Breaking: Scientific evidence linking Republicans and turkeys.
As the Bush administration continues to melt down, they are continuing to spread their version of foot in mouth disease. Maybe Dood Abides should write a diary exploring the relationship between Republicans and turkeys. Here is some obvious evidence on this score. It is a shame that the Republicans have lowered themselves to these magnificent animals. Here are some examples of how the Republicans are obstructing the American Constitutional process:
Charles Krauthammer goes to bat for oil companies and ANWR drilling
Then amnesia set in, mile-per-gallon ratings disappeared from TV ads and we became "a country of a million Walter Mittys driving 75 mph in their gas-guzzling Bushwhack-Safari sport-utility roadsters with a moose head on the hood, a country whose crude oil production has dropped 32 percent in the last 25 years but which will not drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for fear of disturbing the mating habits of caribou."
And don't get me started on the missing supply of might-have-been American crude. Arctic and outer continental shelf oil that the politicians kill year after year would have provided us by now with a critical and totally secure supply cushion in times of tight markets.
Obviously forgetting about the record profits of the oil companies.
Adam Cohen reviews Judge Scalia's unprofessional conduct and inflammatory remarks.
In February, speaking to a meeting of the conservative Federalist Society, Justice Scalia dismissed those who believe that the Constitution is a living document that evolves over time. "You would have to be an idiot to believe that," he said. Among the people who are "idiots" by Justice Scalia's formulation: the vast majority of constitutional law professors, and most of his colleagues on the Supreme Court, who continually reaffirm their belief in a living Constitution.
In a speech at the University of Fribourg in Switzerland on March 8, Justice Scalia was even more off-base. On the subject of whether detainees captured in war should be given a jury trial in civil court, he said "Give me a break," even though closely related questions were at issue in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which was headed to the Supreme Court in a matter of weeks.
The loose cannon keeps on firing. On April 12, during a visit to the University of Connecticut, Justice Scalia said of his decision not to recuse himself from a case involving Vice President Dick Cheney, which he participated in after going on a hunting trip with Mr. Cheney, "I think the proudest thing I have done on the bench is not allow myself to be chased off that case." Justice Scalia's decision was widely criticized by commentators, lawyers, and law professors, including some of the nation's leading experts on judicial ethics. It is bizarre that he would call it his proudest accomplishment on the bench.
A classic example of a right-winger drunk with power.
Jonah Goldberg accuses Islam of cultural genocide.
Radical Islam is globalization for losers. It appeals to those left out of modernization, industrialization and prosperity, particularly to young men desperate for order, meaning and pride amid the chaos of globalization. Radical Islam provides it, but at a terrible price.
The Wall Street Journal recently reported the sad tale of the demise of Mak Yong, an ancient form of dance and theater in Southeast Asia drawn from pre-Islamic faiths, including Hinduism. But such traditional cultural influences are now considered "un-Islamic."
"Many Southeast Asian Muslims now navigate by guideposts from the Arab world," the Journal reported. "Young men in Indonesia are starting to wear turbans and grow beards. In Malaysia, Malays have adopted the Arab word for prayer, salat, to replace the Malay word, sembahyang, which literally means 'offer homage to the primal ancestor.'"
This is typical right-wing behavior - always searching for the perfect scapegoat. We have seen this with Blacks, gays, and immigrants; Muslims are next.
Town Hall columnist accuses Thomas critics of "character assassination."
Clarence Thomas is arguably the most controversial United States Supreme Court Associate Justice in modern times. This is not because of his jurisprudence, which strictly interprets the U.S. Constitution based on the original intent of its drafters; it's not because of the meticulous way in which he relies on the Constitution's text, context, history, and timeless principles of natural law in examining each Supreme Court case that comes before him. The controversy that surrounds him does not even stem from his gutsy willingness (his respect for stare decisis notwithstanding) to publicly criticize Supreme Court precedent, including the methodology used by the Warren Court in rendering its unanimous decision in Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954).
