Reeve doing back flips over having another vote to undo Roe v Wade. I am sick and tired of our party trying to play nice and accomodating. What has that gotten us?

Enough of playing nice.

Christy the right wants to undo Roe v Wade as all of the other civil rights my generation has fought for for 50 years. When that happens hell will break loose in this country. Let Republicans suffer the wrath of young women voters for generations. They deserve it.

dwahzon:

link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051031/pl_nm/bush_leak1_dc_8;_ylt=AvZ9rM8xhxi63s68bzqIRUlqP0AC;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

from Reuters

Kerry on Alito: Bush's sagging numbers no excuse to reopen 'wounds in
America'
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Kerry_on_Alito_Bushs_sagging_numbers_1031.html

"Every American should be deeply concerned that the far right wing which prevented Harriet Miers from even receiving a Senate hearing is celebrating Judge Alito's nomination and urging the Senate to rubber stamp the swing vote on our rights and liberties. Has the right wing now forced a weakened President to nominate a divisive justice in the mold of Antonin Scalia? With civil rights, privacy rights, and mainstream American values hanging in the balance, the President's sagging political position in his own party is no excuse to reopen wounds in America which a President should seek to repair.

"In nominating a successor to Justice O'Connor, President Bush had the power to unite the country by nominating a highly qualified woman or minority who would put the Constitution first and reflect the diversity of our country. Instead, the record must be studied, the documents must be made available, and the questions must be answered conclusively, to determine whether the president has chosen to divide the country with a nominee outside the ideological mainstream." ++

Bush ignored a shouted question about whether he should fire Rove during an Oval Office appearance on Monday.
---------------

Rove Is "Official A"; Wilson Calls for His Firing

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/103105X.shtml

Late Friday, three people close to the investigation, each asking to remain unidentified because of grand jury secrecy, identified Rove as Official A. "I think the president should fire him ... these are firing offenses," Joe Wilson, a retired career US diplomat, said of Rove.

Coverage of CIA leak investigation -
Mr. Fitzgerald Calling
http://www.truthout.org/fitzgeraldcalling.shtml

A defense attorney shares some thoughts in this diary at daily kos after discussing it "with fellow defense attorneys and prosecutors."

A plain english description of the sentencing guidelines impact and some of their thoughts/questions about the indictments.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/31/124027/48

As a mother of five.

I say....

Keep your damn laws OFF my body.

And until they get gutted 5 times in the name of life I don't give a damn what they think they can tell me to do. This is an illegal ROUGE regime and g**dammit I am sick and tired of thier OPEN treason against us while our people start filling the streets in hunger.

F**k sitting back.
F**k negotiating.
F**k going along to get along.

I REFUSE to acknowledge thier authority anymore and wether they like it or not it is their own fault for violating ALL THE LAWS EVER held sacrosainct by this nation.

From now on the ANSWER IS ALWAYS NO.

Rouge Regime. Time to name a duck a duck.

Nothing more. Nothing Less.

All hell has ALREADY broke loose.

It first came as hunger. It will end with the old and young freezing to death on our streets.

Live free or die.

There ARE no other choices now.

Just say no to Alito. If Dubya wants a battle, it's time that we gave him one.

From now on, the answer is ALWAYS NO.

Ending the Fraudulence
Paul Krugman, The New York Times
Monday 31 October 2005
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/103105O.shtml

Let me be frank: it has been a long political nightmare. For some of us, daily life has remained safe and comfortable, so the nightmare has merely been intellectual: we realized early on that this administration was cynical, dishonest and incompetent, but spent a long time unable to get others to see the obvious. For others - above all, of course, those Americans risking their lives in a war whose real rationale has never been explained - the nightmare has been all too concrete.

So is the nightmare finally coming to an end? Yes, I think so. I have no idea whether Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, will bring more indictments in the Plame affair. In any case, I don't share fantasies that Dick Cheney will be forced to resign; even Karl Rove may keep his post. One way or another, the Bush administration will stagger on for three more years. But its essential fraudulence stands exposed, and it's hard to see how that exposure can be undone.

What do I mean by essential fraudulence? Basically, I mean the way an administration with an almost unbroken record of policy failure has nonetheless achieved political dominance through a carefully cultivated set of myths.

The record of policy failure is truly remarkable. It sometimes seems as if President Bush and Mr. Cheney are Midases in reverse: everything they touch - from Iraq reconstruction to hurricane relief, from prescription drug coverage to the pursuit of Osama - turns to crud. Even the few apparent successes turn out to contain failures at their core: for example, real G.D.P. may be up, but real wages are down.

The point is that this administration's political triumphs have never been based on its real-world achievements, which are few and far between. The administration has, instead, built its power on myths: the myth of presidential leadership, the ugly myth that the administration is patriotic while its critics are not. Take away those myths, and the administration has nothing left.

Well, Katrina ended the leadership myth, which was already fading as the war dragged on. There was a time when a photo of Mr. Bush looking out the window of Air Force One on 9/11 became an iconic image of leadership. Now, a similar image of Mr. Bush looking out at a flooded New Orleans has become an iconic image of his lack of connection. Pundits may try to resurrect Mr. Bush's reputation, but his cult of personality is dead - and the inscription on the tombstone reads, "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job."

Meanwhile, the Plame inquiry, however it winds up, has ended the myth of the administration's monopoly on patriotism, which was also fading in the face of the war.

Apologists can shout all they like that no laws were broken, that hardball politics is nothing new, or whatever. The fact remains that officials close to both Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush leaked the identity of an undercover operative for political reasons. Whether or not that act was illegal, it was clearly unpatriotic.

