A frequent reader of this blog emails to ask where she can find an unbiased account of what this Plamegate thing is all about.
Well, Mom, I highly recommend this. Dig as deep as you like, or browse to get to know the basics.
The Road To Burka-ville
Brio magazine is a teen health and beauty magazine put out by — wait for it — James Dobson’s Focus On The Family. In it, we find such gems as this:
Today’s fashion has taken girls away from showing off their personality and instead has them trying to show off their sexuality. It’s not something I want to see anywhere — especially when I’m at church.
Have you noticed that when you raise your hands in the air, your shirt goes up, too? Whether you’re worshiping God or signing for the hearing-impaired, a cropped top is going to be on the move when you raise your hands above your head. Do you really want to expose your tummy and back to other Christians while they’re worshiping? Why distract people from the Lord?
Sound familiar? It should:
Girls in Islamic communities are brought up in a way that they would clearly know their place in the family and in society. They must be taught from the very young age that they are inferior; that they must obey their male guardians and that they must keep their beauties hidden behind the veil until a man buys the license to use them. The most effective and visual way of doing this is by forcing young girls to wear the Islamic Hijab (veil) which is not only conveying the required message, but also hinders physical movements and naturally calms the young girl down and teaches them to behave like proper Muslim women.
– The Islamic culture and the way it affects on the mental and physical development of women, Soheila Sharifi
So, the religious right is all concerned about teenager girls showing their flesh in church, thus distracting religious men from worshipping Jesus. Now, I’m no fan of teen fashion these days (body piercing, etc.), but they are teens trying to express themselves, because that’s what teens do.
That said, the problem isn’t with the girls’ choice of dress — it is with the pervs who are checking them out while (supposedly) praying to Jesus. Apparently, the pull of the Lord isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Sometimes I think repressed people are more perverted than the rest of "heathens".
Antici-pa-yay-tion Is Making Me Wait
Plamegate Prosecutor Fitzgerald gets more office space. Doesn’t look like he’s planning on going anywhere soon. (LATE AFTERNOON UPDATE: Oops. The office space story appears to be false.)
The AP reports there will be no announcements today.
Over at TPMCafe, Paul Begala speculates on "What It’s Like" in this White House under seige (having served with Clinton during L’Affaire Lewinsky). Noting that Bush’s A-Team have all made steady exits (just like the cast of "The West Wing" in Season Six), leaving the Prez with C-level staffers, Begala adds:
And so they wait. And they sniff the royal throne. They tell the Beloved Leader he’s the victim of a partisan plot (although how the Bush CIA, which referred the Plame case for prosecution, became ground zero of Democratic liberalism escapes me). They assure him all is well. But all is not well. People are looking over their shoulders. The smart ones have stopped taking notes in meetings. The very smart ones have stopped using email for all but the most pedestrian communications. And the smartest ones have already obtained outside counsel.
When a White House is under siege, no one wants to talk to anyone. Literally, anything you say can and will be used against you. When you’re in a meeting and you see one of your colleagues taking notes, you start to wonder how long it will be before you’re interrogated based on her notes. Maybe she’s doodling. Or maybe she’s digging your grave. The mind tries to focus on the task at hand, but the grand jury is never far from your thoughts.
Compared to these folks, I had it easy. I’d never met Monica Lewinsky, had no knowledge of the affair, which took place when I was living in Austin, and I knew that neither I nor any of my colleagues were in Ken Starr’s perverse crosshairs. The Fitzgerald investigation is very different. It’s not about the President’s extracurricular activities. It’s about the essence of how the White House works – and the suggestion that this White House has become deeply corrupt.
Feels Kind Of Good, Huh?
Congrats to Chicago White Sox fans, enjoying their first championship in 88 years. I know whereof you celebrate.
Harriet Miers Officially Becomes A Question For “Trivial Pursuit – The 2000 Decade” Edition
Yup. She withdrew her nomination, and Bush "reluctantly accepted".
Still no post about it on Harriet Miers’ blog, but I’ll update here when she updates her blog.
For progressives like me, this is nothing to celebrate (the celebration comes later today when Fitzgerald announced indictments). I have a sinking feeling that the next Bush nominee will be something awful – like Owens or Brown.
