November 2005 Archives

Entitled Bush's Long Road Back, the current edition of moderate Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball newsletter is an open letter to POTUS:

Urgent Memo to the President

Things are bad, Mr. President. Really bad. We can tell you already know that, since it is written all over your pained expression when you appear in public.

[...]

You've got 38 months still to serve as President...You don't want to endure years in the White House with an unfriendly public...[Y]ou need to surprise your critics by proving more flexible and inclusive than we've ever seen you. Are you up to the task? If you aren't, history will almost certainly judge you a failed President.

Here's the plan:

1. Accept Political Reality on Iraq.
   Whether you like it or not, you will have to withdraw a substantial portion of our troops before the midterm elections in November 2006 or risk a Democratic takeover of Congress.

2. Start Aggressive Credit-Taking for a Good Economy.
   Start a debate with your adversaries about the economy. Unlike Iraq, it's an argument you can win.

3. Retool, retool, retool.
   You need to move from policy innovation to consolidation.

4. Re-Staff, Re-Staff, Re-Staff.
   Every President--just like every Major League team owner--needs to refresh his roster from time to time with new, able people.

5. Admit One Big Error and Correct It.
   So let's choose something that even your strongest supporters in Congress deeply regret: the Medicare drug benefit....All at once, you can please your party, make better policy, and change your image by confessing a big goof. People will be amazed at your display of humility. Sometimes, the best politics is counterintuitive.

Sabato is no Republican Machiavelli, no partisan hack. I don't believe he has a partisan agenda. And/But his little checklist is a pretty good blueprint for how the Democrats can take over Congress in 2006 and how they can win back the White House in 2008.

Here's how it works: simply point out that all of these "initiatives" are pale carbon copies of what the Democrats would do if they held the majority. Except the Democrats would do them better.

I mean, think about it: if you go to a restaurant and there are two items on the menu, "A Cheeseburger" and "Another Cheeseburger," which one are you going to order? A Cheeseburger -- because it's the real thing.

If Bush thinks the solution to his problems is to become more like a Democrat, then I say beat him over the head with it:

1. Withdraw the troops? Democrat Murtha already laid it out -- Republican Bush is just playing "me too." Democrats should line up behind Murtha's plan and point out that Bush is a cynical opportunist who has no credibility on the war.

2. Good economy? Are you kidding? Health care costs -- through the roof. Higher education -- increasingly unaffordable. Energy prices -- already high and going higher -- just wait til January. The Gulf Coast -- rotting with neglect. General Motors -- going bankrupt (see the section on health care costs). Democrats have better solutions to all of these problems. And the public knows it.

3. Retool? Sure -- no more Mars missions. No more sucky Republican Social Security proposals. No more Republican tax cuts. Republican immigration reform is a joke. Once Bush is done retooling, he'll discover that the Republicans are bankrupt of "ideas." It's the Democrats who have the credibility and hold the advantage on these issues and the public knows it.

4. Re-staff? Too late -- the Republican White House (and the Republican Congress) is swamped by a tsunami of scandal and corruption. The best way to re-staff is to vote the Republican rascals out of Congress in 2006 and out of the Oval Office in 2008.

5. Admit one big error? Sure -- let's re-visit the Republican Medicare drug benefit plan. In fact, if the people will elect a Democratic majority in the House and the Senate, POTUS can admit his "one big error" by signing the Democratic plan for reforming Medicare.

Come on Democrats -- here's your blueprint. Start building that majority.

George W. Bush is scheduled to give a speech Wednesday morning at the Naval Academy in Annapolis in which he will tout the rapidly increasing readiness of the Iraqi defense forces. Many inside the administration have made this the pre-condition of withdrawing our own troops from the region ("As they stand up, we will stand down.")

Similarly, yesterday in a Pentagon briefing, Donald Rumsfeld made these comments:

In less than six months, we've gone from zero Iraqis providing security to their country ... to close to 100,000 Iraqis currently under arms.

Indeed, the progress has been so swift that Iraq is already the second largest of the security forces in the coalition. It will not be long before they will be the largest and outnumber the U.S. forces. And it shouldn't be too long thereafter that they will outnumber all coalition forces combined.

Some have suggested that any statement that raises awareness of these successes is putting an optimistic face on a difficult security situation. Not so. Every time we've discussed progress in Iraq, I have made clear that the situation in the country remains dangerous, and that there will be setbacks.

Hmmm. Did I say Rumsfeld made those comments yesterday? Well, it only seems like yesterday.

Rumsfeld made those comments October 30, 2003.

But I digress...

After branding Jack Murtha a coward, Bush is now following Murtha's plan. How cynical can you get?

Bottom line: Bush is practicing smart politics. He knows that any politician rides a seesaw. Sometimes you're up and sometimes you're down. The smart politician knows when to get off.

Michelle Goldberg thinks so.

Hard to argue against her, after reading this quote from Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism:

"We are particularly offended by the suggestion that the opposite of the religious right is the voice of atheism," he told his audience. "We are appalled when 'people of faith' is used in such a way that it excludes us, as well as most Jews, Catholics and Muslims. What could be more bigoted than to claim that you have a monopoly on God and that anyone who disagrees with you is not a person of faith?"

Amen, rabbi.

Read the whole thing.

Baseball slugger Carlos Delgado recently joined the New York Mets and was told in no uncertain terms: "You will stand during the singing of God Bless America."

Apparently Delgado, a former member of the Florida Marlins and Toronto Blue Jays, had made it his business to be in the dugout, sitting down during the seventh inning stretch:

“I wasn't throwing a tantrum out there,” Delgado said of his decision. “I wasn't doing anything stupid to get attention. It actually went on for four months before anyone noticed.”

I say leave Delgado alone.

Yeah, I know -- he once told the Toronto Star that the war in Iraq was "the stupidest war ever." So what? It's free country.

If you can't express yourself about this sort of thing, then what the hell was this war all about anyway?

Many of you have commented from time to time that I "love polls."

It isn't true. A more accurate description would be to say that I respect research.

For example: before you go into business you need to be a student of markets. You need to know where the money is being spent, you need to talk to customers. You need to be able to anticipate what might win and what might lose.

You need to do research.