And the Plame affair has also solidified the public's growing doubts about the administration's morals. By a three-to-one margin, according to a Washington Post poll, the public now believes that the level of ethics and honesty in the government has declined rather than risen under Mr. Bush.

So the Bush administration has lost the myths that sustained its mojo, and with them much of its power to do harm. But the nightmare won't be fully over until two things happen.

First, politicians will have to admit that they were misled. Second, the news media will have to face up to their role in allowing incompetents to pose as leaders and political apparatchiks to pose as patriots.

It's a sad commentary on the timidity of most Democrats that even now, with Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former chief of staff, telling us how policy was "hijacked" by the Cheney-Rumsfeld "cabal," it's hard to get leading figures to admit that they were misled into supporting the Iraq war. Kudos to John Kerry for finally saying just that last week.

And as for the media: these days, there is much harsh, justified criticism of the failure of major news organizations, this one included,to exert due diligence on rationales for the war. But the failures that made the long nightmare possible began much earlier, during the weeks after 9/11, when the media eagerly helped our political leaders build up a completely false picture of who they were.

So the long nightmare won't really be over until journalists ask themselves: what did we know, when did we know it, and why didn't we tell the public?

ira
It sounds like Delay plans to put the Dems on trial instead of defending himself (Could it be that he has no defense?)

It's the usual puke* tactic, but will it wash in a court of law-- I'm not guilty because I can make it look like others broke the law...?

* Note: There are Republicans wih integrity. This term refers to the others.

Note who has now signed the world can't wait statement:

http://www.worldcantwait.net/

Who is going to walk out on Wednesday at noon?

It's the usual puke* tactic, but will it wash in a court of law-- I'm not guilty because I can make it look like others broke the law...?

In Texas court's it would require a charge to the jury at the end of trial with a non existent defense; not covered by the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

the answer is no. I suspect that Judge Perkins will bend over backwards to keep politics, and political party affiliation out of the court room and much like Fitzgerald rely on the state's B.O.P. and charges to the jury.

My real fear is that a Democratic Judge will go overboard to prove his impartiality and rule in favor of Degeurin on motions and objections where he might not otherwise, which is behind their strategy to put any judge on the defensive.

These stories and antics are getting news play in the Travis Cty jury pool which may backfire and be insulting to the integrity of Travis Cty jusrists, but that's just my guess.

Understand that even if Earl wins at trial DeLay will have a very sympathetic Ct. of Criminal Appeals who will be pressured to make fair rulings by Earl from the other direction.

re DeLay
I really don't understand why all parties aren't put under a gag order (not that anybody but Delay's surrogates are on teh campaign trail...)

Hopefully a Gag Order will be Judge Perkin's first ruling once the adminstrative judge overrules DeLay's bogus motion to recuse and transfer. Texas Courts aren't too fond of forum shopping for a sympathetic judge, and Deguerin knows that.

Today October 31, 2005 should be announced by Harry Reid as Day 1 of the 2006 Congressional and 2008 Presidential Election. The Congressional and Presidential Campaign Seasons have just begun.

A REAL BREAKTHROUGH

Milwaukee Paper Apologizes for Accepting 'Cooked' WMD Evidence

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001392546

I am truly saddened by Senator's Specter's illness but as I have posted repeatedly he is one of the most unprincipled Senators I have ever seen. Starting with Clarence Thomas and Specter's smear of Anita Hill, Specter has been elected and narrowly re-elected by narrow margins in Pa. on the backs of Democrats, labor unions and pro choice groups, which I have yelled about since the first days of the creation of the JK blog site. Now he can finally put his fingers in the eyes of all pro choice Dems who have been stupid enough to put him in the Senate. With Arlen's blessings this extremist jurist will easily sail through his judiciary commitee, on the way to confirmation, and yes changing women's lives for generations, Thank you voters of Pa.for not paying attention to what your votes in Senate elections really mean to this country.

"Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a supporter of abortion rights, said he would be "interested in Judge Alito's views on following precedents."

Alito, by his own account, "has worked hard to follow the precedents of the Supreme Court," Specter said. "And there is a lot more to the issue of a woman's right to choose than how you may feel about it personally. We have a long tradition in the court."

Specter said Alito has a "very distinguished record" that includes about 300 written judicial opinions and involvement in some 3,500 cases. Specter's committee will hold the Senate's hearings on Alito's nomination."

Senator Specter will now be known for delivering 2 of the worst, most extreme Supreme Court Justices of the 20th and 21st Century.

Senator Specter's

from the NY Times:

October 31, 2005
October Is 4th Deadliest Month for U.S. Forces in Iraq
By SABRINA TAVERNISE

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 31 - The United States military announced the deaths of seven Americans near Baghdad today, making October the bloodiest month for troops here since January.

Six soldiers and one marine were killed in three separate roadside bomb attacks in two days, the military said in a statement. Four soldiers were killed when their vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb in Yusifiya, south of Baghdad, and two more died in a similar blast near Balad, north of the capital. A marine died in a roadside bomb attack on Sunday near Amiriyah, southwest of Baghdad.

The attacks brought the number of Americans killed in October to 92, the highest monthly toll since January, when 106 American troops were killed in violence ahead of national elections here.

That death toll has been surpassed only two other times since the war began: in November 2004, when 137 Americans died, and in April 2004, when 135 died. Those months featured major conflicts with, respectively, Sunni Arab rebels in Falluja, west of Baghdad, and Shiites loyal to a religious leader in Najaf, in the south.
~snip~

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/31/international/middleeast/31cnd-iraq.html?ex=1288414800&en=c1fd9ed436cd15b6&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

New CNN Poll:

55% of Americans believe Bush's Presidency has been a failure.

