First, let me say I am not very familiar with the specific ins and outs of the "Gun Industry Lawsuit Shield" passed by congress today, but I can say unequivocally this whole genre of legislation is not in the bests interests of the American people nor in keeping with the great tradition of American government.  I am not speaking of gun control issues, but rather of Republican sponsored tort reform.

"Hardball politics isn't pretty, but it's not criminal, either."

-- John Tierney, October 18, 2005 on the leaking of Valerie Plame's name

Clearly, there are some people who do feel treason is an acceptable political practice, and the actions of these people are why we have this investigation.  But Tierney and the Noise Machine are deeply mistaken if they believe the American people will be as accepting of treason as they are.

If any members of the Religious Right are on your holiday gift giving list, I'm sure you already know not to give them Tinky Winky or SpongeBob, both being outed and all.  But, as a public service so you do not offend any Right Wing Sexual Conservatives this holiday season, I need to tell you about the latest outed children's character.

I've been hearing about a mysterious and sinister "homosexual agenda" from the Religious Right for years now, and thanks to the fine work of the American Family Association, I've finally gotten a glimpse of one of the true faces of this evil agenda.  

Be prepared because it's shocking (evil face below jump):

From It Affects You

Today's press gaggle lasted 32 minutes. For Scotty, it must have felt much longer. You see, in that 32 minutes, reporters repeated essentially the same question twenty three times. For those wishing to calculate such things, that's once every 83 seconds.

Reporters wanted to know why the administration is peddling Miers' religious beliefs, and when he refused to answer, they asked again. And then they asked again. And then again. They kept this up practically from start to finish, 23 times, once every 83 seconds. They had to repeat the question 23 times, and still they received no straight answer.

That's quite pathetic, and it brings avoidance to new levels. But that's not really the interesting part, of course, because avoidance is why he's there. What's really interesting is reporters actually followed up. Rather than just letting it go, or worse dutifully reprinting the administration's talking points, they hounded him 23 times.

Below the jump read the 23 questions Scotty refused to answer:

The ride may be ending.

After yesterday's CBS poll showed Bush with a 37% approval rate, I speculated that the low number was only part of the story.  The real story was in his support among his base, or more accurately his tenuous support among his base. His near unconditional support among self-identified Republicans was the only thing keeping his numbers from hitting the floor, and the CBS poll (plus common sense analysis of conservative reactions to his spending on Katrina and nomination of Harriet Miers) hinted that support was on the verge of collapse.

Well, today the AP released the results of their own poll, and it is no longer just a theory.  Once again, the low number (39%) is the secondary story.  Bush is suffering from real discontent among the conservative ranks, and that is the meat here.  Bush has been mired in the high 30's and low 40's for months now even while consistently getting 85%+ approval ratings from self-identified Republicans.  Consider what will happen to his ratings as this group abandons him.  Could it be possible to see his numbers approach 30%?

Despite the recent shrill attacks from Jeanine Pirro, Hillary Clinton is looking solid in NY.

From the latest Marist Poll, September 2005:

Do you definitely plan to vote for Hillary Clinton for re-election as U.S. Senator or do you definitely plan to vote against her?

Definitely Vote For  52%
Definitely Vote Against  32%
Depends Who Runs  8%
Unsure  8%

In head-to-head match ups against the two top Republican challengers:

Hillary Clinton  59%  (50%)
Jeanine Pirro  35%  (28%)
Undecided  6%  (22%)

Hillary Clinton  61%   (66%)
Edward Cox  34%  (26%)
Undecided  5%  (8%)

I've read many great defenses of prosecutor Ronnie Earle here at dKos and elsewhere.  As they point out, he's got a decidely nonpartisan record, having prosecuted four times as many Democrats as Republicans.  But as good and as accurate as these defenses are, many play into DeLay's frame.

The evidence is clear enough and presented well enough that we will convince any reasonable person that Earle's motivations are not partisan. But the mere mention of the argument in these terms forces people to answer the question "Is Earle (Are Democrats) targeting DeLay for partisan reasons?"  The frame is of angry Democrats out on a witch hunt for Republican blood, and so it allows DeLay to change the subject.  When responding, we need to reframe it so people are instead asking themselves, "Are DeLay and his supporters smearing an honest public servant so they can avoid accountability?"  The frame now is of unethical Conservatives looking to get away with bad behavior by blaming others.  The focus stays on conservative corruption, and we become the aggressors rather than the defenders.  

During his testimony to the congressional whitewash panel on Katrina, Brownie got right down to the heart of the problem:

"It is inherently impractical, totally impractical, for the federal government to respond to every disaster of whatever size in every community across the country."