Now, a lot of politicians claim they don't read polls. I suppose they do this to prove how resolute they are, or as a way of showing how brave they are, or what a great leader they are. Usually, these politicians also say they don't read newspapers, or magazines, or watch TV news. I gather they want us to understand that their inner compass is so magnificently powerful that they don't need to listen to any voices outside their own head. That's not only scary, it's just plain stupid.

More information is better, not worse.

Do you lead by following polls? No, not necessarily. After all, the majority of people believe that we should have free beer and peanuts.

Rather, you use polls in order to get feedback. It's a way of improving your communications with the very people you are sworn to protect.

Are polls perfect? No -- to be blunt, people do lie. Or simply refuse to talk to you.

No, if you want something better than polls, you become an expert in direct mail fund-raising. Now THERE'S a science. If you know what you're doing, you can find out very quickly what potential voters want -- because they're putting their money where their mouth is.

And, kids, do we know who the 20th Century Wizard of Direct Mail Political Fundraising is? Hint: he is one of the most powerful men in this country today, which is a testament to what I'm talking about.

I'll hang up and wait for your answer.

A new poll reports that seventy percent of respondents said that criticism of the war by Democratic senators hurts troop morale.

It's an interesting poll and Mark Adams has provided an excellent reflection of what the poll might mean.

Here's my take on it:

• Is it the act of criticising that hurts morale, or is it the content of the criticism?

• What hurts morale more -- that people are questioning authority or the realization that the questions might reveal a very, very painful truth?

  In other words, is it possible that troops morale will crater when the troops discover that they were sent to fight and die based on a lie?

• Someone once said that "hell is discovering the truth too late." I certainly don't want to make the lives of our fighting men and women any worse than it already is.

  So...should we all just shut up and let them fight in peace?

Richardson lied, people died.

[crickets chirping]

OK, I made that last part up.

I've been profiled on more than one occasion.

One time, it was because of how I looked (bearded and swarthy) and where I was standing (a few feet away from the President of the United States). When the authorities asked me to please, slowly remove my hands from my pockets NOW, I obeyed. I'm no dummy.

Did it bother me? No. Did I nearly pop a blood vessel? You bet -- but not because I felt my rights were being violated.

I've had other, similar, run-ins. No others involved the Secret Service.

[pause]

Well, there was that time I got pulled over by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in Ottowa after leaving the scene of a crime. This is a true story. Apparently the Turkish military attache had been assassinated by the Armenian Secret Liberation Army and I, um, happened on his body a couple of moments after it happened. Honest! And I didn't see who did it -- you have to believe me!

Again, did I resent being stopped and questioned? Of course not. I know that there were some pretty good reasons why I was in the spotlight -- usually because of how I looked and/or where I was at a certain point in time. Is it my fault that I looked like Carlos the Jackal? No. Well, I did have a full, black, bushy beard, which (in a weird cosmic coincidence) I shaved off shortly before 9/11. Otherwise -- who knows? -- I might have been arrested by "Crazy John" Ashcroft and accused of being the 20th hijacker.

I understand (and appreciate) law enforcement actively trying to stop terrorism by looking for people who, well, fit the description. Does that mean all swarthy Mediterranean types are terrorists? No, of course not. But the preponderence of actual terrorists are swarthy Mediterranean types. It's what makes my life so interesting.

What's the solution? I don't know. But I do know that what happened Deborah Davis only makes things worse, not better:

She's a 50 year-old mother of four who lives and works in Denver, Colorado. Her kids are all grown-up: her middle son is a soldier fighting in Iraq. She leads an ordinary, middle class life. You probably never would have heard of Deb Davis if it weren't for her belief in the U.S. Constitution.

One morning in late September 2005, Deb was riding the public bus to work. She was minding her own business, reading a book and planning for work, when a security guard got on this public bus and demanded that every passenger show their ID. Deb, having done nothing wrong, declined. The guard called in federal cops, and she was arrested and charged with federal criminal misdemeanors after refusing to show ID on demand.

On the 9th of December 2005, Deborah Davis will be arraigned in U.S. District Court in a case that will determine whether Deb and the rest of us live in a free society, or in a country where we must show "papers" whenever a cop demands them.

I shudder to think what will happen if and when the ACLU succeeds in bringing it to the SCOTUS, given Judge "French Fry" Roberts propensity for strict constructionism.

George W. Bush and a secret service agent are taking a stroll when they come upon a little girl carrying a basket with a blanket over it.

Curious, Bush asks the girl, "What's in the basket?"

She replies, "New baby kittens," and she opens the basket to show him.

"How nice, " says Bush. "What kind are they?" The little girl says, "Republicans." Bush smiles, pats the little girl on the head and continues on.

Three weeks later, Bush is taking another stroll, this time with Karl Rove. They see the little girl again with the same basket.

Bush says, "Watch this, Karl. It's really cute." They approach the little girl.

Bush greets the little girl and asks how the kittens are doing, and she says, "Fine."

Then, smirking, he nudges Rove with his elbow and asks the little girl, "And can you tell us what kind of kittens they are?"

She replies, "Democrats."

Abashed, Bush says, "But three weeks ago you said they were Republicans!"

"I know," she says. "But now their eyes are open."

And with that, Miss Julie and I would like to wish you and yours a Happy Thanksgiving.

P.S. Thanks for stopping by and making this a fun place to hang out.

If you must argue with a Republican, here are ten myths and the accompanying facts about the Iraq War.

I've always been a fan of biographies.

As a boy I started out reading every baseball biography I could get my hands on (even The Mel Ott Story as well as that second one about Red Schoendienst). I loved playing baseball and, reading the biographies, I was getting further immersed in the game. I also began to learn about the history of baseball which is closely related to the history of America.

Because of this, I moved on to reading biographies of the Presidents, which I do to this day. I enjoy them because they not only tell you about the man, but also about the times he lived in -- it gives you some perspective. It's an approach I used to teach my kids about American history -- start with a story about the President and then tell them about the surrounding context in which he lived. You can even compare and contrast the story of one President with another -- how one man reacted to an event, how another shaped the events around him. And I encouraged them to follow current events because, after all, it's all just history in the making, isn't it?

That said, the one man who most engaged my imagination in this area, early on, was Hugh Sidey. I began reading him in Life magazine in the early 60's. I guess what attracted me was that he took a personal approach to the subjects of his articles. He also had an easy-to-read style (important for a fourth grader) and he always seemed to be at the scene of the most amazing events:

As the decades passed and the presidents and the presidency came to be at the focus of momentous events, Mr. Sidey was there to watch, to interview and to inform the public.