"This American Life" - the special on NPR that covered Iraq, the one my friend wanted me so badly to hear - it's on their website or you can get it on CD or there is even a way to send it via mP3 using http://www.yousendit.com - right now we're sending it to people overseas & it's a little bit of a long download but it's working well. It's great! I'm listening right now. It's the voices of those who were in Iraq and who they are as people, not statistics. They come back & feel that civilians here do not really understand what it means that there is a war going on.

Which factor should carry more importance in choosing a Supreme Court nominee?

Gender or ethnicity
2% 1200 votes

Ideology
33% 19302 votes

Judicial experience
63% 36332 votes

Religion
2% 1281 votes

Total: 58115 votes

this is clever! try it out and send it to anyone you know in Pennsylvania!

"election year Rick quiz"
http://bobcaseyforpa.com/quiz.html

From Whitehouse.gov: interview with Laura Bush on Jay Leno

Q Well, let me ask you this. When you watch TV, is it hard for you when the TV is critical of your husband?

MRS. BUSH: Sure.

Q Do you think it's harder being the person or being in love with the person?

MRS. BUSH: I think it's harder being in love with the person. You know, you hate to see somebody you love criticized or characterized in a way that you know they're not.

But actually, I don't watch that much television.

Q Late at night? (Laughter.)

MRS. BUSH: Well, every once in a while.
(Laughter.)

Q Now, you have discussions with your husband, obviously. Do you offer opinions when things -- whatever the story of the day is?

MRS. BUSH: Sure. Sure. (Laughter.)

Actually, when he was running for Congress the very first time, his mother told me -- Barbara Bush said, never criticize George's speeches. So I really took her advice to heart and never criticized any of his speeches.

I knew there were plenty of other critics without me being one of them. Until one night, we were driving into our driveway and he said, tell me truth, how was my speech. And I said, well, it wasn't that good. (Laughter.) And with that, he drove into the driveway, drove into the garage wall. (Laughter and applause.)

Q Wow.

MRS. BUSH: That's really true.

Q I can see why she didn't want you to that. (Laughter.)

All right. More with the First Lady right after this. (Applause.)

* * *

Q Welcome back. We're talking with Laura Bush, the First Lady of the United States.

----That's from an email - crazy friends.

I'm listening to the Lancet report special (NPR download) - the biggest cause of civilian deaths in Iraq was from the coalition. They think it's probably been mostly from air power (over 50,000 bombs have been dropped in Iraq) - so more than the number killed in accidents & by insurgents (Saddam loyalists).

Posted by: Amy at October 31, 2005 02:44 PM

I'm with Amy. Besides, I'm really not so sure the right wing wants to overturn Roe v. Wade. What would they have to complain about if it's overturned? And not only that, what will they do to those who disobey the law, if it is indeed overturned? No one has addressed that, to my knowledge...

sorry NativeTexan: this is not about Rick Santorum. We know where he stands its Arlen Specter who is famous for being multiple choice.

defarge: I am disagreeable today. we have heard the line: "I'm really not so sure the right wing wants to overturn Roe v. Wade." I just don't buy that.

They have wanted nothing more than that since 1973. Its the Superbowl for them.

Lancet Iraq civilian death study estimated 100,000 deaths, mostly due to inaccurate airstrikes - by us. It got very little press.
It came out 5 days before the US election.
It was done using rigorous scientific methods & Lancet was not really biased, had nothing to do with the media. This has been a hush up.
A researcher at Human Rights Watch didn't believe the study because the number seemed too high.
It does seem high, but if you listen to how the study was done, it is believable. The critic didn't read the report and says he knows nothing about statistics or methodology. The media were more than glad to listen to him. It turns out the Human Rights Watch guy used to work for the Pentagon & was involved in war planning and "targeting" for Iraq (the "playing card" deck). He then quit the military and became a Human Rights Watch advocate. A complete flip flop - he left the military. He helped target the bombs, then left, not because he was against the war but because his wife got a great job offer.
Who do we believe? I believe Lancet.
You have to hear this!!

The military does not require records be kept of collateral damage. There is a bureaucratic doubletalk. The guys I'm hearing (Human Rights Watch guy, Lancet guy) have talked to alot of military guys, off the record. They say the people in the military don't want to kill civilians.

Rightwing blogs that were aware of the Lancet study (100,000 civilians dead - a year ago) attacked the blogs. Some ministers denounced the study from the pulpit and said it was flawed and wrong. It is hard to tell between civilians and combattants, true, BUT half of those killed were women and children. Clearly, people could not deal with the findings. The media were afraid to report it, people were afraid to contemplate the immensity of so many civilian casualties.

Is it wrong to kill 100,000? Some say that more would have been killed in an earlier war, like in WW2 (bombs were less accurate). We killed more Japanese in 2 days than in a year in Iraq. How many deaths is worth it? All these questions are discussed in this special - all these things people don't want to think or talk about.

Don't we need a means to assess accurately what is being done to the Iraqi people? Even city police departments have ways to monitor what's going on. In this study, almost every single family cooperated and death certificates were produced in most cases.

The military makes mistakes but they don't admit them.

This is riveting. Meanwhile, my husband is watching Ambassador Wilson on another computer.

Posted by: Ira at October 31, 2005 05:42 PM

Agreed! Though I thought this at one time, especially when I saw the gay issue not go through. BUT I think this time, they recognise with their legendary crime sprees they're rolling the dice, they decided to make this final truimphant stand.

