Here and There

The Bush Squad wants to redefine birth control as abortion.

My take: They sat back and reflected, and realized that they hadn’t wreaked enough physical, moral, and sexual havoc on the nation and the world, and decided this would really get the ball rolling again, circa 20 A.D. style.

Bastards. At least Speaker Nancy Pelosi had the decency to waste no time denouncing the move.

This story, by Wired.com’s Ryan Singel*, describes an analysis of contributions from U.S. telecommunications’ PACs to representatives, and how the money may correlate to those reps votes on the recent FISA renewal act now in the Senate.

Singel points out that 40 percent more money went to the 94 Democrats who now support the bill (as opposed to their opposition to the original bill, which went before the House three months ago). Also, in total, meaning when you include Republican reps who, naturally, support warrantless wiretapping and, perhaps more importantly, immunity for the telecoms from prosecution, the PAC money to those voting in favor of the new bill is nearly double that going to members of Congress who voted against it.

This is slightly complicated, but very, very sickening.

Honestly? Screw campaign finance reform. How about legislative finance reform? How about Larry Lessig, and others like him, who are pushing to keep special interest money out of politics altogether?

Members of Congress are charged with representing their constituents. Since when are AT&T, Verizon, and the like constituents of anyone?

* Singel is a colleague of mine.

Barbara Boxer, holding Bush’s (and by extension, all capitulating House Democrats’) balls to the fire on FISA:

“The Bush Administration trampled on the Constitution, and we are not doing anything in this bill to provide accountability.”

Makes me think they want to lose.

Thx: TPM

You can hit all three reps at once with this form letter.

Basically, enough Democrats in Congress may be willing to compromise on the new FISA bill, which offers telecom immunity and actually expands government spying power.

If you trust people like Russ Feingold, who has an amazing civil liberties track record, this is a bad compromise:

“Under the Bond proposal, the result of the FISA Court’s evaluation would be predetermined… the FISA court would be required to grant immunity.” - Feingold and Senator Chris Dodd on Senator Kit Bond’s proposal

Been telling myself it’s fast approaching the time when I hold a fire to Democrats’ ass the way I’ve been doing to the GOP for so long.

Lo and behold, this landed in my Google Reader this morning: Chris Dodd tied to preferential mortgage program at Countryside.

Please, senator, stop addressing the housing crisis RIGHT NOW.

Do not give a misbehaving child what (s)he wants.

And with that implicit analogy, this blog now turns its full attention toward taking down John McCain. Reader submissions are accepted.

The aim will be to expose John McCain for what he is — an old-school politician, beholden to special interests with deep pockets who play by their own rules. The arguments about approach to government are tired, but must be hashed out. The real question is who these candidates are, what they represent, and how they will lead and represent the United States of America at home and to the world.

Given these tenets, the choice should be pretty clear, methinks.

The West Virginia senator, the longest-serving member of the United States Senate, endorsed Barack Obama today. You remember West Virginia, the state where Hillary Clinton wiped the floor with Obama less than one week ago. Byrd begs to differ.

Also, Kansas Democratic Party Chair and superdelegate Larry Gates announced his support of Obama.

112.

Ted Kennedy rushed to a Massachusetts hospital. Story is developing …

On your DailyKos Post “Bush Attacking Obama Is Bush Attacking All Democrats.”

oh …
my …
god.

She’s done it again. She’s attempted to distance herself from the black hole of 2001-2008, and in so doing, has trumpted the Bush Co. mantra of “To hell with experts.”

The Rob has some excellent commentary from Clinton’s appearance this morning with her best buddy and family pet, George Stephaopoulos.

I’d like to add to his analysis by saying that voters aren’t beyond hearing about the devastating environmental consequences of making gas cheaper. They aren’t so stupid that you can’t talk from the outset, emphatically, about the crime of high prices in the face of record oil-company profits. And they’re smart enough to connect the dots between higher oil prices, a Middle East in a shambles, and demand having spiked.

It’s like with being a liar, or being a racist. To not be these things, you shouldn’t have to say you’re not. Ditto populism. A populist should never have to say, “I’m fighting for you,” or, “I’m a populist.” When they do, I smell bullshit.

Hillary Clinton is being a follower. She’s following the most cynical, unthinking viewpoint, which says, “Damn, them’s high prices. Oh, what? It’s because of the gubment taxin’ my gas? Damn them!”

No, a true leader connects the dots and speaks out and address the source of the problem.

Here’s Obama speaking Friday about the politics behind the idea:

Last week, South Carolina’s James Clyburn told reporters that he had heard prominent people say that the Clintons were potentially sabotaging Obama’s chances of winning in November, setting themselves up for Hillary to run again in 2012.

Conspiracy theories aside, this is the third-highest ranking member of the U.S. House of Representatives, not some lowly blogger.

But many have interpreted Clyburn’s remarks to mean that he believes this to be true.

He explains his comments to Keith Olbermann:

Well, maybe not the most important, but this is so timely and crucial that I want you to read it and please, promote it.

I’ve had things I thought everyone should do or read since time immemorial, but honestly, this post from Grassroots Mom at DailyKos lays out in exhaustive detail the legislative legacies of the two remaining candidates for the Democratic nomination for president. Since this incident on Chris Matthews’s show on MSNBC started getting play (in the blogosphere and Clinton speeches, mostly), a lot of people have been trumpeting the whole “he’s done nothing … he’s all talk and no action” lines ad infinitum. Well, the facts should lay that bogus claim to rest. (For the record, Watson responded.)

Whether you’re on the fence, in Hillary’s camp, or already supporting Obama, this is a must-read. Obama’s had my vote for some time now, and this thing gave me chills imagining what kind of president he will be. Perhaps I’m wrong, but if her analysis is any indication, this country (and even the world) could really be headed for vastly brighter days.

According to WaPo’s Fact Checker blog, the Clinton campaign’s claims that Barack Obama had “backroom deals” with Exelon are bogus, as are Obama’s misstatements that he “passed” legislation requiring notification of nuclear “releases” by energy companies. What Obama did was introduce a bill to a GOP-lead committee that required more protections for the industry. Obama cut deals with lawmakers, in the sense that he let the legislation be weakened in order to get something passed.

Seems to me that’s on message with his pledge to work with Republicans, even those as repugnant as then-Senate Environment Committee Chairman James “Global Warming Is a Hoax” Inhofe (R-Oklahoma). Obama, a relatively new senator at the time, did so at the urging or more veteran lawmakers such as Barbara Boxer and Dick Durbin.

But wait, it’s gets better. After the passage of the legislation, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-New York) hailed it as “important.” Surely in 2006 she knew that she’d be running for president in 2008. Problem is, she didn’t realize she’d be in a struggle for the nomination with this very same junior senator from Illinois.

But less detrimental to the image of the country, perhaps.

The Washington Post reports on Clinton’s and Obama’s earmarks while in Congress, versus McCain’s dearth of such.