When a prospective Cold War summit meeting was derailed during the Eisenhower administration by the U-2 spy plane crisis, Mr. Sidey reported from the White House. He was in Dallas with Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963.

When Johnson traveled to Vietnam during the war there, Mr. Sidey went with him, and when Richard Nixon went to China, Mr. Sidey was along.

He flew to the sites of great events with Ford and with President Jimmy Carter, taking the voluminous notes that became the raw material for his books.

It was said that he was one of a handful of journalists in whom President Ronald Reagan confided regularly. Mr. Sidey was on the airplane that carried George H.W. Bush back to Texas after his presidency ended in 1993. He also wrote about President George W. Bush.

Whenever I saw him on TV, he seemed like a gentleman; and his peers -- and the Presidents themselves -- all said the same thing which, given his attitude on living, is not surprising:

A sense of humor... is needed armor. Joy in one's heart and some laughter on one's lips is a sign that the person down deep has a pretty good grasp of life.

He'll be missed.

As you know, today, November 22, is the anniversary of the assassination of JFK in 1963. I was barely ten years old, but I still choke up when I hear the sound of muffled drums accompanied by the clip-clop of horses' hooves.

But I don't want to remember when he died. I want to talk about the spirit of JFK, what he stood for, and what it means to Democrats today.

In his single inaugural address he said this:

Let every nation know
Whether it wishes us well or ill
That we shall pay any price - bear any burden
Meet any hardship - support any friend
Oppose any foe to assure the survival
And the success of liberty

Clearly, these were words spoken by a young member of "The Greatest Generation" just a scant 16 years after the Normandy Invasion and in the midst of the Cold War.

But he couldn't know what his words would lead to when employed by the fellow liberal Democrat who followed him into the Oval Office. Nor could he know what his words would lead to when employed by former-liberals-turned-conservatives (and those that followed them), the so-called "neo-conservatives."

But here we are, remembering JFK on the anniversary of the day he died, remembering his stirring call and wondering how (and whether) we can remain true to his vision:

Now the trumpet summons us again
Not as a call to bear arms - though embattled we are
But a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle
A struggle against the common enemies of man: Tyranny - Poverty - Disease - and War itself

Got that? This was the man who started the Peace Corps as well as the man who put us on a war footing in Viet Nam. He understood that you have to address the issues that are an outgrowth of tyranny, the issues that lead to war. He understood -- we as Democrats should understand -- that there is more to freedom than just overthrowing a dictator.

He understood that while tyranny was our enemy, so was war itself. And he understood that the struggle against war included conquering those enemies that lead to chaos -- poverty and disease.

He also understood the role that sacrifice plays in binding us together as a nation and as a world:

And so my fellow Americans
Ask not what your country can do for you
Ask what you can do for your country
My fellow citizens of the world - ask not
What America can do for you - but what together
We can do for the freedom of man

And, lastly, he recognized the role of God in our nation's history and in our mission, but he also understood that it is up to us to take responsibility for making this a better world:

With a good conscience our only sure reward
With history the final judge of our deeds
Let us go forth to lead the land we love - asking His blessing
And his help - but knowing that here on earth
God's work must truly be our own.

They don't write them like that anymore.

Democrats would do well to re-examine that speech and everything that came after it. Democrats need to remember and understand what we stand for.

"The federal government began investigating allegations of fraud against the Coalition Provisional Authority, a U.S. contractor accused in a bid-rigging operation involving millions of dollars. Asked to comment, a spokesperson for Halliburton said, 'Millions? With an M? That is adorable.'"
---Amy Poehler on Saturday Night Live

"President Bush, is on his Asian tour now. He'll visit Japan, China, South Korea, Mongolia. Once again, he's skipping Vietnam."
---David Letterman

"Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito says he's embarrassed by some of the things he wrote in the 1980's. Apparently Alito wrote the song 'Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go.'"
---Conan O'Brien

"While the Democrats are focusing on how we were misled to war, Bush is focusing on how to mislead us out of it. ... If we were wrong about why we went in, we have to be wrong about why we're leaving. Otherwise it sends our enemies the message that America lacks the will to remain incorrect."
---Rob Corddry on The Daily Show

"President Bush is planning on spending Thanksgiving out at his ranch in Crawford. And you know how he always pardons the White House turkey? Bad news for the turkey: There are three cabinet members ahead of him."
---Jay Leno

(HT to Bill in Portland Maine)

I believe that future historians will find that all PowerPoint presentations were a form of cruel and unusual punishment. IJS.

That said, Seth Godin has written a 10 page eBook called Really BAD PowerPoint (and how to avoid it).

I'll make you a bet -- On Election Day, 2006, Iraq policy will more closely resemble Jack Murtha's position today than it will resemble George Bush's position today.

Know why? Because it's the right position and it's what the American people want.

Anyone want to take that bet?

Corollary: Republicans are terrified that Jack Murtha will become the face of the Democratic Party because (if that happens) they know they will suffer an historical loss the likes of which only happen every decade or two.

Yeah, everyone I know loves to slam Mitch Albom for his treacly Maury and Five People books. Some native Detroiters have never forgiven him for crossing the picket line during the newspaper labor strike a while back. But there's no denying that he's always been one of the best sportswriters who ever sat in a press box.

Here's his spot-on essay on Thanksgiving:

You can have Halloween, New Year's, Christmas, Fourth of July, Easter, Hanukkah and any day dedicated to presidents.

You can stack them all up on one side, and the turkey and I will stand on the other.

I'll take Thanksgiving.

It is, to me, exactly what a holiday should be.

For one thing, there are no gifts. You never have to worry about what to get someone for Thanksgiving or how much to spend. There are no lectures about "greed" or "commercialization" or how we're "forgetting the spirit" of Thanksgiving. No way. The spirit of Thanksgiving is eating.

Who could forget that?

Second, it comes with football. What other holiday does that? New Year's Day? At least with Thanksgiving, you don't have a hangover.

Also, there is no "right" place to go on Thanksgiving -- except home. There is no church or synagogue. No graves that must be visited. No trekking out to watch fireworks.

You just sit on the couch, or sit at the table, and you laugh and eat and laugh and burp and -- ta-da! -- you are credited with knowing the "true meaning" of the holiday.