And Ed Schultz nailed it right on the head. They push through this then they will get donations out the 'ying-yang' from groups wanting their agenda passed.

Nope..I believe they're 100% serious.

ACT II NOT JUST A NUMBER

Live tape - a soldier (through a translator) is going to a police station and apologizes because women and children have died in an explosion as well as those intended to be killed. Another soldier talks over the tape about what it's like to be suspected to have done it on purpose, to have to keep repeating that it was a horrible mistake, that only Allah can bring them back, but that they help to be able to help with the healing process. Imagine your son or daughter having to do this, then having to take the name, gender and specifics for each person. Then there is a 7-10 day grieving process. The process can't be hurried. These "kids" have to try to convince these Iraqi people that they are there to make things better for them. No one asks people like Dick Cheney to have to do things like this at any time in his life. & try as we may, we don't know what it's like over there, what's going on over there. & these military people at the low levels only do the job they're assigned to do. It seems so piecemeal, so hacked-together, so poorly planned.

If you haven't, I've got to recommend a reading of the whole John Kerry speech from the other day (another media blackout, for the most part, though check out Krugman today).

DiAnne,

There were follow ups to this story, in which it was shown that if the Lancet's estimates were that far off the mark, then any such estimate using the methodology must also be discredited - i.e., every other estimate that was ever offered using the same methodology.

The Lancet numbers made Americans uncomfortable, and the Networks and print media were afraid to emphasize them in the run up to the election - much to their shame and our nation's peril. When the Networks and print media cherry pick what news items that they will report, out of fear of impacting an election or offending sensibilities, they are failing in their essential watchdog role.

ACT III What happens to the numbers -

100,000 - a year ago
What is worth so many dead? Is it helpful to think about? What do you do with that number?
According to a military ethicist (female), you do want to know. What is the good we're bringing about in the name of which violence is incurred?

An actual concrete number of dead is being measured against something that can't be measured at all - some ideal such as freedom. We can not really calculate these things, can we.

http://www.audible.com/thisamericanlife

Matthew Carnicelli
The Lancet study used a statistically robust sampling method which was described in the broadcast.

I'm sure the media wanted to hush this up, especially around the election, and to this day - we don't hear much about it.

My friend (Vietnam vet who also happens to be a research scientist) who insisted and insisted that I listen to it & who sent me the Mp3 said:

I really enjoyed that NPR radio story. The decription of the study of Iraq Civilian deaths was technical enough for me to understand that it was scientifically sound, and they also did a nice job of describing confidence limits --- I read something last week about a scientist (biologist) who complained that most persons in the US had insufficient scientific knowledge to understand and interpret advances in medicine. His conclusion was based on a survey that showed that most persons didn't understand the nature of a control group in a scientific study. I bet one could make the same arguments for mathematical understanding. This includes RISK assessment. I bet many people vote and base decisions by drawing wrong conclusions about risk. Dumb bastards are causing us all to suffer.

---a couple thoughts of my own

Those who don't believe in evolution, do they then not worry about bird flu, since unless it evolves, is not dangerous to humans.
How do they explain hair and eye color, talents, intelligence - does God decide each time? If they don't believe in evolution, do they believe in heredity at all? DNA? How do they justify using things like insulin? Isn't it unnatural according to the Bible?

Yes, the distractions have begun. The American electorate is easily manipulated and has an infitesimlly small attention span. Today's announcement has doused the flames of last week's indictments. So let's move on with what Americans really do care about. Most Americans want a Supreme Court that reflects American ideals, hopes and rights. The Supreme Court as proposed by George Bush is so far right, it has become a grotesteque caricature.

So let's accept that the focus of the fight is changing. Let's not let our indignation over last week's indictments stop us from fighting for what is right. We have to use every means that we have to stop the radical right wing fringe of America from turning this country into a theocracy. We have to stop the corporatists from using America as their personal bank and trust. We have to approach this as a battle to save America. Let's fight for what we know is right and good about this country. Let's tell those in Congress who claim to support American ideals, that we want to see them take a stand and fight for all Americans. Let's tell them that if they can't do that, they don't deserve to be there. If we truly care for our country, we will not back down.

Just today: (AP)

A Marine statement said U.S. aircraft fired precision weapons, destroying two safe houses believed used by al-Qaida figures. The statement MADE NO MENTION OF CASUALTIES, but Associated Press Television News video from the scene showed residents WAILING OVER THE BODIES of about six people, including at least three children.

At the local hospital, Dr. Ahmed al-Ani claimed 40 Iraqis, including 12 children, were killed in the attack. But the claim could not be independently verified, and figures from the area have sometimes proven exaggerated.

The footage from the scene showed Iraqi men digging through the rubble of several destroyed concrete buildings with a pitchfork or their hands. In the building of a nearby home, women wept over about half a dozen blanket-covered BODIES lined up on a floor. Some of the blankets were opened for the camera showing a man and three children.

``At least 20 innocent people were killed by the U.S. WARPLANES. Why are the Americans killing families? Where are the insurgents?'' one middle-aged man told APTN. ``WE DON'T SEE DEMOCRACY. We just see destruction.'' He didn't give his name.

http://poll.gallup.com/

I don't know if the gallup poll that was released today has been posted here yet, but it doesn't say much for the intelligence of the American people. But then again,nothing does.
Evidently, Libby was just a lone gunman- no relation to anyone else at the White House at all.
And the Repugs have convinced the American people that no crime has been committed.
It really makes me sick.
If this poll is correct, the American people make me sick.
They deserve to be screwed in every single way possible. It's what they've asked for.