UPDATE: Harriet Mier’s blog has now acknowledged the withdrawal. The once-festive pink and white website is now a stark black, and adorned with a burning candle graphic (which I stole). Harriet is waxing poetical, with such ruminations as:
"Its better to have been nominated and withdrawn then never to have been nominated at all"
and a poem sent in by a reader:
And it seems to me you lived your nomination
Like a candle in the wind:
Never fading with the sunset
When the rain set in.Goodbye Texas Rose,
From a country lost without your soul,
Who’ll miss the wings of your compassion
More than you’ll ever know.
Poor baby.
UPDATE: The text of Mier’s withdrawal letter, and some additional comments from me, are below the fold.
Not Smiling Now
CNN reportsRep. Tom DeLay failed to comply with House requirements that he disclose all contributions to a defense fund that pays his legal bills, the Texas Republican acknowledged to House officials.
He wrote officials that $20,850 contributed in 2000 and 2001 was not reported anywhere. Another $17,300 was included in the defense fund’s quarterly report but not in DeLay’s 2000 annual financial disclosure report — a separate requirement.
Other donations were understated as totaling $2,800, when the figure should have been $4,450.
It was during that period that DeLay was the subject of several House ethics investigations.
Well, Shit, John — No Duh.
John Kerry admits that his pro-war vote was a mistake, adding:
I understand that as much as we might wish it, we can’t rewind the tape of history. There is, as Robert Kennedy once said, `enough blame to go around,’ and I accept my share of the responsibility. But the mistakes of the past, no matter who made them, are no justification for marching ahead into a future of miscalculations and misjudgments and the loss of American lives with no end in sight. We each have a responsibility, to our country and our conscience, to be honest about where we should go from here. It is time for those of us who believe in a better course to say so plainly and unequivocally.
Kerry now favors partial withdrawal.
The La Repubblica Revelations
Crooked Timber has the latest. Key summary:
As best as I can piece this together, the timeline that La Repubblica is arguing for goes as follows. Italian intelligence collected [genuine] information that Hussein was trying to obtain raw uranium at the end of the 1980’s, before the First Gulf War. This information was stored by the branch of Italian intelligence dealing with weapon proliferation issues. When the invasion of Iraq was imminent, this information was brought out from the archives, and bundled together with fake documents in order to make the latter look more legitimate. This dossier was then circulated to UK and US intelligence. The latter didn’t bite at first, causing the director of Italian intelligence to use back channels to Hadley and to Wolfowitz via Ledeen. UK intelligence did bite, either then or later. UK intelligence later claimed that it had a source of intelligence independent from the faked documents saying that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium. However, according to La Repubblica the ‘independent’ source was also from Italian intelligence, and related to efforts by Hussein’s regime to obtain uranium in the 1980’s. Hence, it was for all intents and purposes irrelevant to the question of whether Hussein was trying to obtain uranium in post-sanctions Iraq.
Usual caveats apply — we don’t know how true this is, or what La Repub’s sources are.
And it begs a very important question: Why would someone in the Italian intelligence agency want to mislead US and UK intelligence with false information regarding Saddam and Niger? Were they being "helpful" or "hurtful" to Bush’s interests? In fact, in whose interest were they acting?
Bush Reinstates Wages In Katrina-land
A sign of a weak White House, with good results:
WASHINGTON – The Bush administration will reinstate rules requiring that companies awarded federal contracts for Hurricane Katrina pay prevailing wages, usually an amount close to the pay scales in local union contracts.
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., was among congressmen critical of the administration’s decision to waive the requirement and who met Wednesday with White House chief of staff Andrew Card. He said Card told them the wage requirement would be reinstated Nov. 8.
"We thought it was bad policy and bad politics, and I guess they accepted our argument," King told The Associated Press. "There’s no need to antagonize organized labor."
King was part of a congressional delegation headed by Reps. Frank LoBiondo, R-N.J., and Steven LaTourette, R-Ohio, that met with Card.
In the immediate aftermath of Katrina, President Bush suspended provisions of the 1931 Davis-Bacon Act, which sets wages for employees on federal contracts to ensure they are not underpaid.
The administration contended the move would reduce rebuilding costs and help open opportunities to minority-owned companies, but unions and other critics said it would result in lower pay for workers.
Malkin Dislikes Round Numbers
Michelle Malkin, in her Townhall column, asks:
The anti-war Left couldn’t wait for the death of the 2,000th soldier in Iraq. Peace activists have been gearing up for protests, vigils, and other events this week to mark the completely bogus milestone. Why 2,000? Was the 2nd or 555th or 1,678th death not as worth mourning as any other death with nice round numbers?