Also, it comes with a parade.

I rarely say this, but "read the whole thing."

Come to think of it, I might just bump this to the top of the list on Thursday.

Is Ariel Sharon quitting Likud to form a centrist party one step ahead of early elections? I guess stranger things have happened.

[pause]

Come to think of it, maybe they haven't.

P.S. Those on the left in the US, those who revile Sharon, those who favor US withdrawal from Iraq, should give Sharon more credit for withdrawing from Gaza.

Loved the leads, Phoenix and Witherspoon.

Loved their vocal performances too -- I'd buy the CD just to hear them sing those songs. Their version of Jackson is one of the best I've ever heard. Same for Phoenix doing Get Rhythm.

Loved how they quietly placed Johnny Cash in context -- a guy who was a peer of Elvis AND Dylan -- who else would you put in that group?

The story angle was good too -- Beauty and the Beast meet rockabilly.

Did I mention that I loved the soundtrack? Right.

Looooooove the poster (click for larger version).

All in all, I'd certainly put Walk the Line right up there with Coal Miner's Daughter if not Ray. In fact, I'd put it over the latter movie simply because it has two great performances and the leads do their own singing. I suppose if you don't like the music, or if you weren't a Johnny Cash fan then you could skip this movie. But Miss Julie and I do love the music and we're both fans -- so we enjoyed it.

Before the actual vote was taken, I suppose you could have envisioned a scenario where Democrats unanimously voted "yes" for the Republicans' counterfeit withdrawal resolution. Or just abstaining.

But after watching the debate, it was clear that the Republicans overreached and they're the ones who look transparently stupid:

Dressed in a red, white and blue suit, Rep. Jean Schmidt , R-OH (left), the most junior member of the House [having defeated Paul Hackett, an Iraqi war veteran] took to the floor to protest the resolution.

She told her new colleagues of a phone call she had just received from freshman Ohio state Rep. Danny R. Bubp of West Union, a colonel in the Marine Corps Reserve.

"He asked me to send Congress a message: Stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message - that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," said Schmidt..

The House chamber erupted in angry booing, something seldom seen in my memory:

Rep. Harold Ford, D-TN, charged across the chamber's center aisle, screaming that Republicans were making an uncalled-for personal attack. "You guys are pathetic! Pathetic!" yelled Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass.

Schmidt, who narrowly beat Hackett last time, was forced by her leadership to withdraw her remarks and apologize.

There's no turning back now. I think the debate is out in the open. While the crass Republican withdrawal resolution failed, there will be others, hopefully from the Democrats. It would be appropriate to put Rep. Murtha's original resolution to an up or down vote.

And Karl Rove might think that he can smear Rep. Murtha with an ethics charge, but the public is hip to Karl Rove.

I think we've passed a tipping point.

In October of 1973, Richard Nixon succeeded in firing Archibald Cox, the Watergate Special Prosecutor in what was immediately dubbed "the Saturday Night Massacre." Nixon had jumped the shark. The next morning someone was standing on a street corner in Washington with a sign that said, "honk if you support impeachment." The din was undeniable. Nixon was gone 10 months later.

By the time you read this, the House Republicans will probably have succeeded in ramming through a vote on a non-binding resolution for immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. They expect it to lose, calculating that few Democrats will vote for it; and those who do will be branded as "cut-and-run cowards."

It is a cynical, divisive ploy to avoid a real debate on the course of the war. Although we call it "The Peoples' House," this is not serving the people of this country at all (see polling results, below).

How cynical is this? The Republicans are calling it "a Democrat resolution" because Rep. John Murtha was the author of the original language. You can see it below. And you can also see how the Republicans gutted the resolution and made it into a pathetic fake designed to divide this country, not unite it.

I'll be blunt: before this week, I had never heard of Rep. John Murtha. Then, he spoke out against the war in Iraq, saying, "The war in Iraq is not going as advertised." I won't quote more because you've probably already read his extended comments. Allow me to add that, IMHO, Murtha is a patriot who called it the way he saw it. He was blunt and direct.

The reaction from the White House was swift (yes, you heard me) and fierce. "Dick" Cheney implied that he was a liar and a coward. Scott McClellan accused him of being a terrorist appeaser. And a Republican Congressman suggested that Murtha (and others like him) were guilty of treason.

Harry Reid recently said this:

As a former boxer I know, your opponent always starts to swing wildly when you've got them on the ropes. The way to beat them isn't to hesitate, but to continue landing punches until he goes down. The Iraq war is too important an issue to allow cheap political attacks to prevent us from doing what is best for our troops and best for our country.

Call the White House and let them know you are tired of political attacks and want real solutions for Iraq. You can reach the White House by dialing:

202-456-1111

You can also send an encouraging message to John Murtha.

[crickets chirping]

So sorry. I got that headline wrong -- the correct version says, Bush adjusts strategy, begins “hitting back” .

Of all the people running this war, is there anyone, anywhere, who has less credibility on it than "Dick" Cheney?

What made you slam down your café au lait (beer, bourbon, etc.) and set out to conquer the world?

P.S. The book doesn't have to have been required reading for a class.

(HT to Slate)

Because they think he's like Kryptonite to Superman.

But you decide. Here's the Chairman on Meet the Press:

• We want a strong national security based on telling the truth to our people at home, our soldiers and our allies.
  
• We want jobs in America that will stay in America. And we believe that renewable energy is one of the areas where we can do that.
  
• We want a health care system that covers everybody, just like 36 other countries in the world.
  
• We want a strong public education system.
  
• And most of all, we want honesty back in government.

I think that's a pretty good agenda.

Yes, it is.

What does that say about God? Or more importantly, what does that say about Pat Robertson?

From Associated Press:

AMMAN, Jordan - Eleven top Jordanian officials, including the national security adviser, resigned Tuesday...in the wake of the deadly hotel bombings.

Really? Imagine that -- a security catastrophe occurs and someone in the government feels accountable.

What a concept!

Gallup. 11/11-13. (10/28-30 results)

Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?

Approve 37 (41)
Disapprove 60 (56)

Holy cow -- the guy is still falling. This poll shows a net -8 in the last two weeks alone.

But here's the most surprising nugget of all:

A 53% majority say they trust what Bush says less than they trusted previous presidents while they were in office.