Linda
That is profoundly depressing.

Posted by: Linda Enterkin at October 31, 2005 06:26 PM

Gallop isn't in line with the rest of the polling corps.

We went through the gallop debunking during the campaign.

Linda:

If the Gallup Poll represents the majority of polls, it goes against everything I've read so far regarding the public's approval rating of the Administration, which is low low low.

If you take a look at what's been happening and why the Administration is doing AMAZING tapdances, even keeping a suspected (but not yet indicted) perp in the White House, you will think before you believe the Gallup poll.

FILE UNDER "HIDE YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND AND PRESS 'PRAY' "

White House Rebuffs Calls for Shakeup
By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
18 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The White House on Monday rebuffed calls for a staff shakeup, the firing of Karl Rove and an apology by President Bush for the role of senior administration officials in the unmasking of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Three days after the indictment and resignation of Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, the administration said it would have to remain silent as long as there was an investigation of the leak and legal proceeding under way. Bush ignored reporters' questions during an Oval Office meeting with Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi.

"We don't want to do anything from here that could prejudice the opportunity for there to be a fair and impartial trial," presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said.

Friday's indictment of I. Lewis Libby and the continuing investigation of Rove were a blow to Bush's already troubled presidency. The president's approval rating has tumbled to the lowest point since he took office and Americans are unhappy about high energy prices, the costly war in Iraq and economic uncertainties.

Republicans and Democrats alike have urged Bush to begin remaking his presidency by bringing in fresh advisers with new energy to replace members of a team worn down by years of campaigning and governing. But administration officials said that was not in the works.

Cheney promoted two of his advisers to fill the jobs handled by Libby, his confidant. David Addington, who has been the vice president's legal counsel, was named chief of staff, while John Hannah, his deputy national security adviser, was named national security adviser. Both men have been on Cheney's staff for more than four years.

Libby faces his first court appearance Thursday before U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton.

"There's no discussion of staff changes beyond the usual vacancies that occur or beyond filling the vacancy that the vice president did as well," McClellan said.

While White House officials were relieved that Rove was not indicted, Democrats demanded that he be fired. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., led the charge, calling for apologies from Bush and Cheney and saying the administration should explain the vice president's role in the unmasking of Plame.

The administration refused to respond. "If people want to try and politicize this process, that's their business," McClellan said.

McClellan was repeatedly asked to acknowledge that he was wrong in 2003 when he denied that Rove or Libby were involved in disclosing Plame's identity. He said he would not comment during the ongoing legal proceedings.

For years, Gallup was considered reputable.
Yes I remember during the campaign we found out some unsavory things. Educate, educate, educate!
I work with people with advanced degrees who prefer to tune out all of this. It never ceases to amaze me. They went to a Pampered Chef party, I went to an Indictment party.

DiAnne:

Did they serve subpoenas at the Indictment Party?

(so sorry-couldn't help myself)

Let Republicans suffer the wrath of young women voters for generations. They deserve it.
Posted by: Ira at October 31, 2005 02:55 PM

I see your point about Chaffee et al, and I agree, they should be forced at the time of the election to choose between rationality and religiosity.

But this SC nomination is about a hell of a lot more than abortion rights. It's about the environment, civil rights, and consumer rights. And what is at stake is much more huge than abortion rights.

And as far as the "wrath of young women" - where is it? When I go to rallies, etc, I am, at 52, often the youngest person there. Where are these mythical young women who want the right to abortion? Where are they hiding? Many of them, at any rate, have been systematically brain-washed by religion for the last 20 years.

I don't think the Dem party should lay down it's life for them, wherever they are. Dems should talk about the much bigger issues, the environment, civil rights and consumer rights.

I simply won't be involved with a one-issue party. I'll withdraw my monthly donation if that happens.

Amy,

You are right. This is about more than one issue-no doubt about it. If the Democrats force this as an abortion only issue, they will lose this fight. It is the Republicans who will try to portray this as a single issue debate because they know that when it comes to civil rights, the environment, health care, worker's rights and the environment they will get their heads handed to them on a platter.

We can not let the Propagandists turn this into a single issue battle. They would love nothing more than to turn this into a debate over abortion. Over two thirds of the country supports a woman's right to an abortion, but when the issue is distilled down to a nominee's opinion about abortion, it is pointless to argue against their approval.

My elderly neighbor, a Vietnam veteran, a retired oil executive, and a Democrat, told me that he thinks that the internet may actually be a detriment to progress in the political arena.

He mentioned some recent research that suggests that Dems on blogs outnumber Repubs by more than 10 to 1. I forget the exact stats - maybe someone else knows. Anyway, he thinks that if we didn't have the internet to find each other, and commiserate from within our own warm, cosy home offices, we would be forced to take our outrage to the streets.

He points out that during the Vietnam era, the opposition was much more visible on the streets - everywhere you went, looked, there were protesters, signs, etc. The anger was visible. And when it came time to show up, to make a public statement by being counted, people welcomed the comraderie they knew they would find in public action, so the showed up. They needed to find others who understood, who also grieved.

I show up for almost everything, but I've been very disappointed in a lot of the progressives that I know in my area. They blog, they know about things, but they don't show up.

Just sharing this to get thoughts.

Just a quick comment on Alito – he was born in Trenton, New Jersey and grew up a Philadelphia Phillies fan. I grew up 20 minutes south of Trenton and I know about Philly fans – love ‘em or hate ‘em – they are some of the most knowledgeable sports fans out there. They are intense. And, true to form, Alito is intense – and for all the wrong reasons. He is an ultra-conservative. He is no good for America. Time to filibuster the hell out of this one – he is no good to anyone except the ultra-conservative, neocon right-wing, conservative, idealogic believers. God bless us all if this guy makes it.