Of course not, Moonbat. All the deaths are tragic. They were tragic when Ted Koppel tried to read them on Nightline, and your ilk got all flustered.
But 2,000, being a round number, is a milestone, and serves as a time to reflect.
Let’s not be faux stupid. When people hit their 40th birthday, it’s a big deal (whether they admit it or not), although that particular day only means that they are one day older than the previous day. Round numbers, as well as anniversaries that come in ten’s and five’s — we remember these things as significant points. And so do you, Michelle:
-
Remember The Cole – Michelle’s post about the fifth year anniversary of the bombing of the Cole. Where was the four year anniversary post, Michelle? You were blogging then, yet you failed to mention it at all.
-
Oklahoma City: Ten Years Later: Michelle’s post marking the ten year anniversary of the Oklahoma bombing. What is her obsession with round numbers?
-
This Day In History: Michelle notes all her fellow bloggers who are writing about the sixtieth anniversary of Iwo Jima. What’s so special about 60? What about 59?
-
Blogiversary Celebrations: Michelle notes the passing of her half-year of blogging. Nothing was mentioned on the 7th month, 8th month, 9th month, etc. "blogiversary". (she blogs again at her one year mark in "A Year In The Life Of A Blog")
So, Michelle, please don’t pretend that certain events and numbers never act as milestones. They do. They trigger retrospection. To suggest otherwise is an insult to my intelligence, and a demonstration of your lack of it.
UPDATE: What The Rude Pundit says.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Malkin is now decrying MoveOn.org for a "How Many More"-type ad. She says MoveOn is "exploiting the dead".
Geez.
If I could corner her in a room for just one second, I would like to ask her to distinguish between what MoveOn does, versus what she does on a daily basis with the 9/11 dead.
Except if I had her "in a room for just one second", my time would be better spent kicking her in the crotch (oh, yes, people — she’s got ’em), so I probably wouldn’t have time to even pose my question.
Another Day Comes And Goes
Not Fitzmas today. Maybe tomorrow.
Operation Yellow Elephant++
I’ve had my share of fun with college-age Republicans for their hypocrisy regarding Iraq. They are all gung-ho about the war and how patriotic they are, but when it comes down to actually fighting the war themselves, they wimp out with lame excuses ("I’m fighting the war at home", etc.)
But this story takes the cake. An anti-war college student named Alex Cornell du Houx is being deployed to Iraq (he is a Marine), and he willingly goes because he recognizes it is his duty as a Marine.
The response from the pro-war students? They slam him.
While Cornell du Houx has actively rallied against many of President Bush’s policies, he feels that his involvement in the Marines is not a conflict of interest.
"Regardless of my opinions regarding the war in Iraq, it is my duty as a U.S. Marine to serve and I am ready and willing to do my job to its fullest extent," he said.
Others on campus, particularly his political opponents in the Bowdoin College Republicans, feel differently about his service. Daniel Schuberth, a leader of the Bowdoin College Republicans and College Republican national secretary, said, "I applaud Mr. Houx for his service, just as I applaud any other soldier who is brave enough to take up arms in defense of his country. I find it troubling, however, that one of the most vocal opponents of our president, our country and our mission in Iraq has chosen to fight for a cause he claims is wrong. Mr. Houx’s rhetoric against the war on terror places him in agreement with the most radical fringes of the Democratic Party, and I am left to question his logic and motivation."
Dan Schuberth
Secretary, College Republican National CommitteeDear Mr. Schuberth,
It takes a lot of balls for an officer of the College Republican National Committee to attack a soldier heading off to war. When you did so, you opened yourself up to being assailed as a cowardly yellow elephant and a souless, political hack who selfishly places his partisan ambitions above all that is right and decent. Thank God you didn’t let that stop you.
It’s important for people to know that although Alex Cornell du Houx is honorably keeping the commitment he made to the Marine Reserves in high school, he is still a major player in the Maine College Democrats and a vocal opponent of Our Leader and the Iraq Phase of the Eternal War to Resubjugate Brown People. He doesn’t deserve to face death in battle for the glory of Our Leader and his Administration of the Indicted. That honor should be reserved for people like you, able-bodied, albeit overweight, College Republicans who place the needs of the party ahead of national interest.
I was particularly impressed by your claim that this young Marine opposed his country by opposing the president. It demonstrates that you are capable of doing whatever it takes to destroy your political opponents. Just as such former College Republican greats as Scooter Libby and Karl Rove betrayed the identity of a CIA agent for political purposes, you accuse an Iraq-bound Marine of treason simply because he protests Our Leader’s policies. Obviously, you have the right stuff to go far in today’s Republican Party.