In a specific comparison with President Clinton, those surveyed by 48%-36% say they trust Bush less.

If that doesn't set off the tornado sirens around the White House, I don't know what will. Jeez -- for Republicans, Clinton is the gold-standard of untrustworthiness.

Now here's the thing: this is actually good news for Bush if he does something about it -- fire Rove, clean house, bring in fresh faces, get a new chief of staff, something. Anything. Democrats would be hard-pressed to rail against a President during the midterm election campaign if POTUS did these things NOW, in late 2005.

In short, gangrene has set in and the patient is resisting surgery -- always a bad sign.

Kos:

Dean has already surpassed McAuliffe's vaunted presidenital-cycle [fund-raising totals]. Period. And [the totals will] only get better.

Dean has started rebuilding the state parties -- something DC Democrats could care less about (considering they never bothered trying to do it before).

And as to establishment and DLC fears that Dean would be an electoral disaster for Dems? Two words:

2005 elections. 'Nuff said.

There is a paucity of "cash on hand" and/but it's hard to say why.

All in all, Dean is part of the solution, not part of the problem, as some in the MSM are reporting.

What the hell is up with that?

Joe Klein interviews Rep. Rahm Emmanuel for Time Magazine.

I like Emmanuel, and not just because I recently read that he was the real-life model for the character of The West Wing's Josh Lyman. Emmanuel is what Klein calls a "happy warrior," i.e., he's an enthusiastic guy who revels in what he does and is willing to fight for what he believes in.

He is also the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), the organization responsible for getting more Democrats elected to Congress (Chuck Schumer is his counterpart for the Senate).

Here are five issues that Emmanuel is focusing on for the mid-term elections next year:

1. Expand support for higher education.
   "Make college as universal in the 21st century as high school was in the 20th"; three out of four jobs in the new, high-tech economy require two years or more of higher education.

2. Create a National Institute of Science and Engineering, like the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
   Funding for the nih has quadrupled since the 1980s, from $7 billion to $28 billion. "That's why we lead in pharmaceuticals and medical technology." Funding for science has been stagnant—about $5 billion—during that period. "I'd quadruple it and concentrate on nanotechnology, broadband and energy."

3. Promote energy independence.
   Reduce foreign oil by 50% in 10 years. Create a hybrid economy. Use government contracts and tax incentives to boost solar and wind power.

4. Provide health care vouchers.
   "I'm not afraid of vouchers"—for use in the health insurance system that covers federal employees. Basic coverage, nothing fancy.

5. Organize a bipartisan summit on the budget.
   Balance it. Everything on the table—loopholes, pork, Bush tax cuts.

"And then you gotta have a reform piece," Emanuel hydrofoiled. "Actually, that should come first. Clean up the relationship between lobbyists and legislators, same way we did donors and candidates. This place is a cesspool—gotta address the gifts, free trips, the revolving-door lobbying jobs for staff members."

Not a bad list, although I'd like to see something stronger on health care, something more like Kennedy's "Medicare for all."

Conspicuous by its absence is a bullet point on national security and more specifically on Iraq. Emmanuel (and DCCC mastermind Nancy Pelosi) have taken a lot of heat from the grassroots on this point because, while polls show that overall support for the war has fallen dramatically among all segments of the electorate, the DCCC has been wishy-washy on the issue. The closest I've heard Emmanuel come to a statement on Iraq is when he said this on MTP:

Congress has an obligation to hold a standard. We have given the president a blank check. It's been a rubber-stamp Congress that sent troops in there without Kevlar vests, without Humvees. We have to have a standard in which Iraq and the administration measure up over the two years, and at that point we'll evaluate where we are.

I'm the last guy qualified to lecture Emmanuel about political tactics, but in the world of "us vs. them," how does this distinguish the Democrats from the Republicans?

Here's the thing: If you go into a restaurant and the menu has two items -- "A Cheeseburger" and "Another Cheeseburger" -- you're going to order "A Cheeseburger" every time.

Kevin Drum:

If I had to choose one single thing as the most important determinant of a genuinely strong economy, it would be median wage growth. After all, if median wages are increasing smartly, it's a sure bet that the economy as a whole is growing too and everyone — including Donald Trump — is doing well.

It's quite possible to have strong GDP growth that still leaves two-thirds of the country stagnant — which is roughly what's happened for the past 30 years — but it's almost impossible to have strong median wage growth and not also have a booming economy.

It's clear: the dominant economic theory of the last thirty years (supply-side economics) has failed to stimulate median wage growth. At all.

Let's try policies that make it easier for wage-earners to increase their income. Provide incentives for corporations to help workers make more money instead of cutting labor expenses to the bone. Help wage-earners keep more of their money instead of paying more and more and more of their paycheck in health care expenses, expenses for higher education, energy expenses, and so on. Focus on (and help, not penalize) people who work for a living instead of people whose income comes from passive investments.

I am not one of those people who think all conservatives are whackos.

But I do believe that this President was elected mostly because the people who believe this sort of crap also voted for George Bush.

Pat Robertson, talking about the defeat of pro-Intelligent Design school board members in Dover, Pennsylvania:

I’d like to say to the good citizens of Dover. If there is a disaster in your area, don’t turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city.

And don’t wonder why He hasn’t helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I’m not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that’s the case, don’t ask for His help because he might not be there.

Let me be blunt: there are crazies on both sides of the fence; but it's only the crazies on the Republican side, the crazies that put Bush in office, it is only those crazies who pretend they can divine God's Will.

Here's the thing: those that put God above the US Constitution are destroying our system of governance.

You heard me: when you say, "You just voted God out of your city," you might as well be saying, "Jesus hates Democrats."

It was because of people like Pat Robertson that the Pilgrims fled England.

General Clark on Fox & Friends, Nov. 12, 8:15 am:

I was one of many people who had seen previous intelligence that said the best judgment of the intelligence community was there might be weapons of mass destruction, some materials were unaccounted for.

But the talk about mushroom clouds that Secretary Cheney was certain they were going to get a nuclear device fairly soon and so forth; it was irresponsible, it was ungrounded in the facts and the Congress that voted on the resolution never had the chance to see all the dissenting opinions within the intelligence community so I think there's a lot to be looked at here.

I think strategically, though, we can see now, four years after 9/11, that going into Iraq in a way to fight the war on terror was a strategic blunder. Al Qaeda...is in Iraq right now because there is not strong control over Iraq.