They deserve to be screwed in every single way possible. It's what they've asked for.

Posted by: Linda Enterkin at October 31, 2005 06:26 PM

Heaven help me, you took the words right out of my mouth.

I'll post my new address when I get back home- Everyone welcome!

By the way - funny how MoveOn has now got a negative rep with the public, when all the right-wing PACs still work on in relative obscurity. The LSM really did a good job for the right wing there!

Let's agree to move abortion to a state issue. But, let's ALSO make welfare completely and totally a state responsibility.

Then let's allow for corporate welfare, including the welfare given to agrocorps, to only be contributed by state governments. No more federal corporate welfare.

Then, we need to attack the economic war machine that is also mainly in the red states. States will vote on exactly how many tax dollars from their state will go toward arms manufacturers. They give their share, but allotted as they see fit.

Then let all the rational folks in the red states move to more sane places.

And let the wingnuts in the red states deal with all their unwanted children, their high welfare and divorce and crime rates, their loss of civil rights, etc.

It's time for another civil war.
This is a blog, it's about opinion, right? Well, this has been mine for some time. The American people have lost their media. We won't be able to overcome that. The American brain has been washed, and all the color came out. It's now a pale, limp dishrag.

Posted by: Amy at October 31, 2005 07:59 PM

Amy,

I think you have a valid point, right now, we are the *silent* majority. I am not sure what it is going to take, but I honestly believe if it weren't for the blogosphere, we would not have had the enormous turnout in Washington protesting the Iraqi war. Still I can't disagree that blogs are much like therapy sessions for those of us who are profoundly disappointed by current events. As a protest medium we do need to take it to the streets. Yet it was only because of the JK/JE blog that I knew that my efforts were better spent in Wisconsin rather than Illinois.

This is why we can't approach this as a single issue fight:

Alito's politically conservative views were not in dispute. "Of course he's against abortion," his 90-year-old mother Rose told reporters at her home in Hamilton, N.J.

Despite the unguarded comments of a proud mother, Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), who will chair Judiciary Committee hearings, told reporters in the Capitol, "There is a lot more to do with a woman's right to choose than how you feel about it personally." The Pennsylvania Republican cited adherence to legal precedent in rulings over 30 years upholding abortion rights.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051031/ap_on_go_su_co/bush_scotus

"I'm listening to the Lancet report special (NPR download) - the biggest cause of civilian deaths in Iraq was from the coalition. They think it's probably been mostly from air power (over 50,000 bombs have been dropped in Iraq) - so more than the number killed in accidents & by insurgents (Saddam loyalists)"

Many of the bombs dropped in Iraq were Napalm and Cluster type. I apologize for the following graphic text, please skip if so inclined. Imagine what the people in Iraq went through. Very few understand what the United States did in Iraq;

Napalm is a flaming gelatin that sticks to your skin. It must be cut off with a knife and until it is will continue to burn, until it goes through. Napalm was used so they could be depleted from defense stockpiles. If you remember the infamous picture of the little girl running her clothes burned off (in veitnam), was from a napalm strike. it is a horrific weapon.

Cluster bombs are hundreds of small grenade type bomblets carried within a mother bomb. They can be set to explode over a target, fly over the target and lay these bomblets over the area, or other dispersal methods.
There is nowhere to hide, nothing that will protect you from cluster bombs. A typical bomb will kill and destroy everything in a football field size area, wound and disable everything in an area double that size. They are loaded with shrapnel, sharp metal that will cut though houses, cars, and you. Most civilian amputations come from the use of cluster bombs in Iraq.

I read estimates of thousands of napalm and cluster bombs used. Iraqis did not just die, they were burned and mutilated.
Does anyone truly believe we are not creating an entire generation of iraqi's that hate what America has done to their mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters..? What will happen when the orphan grows up, the sister recovers, the brother takes up arms to remove the invaders from Iraqi Soil. This is the next shoe to drop on inept foreign policy.

Valerie plame's cia cover was to operate a Company that actually tracked nuclear materials. It was a succesfull front to keep track of uranium and other materials that could be used to attack the United States.
When the White house destroyed her identity, the White House destroyed a valuable asset to find and eliminate real nuclear threat, not the imagined and fabricated threats used to justify the invasion of Iraq.

The Irony of what the White House has done has escaped the MSM, not to mention most journalists.

Toolmaker
I'm so glad you listened to the Lancet thing.

Re. MoveOn, blogs & activism - I can only report from Seattle. Most people I know, have met at political events or during canvassing here - many Democrats did not belong to MoveOn or read blogs. Of those, a certain proportion would take to the streets if it is a huge issue, others are reliable for everything.

If we have about 350,000 in the inner urban area (not counting suburbs). In a national election, voter turnout was 80%, so say 280,000. About 80% went for Kerry, so about 240,000. The biggest rally drew 55,000, so maybe 40% of the voters took to the streets. Of those, I don't know how many are bloggers, nor is there a good way to estimate how many who didn't take to the street are bloggers. I do know that in my neighborhood and others where I canvassed (in liberal districts about 80% Dem or more), many people did not read or contribute to blogs nor had they heard of MoveOn. I doubt in this area that blogging keeps people off the streets. If anything, I think it is public activism that leads people to blogs for information.

I was thinking the other day that use of the internet is a virtual way to organize and act and has possibly replaced some of what used to go on in coffeehouses. I was thinking about one of the places in Paris Andree showed me, where Benjamin Franklin used to frequent - no internet then!