Justice Thomas is controversial for mainly one reason: He is a black conservative jurist who sticks to his guns and stands by his convictions. As a result, the vicious character assassination leveled against him by the liberal elites and the civil rights establishment over the past 15 years has spurred another conservative lawyer into action. The result is a must-read: The Keeper of the Flame: The Supreme Court Opinions of Justice Clarence Thomas (1991-2005).
It is completely ironic that Justice Thomas benefitted from all these programs and works to gut the very programs that helped make him so successful. This is the nature of power - right-wingers engage in gay sex, prostitution, and other such activities - just because they can. But woe to us if we ever do such a thing.
J.C. Watts spins bad economic numbers:
J.C. Watts' amazing response was that "Bush cannot let good news about the economy be framed by high fuel prices". His response betrays a complete lack of comprehension of how people really live. Believe it or not J.C., high gas prices are only what people can perceive - high gas prices also affects everything that is transported to stores.
And then, Wolf confronts him with a poll taken by the Wall Street Journal (I think). The results were that 17% of respondents think that the economy will be better this time next year while 44% think it will be worse. J.C.'s response is jaw-droppingly assinine - "Of course only 17% said it will get better. How COULD this economy get any better than it is?" That is what he said, I shit you not, verbatim, word for word. I am at a loss for words at such clueless, out of touch, stupidity. I think we have a winner for Wanker of the Day. J.C. Watts may even be Wanker of the Year (so far)...
All that tells me is that poverty means prosperity and unhappiness means satisfaction.
FOX News accuses Neil Young of attacking America.
Anybody can accuse someone of attacking America when they can't answer the argument.
Banned troll plays the victim on Red State.
Since I have been labeled a "TROLL" at DK and since my comments are being removed let me just tell you what transpired:
Kos posted an article on a Montana Congressman who had some dilemmas. He was asking for the man to step down (what else is new over there?)
A member of the DK community (not me) said that she could not tell from reading the probably 1000 word or more article whether the congressman was a Democrat or Republican.
I posted a comment that said "since there was no classification given perhaps he is a Democrat." or something thereabout.
I was correct of course and then the troll hunters showed up. A comment was made that after leaving 20 comments, I had managed to "out" myself as a unhappy Democrat or some line, and that I had been outed as a "TROLL." Well I'm glad that the folks could tell the difference between a mad Democrat and a Republican! I was fairly irritated, so I thought I'd write my first diary entry here. Apparently I wasted the Kossack's time, that's fine. I'll come over here and try to post a diary now and then. Maybe Scoop will allow a "SAD_DEM_TROLL" over here. We'll just have to see.
Not only did he play the victim, he got smacked down hard on his own turf.
Victor Davis Hanson claims "good news" in Iraq happening:
No one pauses to suggest what the region would now look like with Saddam reaping windfall oil profits, 15 years of no-fly zones, ongoing corruption in Oil-for-Food, the bad effects of the U.N. embargo, Libya's weapons program, and an unfettered Dr. Khan. If a newly provocative Russia is willing to sell missiles to Iran's crazy Ahmadinej(ih)ad, imagine what its current attitude would be to its old client Saddam.
Or perhaps, as in the 1980s when over a million perished, our realists, who seem fond of such good old days of order and stability, could once again encourage an unleashed Saddam, with Uday and Qusay at his side, to be played against Iran for a (nuclear) round two. How sad that those who once fallaciously argued that the fascist Saddam was the proper counterweight to the fascist Iran now ignore that the genuine corrective is a democratic and humane Iraq.
A few retired generals smell blood, want to even old scores, and have demanded Secretary Rumsfeld's resignation. They earn not the usual condemnation from liberals for intruding into the gray area around our hallowed civilian control of the military, but praise for their insight and courage -- as if speaking out on in retirement is especially brave or calling for radical change at a time of war is always wise. That they are usually Army officers long furious over military transformation is left unsaid -- as is the irony that Iraq will largely be saved by the skill of their brethren U.S. ground officers currently deployed.