[...]

[The Silberman/Robb Commission] never looked at whether the administration distorted the information that was available in its approach to the public...[T]hey specifically said they weren't authorized to do that. That's what has to be looked at by this...Senate committee and they haven't done so.

(HT to gsp)

Read this article about the MIT engineering study -- you'll be surprised.

We heard today from President Bush -- he "blasted his critics," branding them hypocrites because more than 100 Congressional Democrats had access to the same intelligence as the White House and they voted to support the President's plans to remove Saddam. Now they're kicking him while he's down. Poor baby.

Of course, what he won't mention is that they only saw part of the picture -- Bush hid the rest.

It's clear now that many analysts expressed doubts about the intelligence that the administration was relying on. For example:

• INR never bought the claim about uranium from Africa.
  
• DIA thought the informant in the Iraqi-al Qaida connection was a liar.
  
• Drones? The Air Force thought it was ridiculous.
  
• Aluminimum tubes? DOE didn't believe it.

Did we hear about this in the run up to the war? Nope. Fact is, probably not a single one of the Congressional Democrats Bush is chastising today knew about any of that.

What would have happened had they known then what they know now?

• Saddam did not actively assist al Qaida
  
• Colin Powell's mobile weapons labs were based on flimsy evidence
  
• Condi Rice's pronouncements about aluminum tubes had been debunked before she made a single public statement about them.

What would have happened if we, and those Congressional Democrats, had known about all that?

A couple of these Democrats have come out and said that their vote was a mistake, the most recent being John Edwards. And, of course, Bush slammed them, accusing all of them of being demagogues. Karl Rove rides again.

[Note: some Democrats have also piled on, complaining that we should have heard from these guys a year ago or more. Maybe so, but I still give them credit -- better late than never.]

But I digress. The fact is this administration cherry-picked the intel to scare us into a war they wanted to fight from Day One.

Tim Grieve:

As his poll numbers plummet, as his party begins to look past him, [Bush] spends Veterans Day on a stage set in Pennsylvania, insisting that it doesn't matter that he was wrong about war because the people he fooled were wrong about it, too.

I supported the war before, during and after "major combat operations" had ended. People very close to me did the same thing. But when it became clear that the President had lied and exaggerated in making his argument for war, when it became clear that he spun the facts to sell his case, then it became clear that he had, and has, betrayed his public trust and has diminished the credibility of his office and our country.

History may yet judge us and say that what we lost was far more important than what we gained from this war.

But it's not too late. We can turn the judgement of history around now. But we can't do it by continuing to make the same mistake, by continuing to "stay the course." We have to start talking, now, about the things that Bush doesn't want us to discuss. We have to start talking now about how to bring this thing to a close and how to get out. There are some public officials starting to do that. Let's give them the stage. Let's begin that debate.

...and I agree with his definition:

I think it starts with not uttering falsehoods that damage the country in time of war, simply because your donor base wants to hear them.

Damn straight.

Now if we could just get President Bush (and Karl Rove and "Dick" Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and Condi Rice) to be more patriotic, then maybe we could straighten this whole mess out.

My favorite Bush apologist wants to know: Who screws us more, Government or Big Oil?

Yes. Well.

We're getting screwed with our pants on by both the government (especially this government, BTW) AND the oil companies.

But here's the difference between them:

When it comes to the oil companies, the only recourse you have is to be a shareholder and raise holy hell. Good luck with that. It's a system where one dollar equals one vote. The more shares you own, the more votes you have, the more hell you raise. Oddly enough, I like that system -- it is as it should be. But don't kid yourself -- it's no comfort to those who are not shareholders and are getting screwed with their pants on, which is pretty much all of us.

The government, OTOH, operates under a slightly different system: one person equals one vote. And the cost of that vote is free, if you'll exercise it. Do you think that this administration, this Congress is in the hip pocket of Big Oil? Then vote the rascals out. Doesn't cost you anything, and if you organize lots of like-minded people, it could happen.

Bottom line? I'm for the government grabbing the oil companies by the scruff of the neck and rubbing their noses in their own crap until they learn to be better corporate citizens.

In other words, bring back Teddy Effing Roosevelt, please.

From Eric Cornell, Nobel Prize winner:

[A]s exciting as intelligent design is in theology, it is a boring idea in science.

Science isn't about knowing the mind of God; it's about understanding nature and the reasons for things. The thrill is that our ignorance exceeds our knowledge; the exciting part is what we don't understand yet.

If you want to recruit the future generation of scientists, you don't draw a box around all our scientific understanding to date and say, "Everything outside this box we can explain only by invoking God's will."

Back in 1855, no one told the future Lord Rayleigh that the scientific reason for the sky's blueness is that God wants it that way. Or if someone did tell him that, we can all be happy that the youth was plucky enough to ignore them. For science, intelligent design is a dead-end idea.

My call to action for scientists is, Work to ensure that the intelligent-design hypothesis is taught where it can contribute to the vitality of a field (as it could perhaps in theology class) and not taught in science class, where it would suck the excitement out of one of humankind's great ongoing adventures.

Great minds do, indeed, think alike.

John Harwood, writing on the WSJ Editorial page: "[Democrats] lack either a singular national voice or a clearly defined agenda for voters to seize on."

That might be, but it's only postponing the day when the President (and his apologists) must admit that he's running on fumes himself.

Dan Balz, quoting yet another unnamed Republican strategist: " 'We're tapped out on taxes,' he said, asking not to be identified to offer a more candid analysis. 'We failed on Social Security. We're nowhere on health care. Medicare didn't do it. The war's not going well. The economy's in fact going well, but we're not getting credit for it.' "

So there you are: 5 years into the Bush Presidency, 3 years to go and one year after he scores a "mandate" in the last election, George W. Bush is "tapped out."

It's one thing for the opposition party to be voiceless; but when the President fails to use the bully pulpit and a majority Congress to his advantage, that's pathetic.