I think the internet and activism go hand in hand. In this area, it's easy to find others without going to the internet but it's been much easier for someone like me who wanted to network nationally and even internationally, using the internet. I do also find that I know keep in touch with people I met locally doing political work (peace movement & campaign work) via the internet, both socially and to receive and disseminate information.

I know that when I lived in a rural area in South Dakota, I depended on late night radio and items in the back of magazines to find out what was going on. I suspect the internet serves the same convenient purpose now for people who don't have alot going on in their area or not consistently.

I really think that when Bush went ahead and proceeded into Iraq, people felt somewhat powerless with the "taking to the streets" approach, especially since we once had 11 million worldwide on one day. In Europe, big demonstrations and even total work strikes that used to shut the government down - don't anymore - for which I blame globalization. It's not just our corporations that want cheap labor via outsourcing and cheap resources via stealing them (though we are a terrible offender).

If more progressives than conservatives are on blogs, there should be more informed progressives than conservatives. There have been studies of where various demographics get their news and of course we know the conservatives mostly went to Fox and their talk radio, progressives to news radio, internet and newspapers as well as documentaries & exposes. As we see, the intelligent candidate was passed over by the moron via Diebold, Sequoia and so on.

This is from Congressman McDermott, Seattle

WHY WE SHOULDN'T COMPARE OUR CONSTITUTION AND IRAQ'S
It's not often that you'll see me quote conservative columnist George Will, but occasionally we do see eye to eye on an issue. In a recent editorial, he explained how the Iraqi's recent vote in favor a new constitution is not necessarily a sign of progress. He writes that "The administration's theory... is that there could not have been a bad outcome from [the October 15] vote: The mere fact of voting, by drawing Iraq's tribal factions into politics, enmeshes them in the democratic process and its civilities."
Will goes on to explain that there is strong evidence that the Iraq constitution as it's currently envisioned could cause more problems than it solves, despite the clear influences it derives from our own constitution. He writes, "The salient difference is this: America's Constitution was written to strengthen the central government for a remarkably homogeneous society. Iraq's constitution was written to make a strong central government impossible for a violently tribal society. The constitution's basis—federalism based on ethnicity—replicates the condition that contained the seeds of America's Civil War: The deepest political cleavages coincide with regional cleavages."

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!

Is this Hallowe'en?

BOO!

Boo Who ?

Look in the front of the march and you will see a very familiar face

"Forty years ago, a young teacher and her husband left their home in Newton to march through the streets of Roxbury with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to protest Boston's segregated schools and the city administrators that allowed the injustice to continue."

http://www.boston.com:80/news/local/articles/2005/10/31/stride_for_stride

--Just had Halloween kids knock on the door & handed out apples. They said, "Apples! I love apples! Finally someone is giving us something healthy." Maybe there is hope for the future.

Is this progress?

"Iraqi casualties have also risen, with 63 Iraqis killed and wounded in insurgent attacks every day in early September, up from 26 a day in March of last year, according to the military."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/01/international/middleeast/01iraq.html

November 1, 2005
Methodist Court Removes Openly Lesbian Minister
By NEELA BANERJEE

In a pair of decisions that bolstered conservatives, the highest court of the United Methodist Church defrocked an openly lesbian minister yesterday and reinstated a pastor who had been suspended for refusing to allow a gay man to become a member of his congregation.

The nine-member court, the Judicial Council, also ruled in two other cases that church law superseded local resolutions that were more inclusive toward gay men and lesbians.

The series of decisions come at a time when disputes over the role of gay men and lesbians in the clergy, and whether to bless same-sex unions, are roiling the mainline churches. The rulings served to reaffirm the Methodists' traditional stance against the ordination of "self-avowed, practicing homosexuals."

In the best-known of the cases decided yesterday, the Judicial Council removed Irene Elizabeth Stroud from the ministry. Ms. Stroud, 35, told her Philadelphia congregation in 2003 that she was a lesbian in a long-term relationship with another woman.

But church experts said the most significant decision could prove to be the little-known case of the Rev. Edward Johnson, pastor of South Hill United Methodist Church, in South Hill, Va. Mr. Johnson's decision to keep an openly gay man from joining his congregation was upheld by the Judicial Council as the rightful exercise of his pastoral discretion. He had been suspended for a year without pay by fellow ministers in Virginia, but the Judicial Council ordered his regional leaders to find a new appointment for him.

The church has declared in the past that there are no bars to the participation of gay men and women as lay people, but it also gives pastors discretion over their congregations. Stephen Drachler, a spokesman for the United Methodist Church, noted that gay men and lesbians were active members of thousands of Methodist churches across the country. But, speaking from a semiannual conference of bishops in North Carolina, he acknowledged of the ruling in the Johnson case: "The bishops are looking at this very carefully as far as what impact this may or may not have going forward. What sort of precedent does this create? What role does it create for bishops over their pastors? No one has answers to that yet."

Some Methodists had voiced concerns that the debate over gay men and women could rupture their church, the country's third-largest denomination, and cause conservatives to leave. The rulings will most likely assuage conservatives, church experts said. But the experts also said they did not expect those who want the inclusion of gay men and lesbians in the ministry to back down, even if the chances of a reversal in church policy remains remote.

"The church and mood of our culture is conservative now," said the Rev. Michele Bartlow, pastor of the First United Methodist Church of Germantown, where Ms. Stroud served as an associate pastor.

Ms. Bartlow said the council's decisions sent an "unambiguous" message that the church would not tolerate openly gay people in its clergy. "But I, like many people, will stay and fight," she said. "I think these decisions are another step in a journey, and one day the church will receive gay and lesbian people into ministry."