Scholars under the rubric of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, not the American Conservative magazine, publish a pseudo-scholarly treatise about undue Jewish influence that resulted inexplicably in a disastrous tilt in American policy toward the only liberal society in the Middle East.
Anybody can accuse someone of encouraging Saddam to commit murder, wanting to even old scores, or pseudo-scholarship when they can't answer the arguments. The fact that Saddam was evil did not make the invasion of Iraq or minimize the horrible disaster that Bush has made it become.
This tells me more about Hanson's motive than any of his critics - this is an appeal to fear - a fear that is a result of sheer speculation as opposed to reality. The painful reality is that the bombings are continuing in Iraq unabated, the unemployment rate continues to be 40-70%, vigilantes are rounding up and arresting thousands of dissidents, and support for our presence in Iraq is in the teens. Almost half the Iraqis support attacks against our troops there. There is not enough food, not enough water, and not enough electricity there.
And we know that Bush lied about Iraq. So, why should we trust him when he says that a nuclear Iran is a threat to this country?
Ramesh Ponnuru calls the Democrats the "Party of Death."
"The party of death started with abortion, but its sickle has gone from threatening the unborn, to the elderly, to the disabled; it has swept from the maternity ward to the cloning laboratory to a generalized disregard for 'inconvenient' human life."
A clear reference to Communism.
One of the stories the book tells is how abortion transformed the Democratic party from a party primarily concerned about protecting the weak to one that is more avid about defending the alleged rights of the strong. Pro-life Democrats have resisted this transformation, but it is certainly true that the Democratic party has become the party of unrestricted abortion, lethal research on human embryos, and euthanasia. The way I put it is that the party of death has largely taken over the Democratic party and has an outpost in the Republican party too.
It is interesting how he suddenly refuses to answer even a softball question about war and the fact that we have killed over 180,000 people in Iraq. Not only that, we will die out as a race if we do not address the threat of global warming to our environment. And it is amazing how he values tiny sperm cells over that of people. Is he saying that the Iraqi people are not human and should thus be expendable, but that human cells are more worthy of protection than that?
Arrest of Saudi tourist sparks Islamophobic comments at FR.
"Walking in the path of the prophet?"
"According to our law, he must have his wanker cut off with
a dull knife. (Would that it were so.)""Slit his throat on Fox News. "Fox News Alert"!"
"Yup...the filthy vermin is a chip off the old prophet's moon rock."
If that is not hate speech, I want to know what is. Even one of their fellow posters told people to knock it off.
Little Green Footballs blames DOS attack on left; members suggest retaliation.
From the main post:
I wonder why we never see these kinds of attacks on "progressive" blogs? I'm just sayin'...
From the comments; note the Islamophobia springing up here as well:
"Behold what the left and the islamofascists believe about freedom of expression."
"Like I said earlier, why can't we return the favor?"
"Hey, Cato
Yes, who else? Welfaretarians (am I spelling this correctly) are too busy at the moment constructing non-child-proof splodeydope bels.""Maybe we should call them hack-tivists."
"They can hack and hack, and hack again, but it won't stop the truth about Ass-lam getting out."
"There is no better indication of the fact that criticism of Islam and Muslim immigration by infidel bloggers and independent websites is working. They fear us, and they should. I still hope/believe that the West, Europe included, will pull through this. And the Internet will play a crucial part in this victory, by bypassing the msm and bringing the truth out to the people."
And Bush refused to state when the cooking of turkeys would stop:
U.S. President George W. Bush rejected calls for a timetable in the withdrawal of Thanksgiving Turkeys from the White House oven on Thursday, vowing "we will continue to cook our turkeys" until tenderness is achieved.
"The turkeys will leave the oven when they are done," Bush said to a roomful of famished guests. "When that will be, I cannot say. Could be minutes, could be hours. Possibly even days."
Bush's remarks were made in response to queries from several ravenously hungry Thanksgiving dinner guests, who urged the President to tell them exactly when the four 35 pound turkeys would be ready for consumption.