"Last month, the Senate voted for a ban on torture 90-9. You heard me correctly: Nine United States Senators refused to vote against torture. Those senators included Illinois Democrat Thumbscrews McGee, Iowa's Cattleprod von Analpair and, of course, Ted Stevens [of] Alaska."
---Jon Stewart

"What's the next best thing to simply hiring ethical people [in the White House]? Explaining to the crooks and liars you hired how ethical people would act."
---Randi Rhodes

"It was reported this week that when he was in college, Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito supported gay rights. Apparently, his exact words were, `Let's get Jenn and Stacy drunk and see if they make out.'"
---Conan O'Brien

"The [rioting] immigrants, mainly North African Muslims, are upset that they're being shunned by French society. They feel alienated, scorned, looked down upon. Apparently, they're unaware this is a common situation known as Being French."
---Rob Corddry

"New Rule: I'm not impressed by what college your kid is going to. George Bush went to Yale. The End."
---Bill Maher

(HT to Bill in Portland Maine)

Oil company CEOs showed up on Capitol Hill today. They were invited to testify in front of Congress about the skyrocketing price of gas and heating oil, as well as their record-breaking quarterly profits ($25 billion).

I mean, wouldn't you like to ask them a bunch of questions about all that? Me too. Let's talk about The Grinch That Stole Christmas.

But for some reason, Chairman Ted ("Bridge to Nowhere") Stevens pointedly declined to put them under oath before their testimony began.

Is he arrogant or just tone-deaf?

P.S. IIRC, Bush and Cheney were not put under oath when questioned by Patrick Fitzgerald during the CIA Leak investigation. What is it about Republican Oil-Men that allows them to be above the law?

Rose -- WTF??

Not much, really, other than this: it's good to win and Democrats won.

And, on a day when the conservatives who run this country really, really, really needed some good news, they didn't get it.

Remember when we were actually talking about amending the Constitution to allow Schwarzenegger to run for President? Heh. Now, it looks like he won't even be re-elected Governor next year.

It's ovah, baby.

From MSNBC:

Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould said teaching [intelligent design] was akin to teaching “American history without Lincoln.” Bill Nye, the “Science Guy” of children’s television, called it “harebrained” and “nutty.”

[...]

Yet, today, the Kansas Board of Education approved new public-school science standards Tuesday that cast doubt on the theory of evolution.

It's been said that the first person to stand on the planet Mars, or find a cure for cancer, or perfect a pollution-free source of energy is probably, today, somewhere, in elementary or middle school.

With this move by the Kansas Board, we can almost be assured that the kid is not in Kansas.

P.S. I believe in God and I also believe in evolution. And I believe that if you must teach them both in the same school, you must teach them in separate classrooms.

P.P.S. You know, you could make the argument that this violates the separation of church and state. But you know what? It's worse than that and here's why:

In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.

So much for science class.

How about history class? You watch: some day in the not-too-distant future, American students studying history will note that the Nobel prize for curing cancer went to an Indian scientist; that the first man on Mars was a Chinese astronaut; and the inventor of a pollution-free power supply was a Canadian engineer.

The Daily News publishes an article today detailing "the subtle but unmistakable erosion in the bond between President Bush and Vice President Cheney."

Feh.

It's the usual crap, whispered by unnamed sources, contradicted by other unnamed sources all with their own individual fish to fry.

But buried at the bottom of the article was this little nugget:

A highly placed source said the President believes Cheney "got too deeply concerned with being portrayed as the source of the Wilson trip."

Now, of all the reasons why the White House went after Joe Wilson and his wife, of all the speculation out there, have you ever, ever, ever read that Cheney was pissed that people would think HE sent Wilson to Niger? No, never.

If anything, Cheney was pissed at Wilson because he, Wilson, called bullshit on the administration's crackpot, mendacious insistence that Saddam was about to go nuclear.

I wouldn't be surprised if this "highly placed source" is Karl Rove. After all, it's the same right-wing talking point, i.e., that Wilson "lied" when he said he went to Niger on Cheney's orders. Of course Wilson never said any such thing. But Bush apologists push that point over and over and over again in a never-ending attempt to destroy Wilson's credibility and reputation.

Last week, the Washington Post published a story about a super-secret CIA prison system.

Soon after that, Speaker Hastert and Majority Leader Frist called for an investigation into the leak.

Next thing you know, it turns out the leak probably came from some place just a little too close for comfort:

Trent Lott stunned reporters by declaring that this subject was actualy discussed at a Senate Republican luncheon, Republican senators only, last Tuesday the day before the story ran in the Washington Post.

Lott noted that Vice President Cheney was also in the room for that discussion and Lott said point blank "a lot of it came out of that room last Tuesday, pointing to the room where the lunch was held in the Capitol." He added of Senators "we can't keep our mouths shut." He added about the Vice President, "He was up here last week and talked up here in that room right there in a roomful of nothing but senators and every word that was said in there went right to the newspaper."

[Lott] said he believes when all is said and done it may wind up as an ethics investigation of a Republican senator, maybe a Republican staffer as well.

Senator Frist's office not commenting on this development. The Washington Post not commenting either.

So let me see if I have this right: a CIA leak comes out of a roomful of Republican Senators .... and "Dick" Cheney.

I swear to God, you couldn't make up a more delicious story.

P.S. I think Cheney is just taunting us now.

Anybody watch Sunday's live debate on The West Wing?

Who do you think won?

As you probably know, I'm someone that would stand in line to watch The West Wing. I think it is one of the best shows ever produced for prime-time network television. And I think that, even on a bad night (or during a bad season), TWW is still one of the better shows on TV. I was never a Star Trek geek; but I come pretty close to being a TWW wonk.

Anyway, can I tell you that I was a bit disappointed that Santos did not knock it out of the park? If Santos is nine points down (as we saw in the previous episode), I have a hard time seeing how he gets even with this performance. I even told Miss Julie that I actually liked Arnie Vinick's debate performance better.

Oh, yeah, Vinick was often whiny and annoying and he was a looney tune when he talked about lowering taxes in Africa. But, overall, he seemed nimble, strong and in control. No wonder Leo McGarry warned everyone about how good Vinick is.

Santos also had his moments. He hit all the right liberal notes, including his health care plan (Kennedy's "Medicare for All") and his proud defense of liberalism in general. Plus, he looked strong and vigorous. And after all, politics now-days is just TV with the sound turned off, isn't it? So Santos was ahead on that count.

Now, maybe I'm wrong, but it seems pretty clear that Santos is being set up to win the election. I mean, how else would the producers be able to maintain continuity with even part of the cast if Vinick wins? All the cast members would have to exit. At least if Santos wins, Josh stays around.