Ms. Stroud was stripped of her credentials in late 2004 by a lower court of the church, but that decision was reversed on appeal last April. The Judicial Council's ruling yesterday reinstated the original decision, and Ms. Stroud, who will continue as a lay pastor at the Germantown church, said in a telephone interview that she would turn in her ordination credentials.

"I felt that I was prepared for whatever might happen," she said, "but this has been a blow for me."

Among the other decisions issued yesterday by the council, at a meeting in Houston, were two involving resolutions passed by the church's California-Nevada Regional Conference and its Pacific Northwest Conference. In an effort to discourage bias based on sexual orientation, the California resolution said such orientation should be considered innate. The Pacific Northwest resolution asserted tolerance for a plurality of views on sexuality. In both cases, the council held that church law superseded the resolutions.

Church experts said they were not surprised by the rulings in these cases or in the one involving Ms. Stroud, but the decision in the case of Mr. Johnson instantly sent tremors through the church, those experts said.

Although United Methodism prohibits openly gay people in the pulpit, it welcomes all to worship. Mr. Johnson did not forbid the gay man to attend his church but said he would not allow him to become a member, according to Carole Vaughn, spokeswoman for the Virginia Regional Conference, which includes the South Hill church.

Regional church officials tried to get Mr. Johnson to change his stance, and when he refused, his peers suspended him for a year without pay. The regional conference must now reinstate him, pay him back wages and benefits and find a new position for him. Mr. Johnson could not be reached for comment.

"It is certainly the more interesting case because it has much broader ramifications," said the Rev. L. Edward Phillips, a Methodist minister and associate professor for the practice of Christian worship at Duke University Divinity School. "It makes a statement about the authority of local pastors to make determinations on the fitness of members."

"It could be used to keep gays out," Mr. Phillips added, "and I would say unfortunately, from my position, if this ruling were used by pastors for a draconian stance on this narrow issue."

Others welcomed the decision supporting Mr. Johnson.

"The Judicial Council made a precedent-setting decision in supporting a pastor who upheld" the Book of Discipline, the church's compilation of laws, procedures and doctrine, said the Rev James V. Heidinger II, president of Good News, an evangelical Methodist organization. "Most evangelical pastors would have made the same decision as Ed Johnson made."

At the heart of the disputes, several clergy said, is the profound and ongoing conflict among Methodists over the nature of homosexuality. "Is it something you can't control," Mr. Phillips said, "or something sinful and that should be repented of?"

A gay man can't even be a MEMBER of the congregation???

Andrew Sullivan on the nominations of Bush:

"The key thing to remember about Bush's nominees: they are all completely craven with respect to the executive's powers in wartime. And wartime is now defined as: for ever. In my view, the real upshot of the Court's shift under Bush may well be not in terms of the usual culture-war battles, but in terms of unrestricted executive power - to detain without charge, to cover up its own actions, and to torture. To do that, you have to get the Court out of the way. That's what Cheney is doing; and what Roberts and Alito will support. Only the Congress will be able to stop the executive from now on."

And another observation from Sullivan:

"There are now potentially five Catholics (and two Jews) on the Supreme Court." I found this interesting considering we have never had a Jewish president, and only one Catholic has ever been elected president.

Heard on this am c-span,Alito is also for every man to bear semi-auto weapons.
Turn on CNN now and watch "hell house" and how these radical right wing pastors scare the daylights out of their stupid followers...FRIGHTENING!
We need an ad depicting the horror on the faces of those innocent Iraqi children in this chaos Bush has created. Lots of Bush protesting going on around our town today and in the days to follow. We're with you all in the "days" event

Matthew Carnicelli
I think the dead Iraqis are viewed as progress & that explains the starting up of the body counts again. It didn't work during Vietnam though.

The 2nd story - that partially explains why I don't attend Methodist Church any more!!

It really is Hallowe'en.

And not one of my does dressed up! Although... I did see a buck run through (it's rutting season) with a garland of Oregon Grape Holly in his rack. Perhaps he was dressed as... father christmas?

Rockstar Minister Electrocuted

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-1852085,00.html

Boo Who ?

Posted by: abqjohn at October 31, 2005 09:50 PM

The Ghost of Nixons Past

I think we're counting dead Iraqis now in the hope that Iraqis themselves will start turning on the insurgents rather than on the Americans. It's a PR move.

When the US fesses up to all the Iraqis we killed in Shock and Awe, I'll pay attention.

Posted by: monkey at October 31, 2005 10:27 PM

LOLOL
That's funny on so many levels.
You really are the star wit on this blog!

I had heard a minister was electrocuted while doing a Baptism but in the British press I found out it was near Baylor, which is near Crawford, which is near Waco - where Dr. Pepper was invented & home of the Branch Dravidians. I didn't know it was a rock church & that Waco is also where slave children were imported to (see the article). Very interesting, as until today I hadn't even known of the proximity of Baylor, Crawford and Waco - I didn't know that students couldn't dance at Baylor til 1996 & that Bush purposely planned to become a cowboy & picked a ranch at Crawford (with Rove's help) as a PR stunt. I knew he ain't no cowboy but didn't know about all these connections. Very Halloweenish.

Just had 3 wee drummers show up - we had a drumset in the living room and one said, "Whoa dude, drummers live here." Then had a mime with a "Trick or Treat" sign (he didn't talk). I got the same reaction - "apples! I love apples! Finally someone is giving us something besides candy." Seattle kids rock!! They all make their own little protest signs too. This is where people with true moral values live.