Sadly, in President Bush's poor response to Katrina, we all saw how ill prepared the Bush administration was to handle any sort of large scale disaster, despite all the promises they made post 9/11.  We could not know the depths of that failure until we saw it in action in New Orleans, but as the mayor of the city which is both America's largest and most likely terrorist target, Michael Bloomberg was in a better position than virtually anyone to know how deep those failures ran.  Yet in 2004, almost three years to the day after 9/11, Bloomberg stood on a New York stage and endorsed his ally George Bush for president. Michael Bloomberg owes us all an explanation.

Let's be clear. He did not just endorse president Bush; he raised significant amounts of money for the Bush campaign while thanking him in glowing terms, particularly noting Bush's commitment to homeland security:

There's a new AP poll measuring Americans' attitudes towards issues relating to Katrina - mostly it highlights the usual areas.

But viewing the topline results (PDF), I found a very interesting question not featured in the AP's own story on their survey:

If you had to choose, which one of the following options do you think is the best way for the government to pay for the relief effort for Hurricane Katrina:

Cut spending on Iraq:  42%
Delay or cancel additional tax cuts:  29%
Add to the federal debt and gradually pay it back:  14%
Cut spending for other domestic programs like education, welfare, transportation, and health care:  11%
Not sure:  4%

There are several vaccines in various stages of development which could prevent many sexually transmitted diseases from spreading.  Now, I know enough about pharmaceutical company hype to recognize these vaccines might not pan out exactly as advertised, but nonetheless there's absolutely no logical reason to oppose their continued development.

Enter the illogical.

If the present situation were reversed, if such clear and inexcusable mistakes were made during a Democratic administration, we know exactly how Conservatives would respond.  They would not merely criticize Democrats for failing to do x, y, and z.  The message would be that Liberals cannot be trusted to protect America, and x, y, and z would be used as examples of that.  In other words, they would treat the mistakes made not as the errors of a few elected and appointed officials, but rather as the inevitable consequence of liberalism.  

This is an absolute national disgrace.

There's already been a marked rise in the use of the good 'ol Southern Strategy, and the resulting increased use of racist code talk has been disgraceful enough.  But now in 2005 we have a blatant return to Jim Crow laws:

In 1966, the Supreme Court held that the poll tax was unconstitutional. Nearly 40 years later, Georgia is still charging people to vote, this time with a new voter ID law that requires many people without driver's licenses - a group that is disproportionately poor, black and elderly - to pay $20 or more for a state ID card. Georgia went ahead with this even though there is not a single place in the entire city of Atlanta where the cards are sold. The law is a national disgrace.

From It Affects You

The 9/11 ceremony in New York ended a short while ago.  I was under the impression that it was broadcast around the country, but I learned this morning that was not the case, and that it was broadcast only in the NYC area.

The ceremony was little changed from years past.  It was simple, somber, highly emotional and respectful. This year, it was brothers and sisters who read the names of those murdered that day.  

The ceremony was marred only by the appearance of Condoleeza Rice.  I was surprised and angered to see her speak just after the second moment of silence.  After 9/11, New Yorkers trusted the Bush administration to do the right thing.  It seemed incomprehensible that they wouldn't.  But we were betrayed, and they turned 9/11 into the most politicized and exploited large scale tragedy ever on American soil.

Dick Morris thinks Katrina and the Bush administration's disasterous handling of its aftermath are the gifts that keep on giving.

Yes, his reviews in the first days after the tempest hit are clearly bad and he obviously failed to anticipate the magnitude of the response the nation expected and the area needed -- but relief is a gift that keeps on giving.

Day after day after day, people will see a massive flow of federal aid to the hard-hit area. While the storm's intensity and the catastrophe it caused concentrated into a few days the horrific experiences of the poor victims, the rebuilding process will take months and years. This process, likely to become a theme for Bush's second term in the way 9/11 dominated his first one, will ultimately become a presidential strength.

To distill this diary into one sentence: The Conservative government has given terrorists access to more fresh recruits and greater training grounds abroad while weakening our ability to fight them at home.

America has been betrayed.

(Okay, that's two)

George Bush famously said, "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."  At the time, I thought I knew what he meant.  Of course, it turned out to be nothing more than a political ploy, but that's a topic for another post.

But since the Republican Noise Machine loves absolutes, how about I give them another one:  either you are with us, or you are with the people who abandoned the residents of New Orleans to death, murder, disease, starvation and despair.

The line in the sand is drawn, and to stand with Bush is to share his guilt.

(Long rant below the jump)

From It Affects You

Take a look, side by side, at the covers of New York's two major tabloids (I've only posted a thumbnail of the NY Post cover here - larger versions of both are posted below the jump to save bandwidth.)  One gets it right while I have never been more embarrassed by the other.

(While the New York Post is the target of this rant - deservedly so - they are really a proxy representing all those who would actively try to promote the Katrina response as some sort of victory for Bush as well as those who passively help by insisting nothing is wrong.)