That said, something else will have to happen this season to put Santos on track to win the election; IMHO, the debate hasn't done it.

Of course, maybe the producers have no plans to take it into Season 8. Maybe the ending of the campaign hasn't even been written yet -- Miss Julie said she heard even the actors don't know how it all turns out. Hmmm. Maybe they're waiting for the "returns" on this debate. Or maybe it won't be resolved at all. After all, we did see some ambiguity in the season premiere -- in that episode we flash-forwarded three years into the next President's tenure and we didn't actually see WHO the new President was. Maybe the season (or the series) ends without closure on that count.

Hoping to score big, the producers had Lawrence O'Donnell write the script -- he has written many of the classic episodes from the Aaron Sorkin era. I think they were trying insure that the episode would boost viewership now and for the rest of the season. But judging by the fan reaction on the bulletin boards, the fanatics were somewhat underwhelmed by the episode. The ones who liked it were, like, "enh" and the ones who disliked it, detested it.

What do you think?

P.S. Weird trivia: younger viewers switched allegiance to Vinnick after viewing the show; older viewers stayed with Santos. Go figure.

(If Libby's trial ever happens) expect his defense lawyers to paint Matt Cooper, Judy Miller and Tim Russert as dishonest and, furthermore, biased against their client.

In other words, the "liberal media" will be on trial.

It could work, but a lot depends on what kind of jury they can glean from the DC jury pool.

Bush stumps tonight for Kilgore. The race is too close to call.

Tomorrow Wednesday morning, come what may, will Bush be the story in that race?

The White House has announced that staff will be required to attend a refresher course on ethics.

This is true, it's not a joke.

P.S. I guess this is what Bush calls "restoring honor and dignity to the White House."

You know, I've always been prone to respiratory problems; when I was a boy, I suffered from hay fever. As an adult, my "Achilles heel" evolved and expanded so that these upper respirtory problems now settle in my chest and the cough lasts for weeks. Moving to Louisiana hasn't helped; it's probably made it worse. So when I developed a cough a few weeks ago, I went to the doctor and got the requisite steroid shot, Z-Pack prescription with the added bonus of a prescription for Tussin. And for the first time in my life, I got a flu shot.

It worked for a while -- the cough went away. Then it came back. And not only that, Miss Julie got it too. In fact, so many people have it, they've given it a name -- "Katrina Cough:"

A large number of people along the Louisiana and Mississippi coasts are developing a condition dubbed "Katrina cough," believed to be linked to mold and dust circulating in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

Health officials are trying to determine how widespread the problem is, but suggest that it is popping up among people who have returned to storm-ravaged areas, particularly New Orleans.

Son of a gun. I work with people every day who are going to, and coming from, New Orleans. And you know what? They're all coughing. Everyone has this thing. It doesn't help that Baton Rouge has only had a speck of rain for the last 2-3 weeks -- it's really dry and dusty here.

Man, you survive two hurricanes and then you get this. What's next? Frogs? Vermin? Cattle Disease? Boils? Hail? Locusts?

Ouch! 19%

10. Before eating chicken, soak it in Lysol

9. Don't lick unfamiliar pigeons

8. Frighten birds by constantly meowing

7. Stay away from basketball great Larry Bird

6. Anti-bacterial smoothies

5. Move to a place where there are no birds...like the moon

4. Avoid birds that look like they're up to something

3. Go back to the old Y2K bunker, start drinking

2. Fill birdfeeder with Sucrets

1. If you have a chicken, check for swelling in the McNuggets

---Late Show with David Letterman

(HT to Bill in Portland Maine)

In a word -- hell, no. It's a measure of how far off-kilter we've gone that the MSM is even discussing this absurd situation.

Are you kidding? The guy is under criminal investigation. He has become what John Dean called "a cancer on the Presidency." Democrats, Republicans and Independents alike are calling for him to be removed.

And of course, the real reason he's still there is because he, Karl Rove, has convinced George Bush that it's in Bush's best interest to leave him be. And Bush listened, again proving how weak and irrelevant he really is.

Broder had it right: George W. Bush is President Pushover.

P.S. Jonathan Alter suggests that, in accordance with sections 5.1 and 5.7 of Executive Order 12958, Rove should have his security clearance revoked. The problem with that is that it would require President Pushover to, you know, actually do something.

On day when Karl Rove hoped to shift the focus away from the CIA leak investigation and the indictment of potential felon Scooter Libby, Harry Reid said, "Not so fast."

Invoking the rarely used Senate Rule 21, Reid put the US Senate into a closed session:

In a speech on the Senate floor, Reid said the American people and U.S. troops deserved to know the details of how the United States became engaged in the war, particularly in light of the indictment of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff.

Apparently the entire maneuver caught Bill Frist by surprise. He all but popped a blood vessel while denouncing his Democratic counterpart. Poor baby!

CNN was also caught off balance -- Wolf Blitzer cut to one in-studio reporter who tried to deliver some information about Rule 21, but her mic wasn't on. Wolf then cut away to Bill Schneider who appeared on-camera with a crooked necktie.

Man, they was scramblin'!

With this move (which some are saying will be repeated every day until the long-promised investigation is launched by the Senate Intelligence Committee), Reid served the majority with notice that the Dems still have some fight in them. Maybe Reid is thinking about filibustering Samuel Alito's nomination after all.

Bottom line? Reid has succeeded (for a few hours) to remind people what's at stake in the CIA leak investigation and the indictment (so far) of Scooter Libby: that this administration will go to any lengths to cover up what really happened in the run-up to war in Iraq.

In other words, Reid connected the dots and reminded people that there is a really big picture here to look at.

(HT to Miss Julie for the clever headline -- the New York Post got nothin' on you, baby!)

If there ever was a judge whose nomination you'd want to filibuster, it's got to be Samuel Alito:

• His Taliban-like views on marriage and abortion should be anathema to any right-thinking Democrat, liberal and/or progressive (or Republican, for that matter).

• If the Dems are so afraid of the filibuster, it's like not having it anyway. So if the Republicans kill the filibuster, what have the Democrats really lost?

• Besides, the way things are going, it might not be long before the Democrats control Congress and the White House anyway. Then the shoe's on the other foot.

I say Filibuster Alito.

Just make sure everyone in America knows what a Neanderthal (and activist!) judge he really is.

(HT to kos)