There is still more you can do. Join the Marines and follow du Houx to Iraq, and when an opportunity presents itself, betray him to the enemy. That’s what Dick Cheney would do.
Heterosexually yours,
Gen. JC Christian, patriot
Hindrocket Wins Wanker Of The Day Award, Again
From Is That Legal, via Atrios:
Tomorrow may bring indictments of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby on charges that can charitably be described as trivial. Tonight, one of our readers urged us to link to President Bush’s great speech to the Joint Armed Forces Officers’ Wives’ group rather than being distracted by the minutiae of the day. Good suggestion.
John Hinderaker, December 17, 1998:
"Like many others, we have been frustrated by the apparent inability of much of the American public to take the Clinton scandals seriously. "It’s not about sex," we have patiently repeated to our benighted friends. "It’s about perjury. It’s about obstruction of justice. The sex is only incidental. At most it was the motive for the crimes. You wouldn’t think murder was unimportant just because the motive for the murder was sex, would you?" So goes our argument."
Four Questions
The Liberal Avenger points to a wonderful Salon article which asks "four of the biggest questions Fitzgerald’s investigation may be able to answer". I’ll post the "questions", but seriously, the whole article is worth a read:
Did the vice president’s office put pressure on intelligence analysts in the run-up to war?
Did pressure from the vice president’s office have anything to do with the more aggressive views expressed in the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) or the accompanying "white paper" about Iraq’s weapons threat?
Who forged the Niger documents that purported to show a sales agreement for Uranium with Iraq?
What role did the vice president’s office and the Pentagon play in gathering and disseminating intelligence from sources outside the normal intelligence process?
Inquiring (enquiring?) minds want to know.
The Credibility Gap
Yesterday, eternally-outraged Michelle Malkin wrote a long post entitled "Al Franken Is Cracking Up". Her thesis was that Al Franken is "cracking up" because he took part in a silly skit in which he symbolically beats up a conservative (actually an Air America studiohand). It was a silly skit and promotion gimmick for Franken’s new book "The Truth . . . with Jokes".
Michelle writes:
The real joke is that Franken’s staged assault inadvertently exposes and underscores the truth about the Bush-deranged Left. Over the past few years, we’ve seen frightfully Franken-esque intolerance, violence, and hatred spread from the moonbat fringes to the liberal mainstream to the top echelons of the Democrat party.
Intolerance? Violence? Hatred? From liberals? Is she fucking kidding?
Let’s start with violence. I’m not aware of violence emanating from liberals. And certainly not the docile "top echelons of the Democratic party". We’re the anti-war crowd, Michelle. Keep that in mind. The violence you see, Michelle, is in your head.
And "intolerance". Let’s see. Who came into the public spotlight by writing a book suggesting that Arabs — even law-abiding ones — be placed in special "camps," just like we did with Japanese-Americans in WWII? Oh, yeah. It was you, Malkin.
Speaking of books (as well as intolerance), Michelle has a new book out called "Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild" in which she whines about the hate mail she gets after she attacks people with her lies. It’s an unintentionally ironic book, whose subtitle should be "How I Can Dish It Out, But Can’t Take It". Or maybe "Pot. Kettle. Black."
Anyway, Malkin doesn’t seem to have the pulse of the nation. Malkin’s book was published October 24, 20o5; Franken’s book was published the following day.
Thanks to Tbogg, we can see exactly who of the two pundits is on the "moonbat fringe":
Franken’s The Truth
# Hardcover: 352 pages
# Publisher: Dutton Adult (October 25, 2005)
# Language: English
# ISBN: 0525949062
# Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6.4 x 1.3 inches
# Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds. (View shipping rates and policies)
# Average Customer Review: based on 119 reviews. (Write a review.)
# Amazon.com Sales Rank: #2 in BooksMalkin’s Unhinged
# Hardcover: 256 pages
# Publisher: Regnery Publishing (October 24, 2005)
# Language: English
# ISBN: 0895260301
# Shipping Information: View shipping rates and policies
# Amazon.com Sales Rank: #2,394 in Books
And nobody had written in to review Michelle’s book (compared to 119 reviews for Franken’s book).
That was last night at 11:30 when Tbogg posted that. This morning, Malkin’s book is ranked #3,460.
So Michelle, do yourself and the country a favor: shut up.