Can someone please show the White House the 4th Amendment?

This from USNews:

In the dark days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, a small group of lawyers from the White House and the Justice Department began meeting to debate a number of novel legal strategies to help prevent another attack. Soon after, President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to begin conducting electronic eavesdropping on terrorism suspects in the United States, including American citizens, without court approval. Meeting in the FBI's state-of-the-art command center in the J. Edgar Hoover Building, the lawyers talked with senior FBI officials about using the same legal authority to conduct physical searches of homes and businesses of terrorism suspects--also without court approval, one current and one former government official tell U.S. News. "There was a fair amount of discussion at Justice on the warrantless physical search issue," says a former senior FBI official. "Discussions about--if [the searches] happened--where would the information go, and would it taint cases." [Emphasis added.]

Here again, our 4th Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

How much more evidence do we need to conclude that this administration is hostile to our civil liberties? Hostile to the Constitution itself? They wanted something expressly forbidden by the 4th Amendment.

The article describes this administration's now familiar flim-flam of misusing the testimony of Jamie Gorelick to bolster it's illegal actions. Then it calls in an expert:

But John Martin, a former Justice Department attorney who prosecuted the two most important cases involving warrantless searches and surveillance, says the department is sending an unambiguous message to Congress. "They couldn't make it clearer," says Martin, "that they are also making the case for inherent presidential power to conduct warrantless physical searches."

Doesn't matter, I guess that the 4th Amendment bans them.

The article does point out that they weren't able to find out whether any searches were conducted. They did add the story of a defense attorney Thomas Nelson. He wrote to US Attorney Karin Immergut that there were strong indications that his house and office were searched.

The searches, if they occurred, were anything but deft. Late at night on two occasions, Nelson's colleague Jonathan Norling noticed a heavyset, middle-aged, non-Hispanic white man claiming to be a member of an otherwise all-Hispanic cleaning crew, wearing an apron and a badge and toting a vacuum. But, says Norling, "it was clear the vacuum was not moving." Three months later, the same man, waving a brillo pad, spent some time trying to open Nelson's locked office door, Norling says. Nelson's wife and son, meanwhile, repeatedly called their home security company asking why their alarm system seemed to keep malfunctioning. The company could find no fault with the system.

In October, Immergut wrote to Nelson reassuring him that the FBI would not target terrorism suspects' lawyers without warrants and, even then, only "under the most exceptional circumstances," because the government takes attorney-client relationships "extremely seriously." Nelson nevertheless filed requests, under the Freedom of Information Act, with the NSA. The agency's director of policy, Louis Giles, wrote back, saying, "The fact of the existence or nonexistence of responsive records is a currently and properly classified matter."

How convenient.

But don't go away tyranny-fans, there's more!

White House lawyers, in particular, Vice President Cheney's counsel David Addington (who is now Cheney's chief of staff), pressed Mueller to use information from the NSA program in court cases, without disclosing the origin of the information, and told Mueller to be prepared to drop prosecutions if judges demanded to know the sourcing, according to several government officials. Mueller, backed by Comey, resisted the administration's efforts. "The White House was putting pressure on Mueller to broadly make cases with the intelligence," says one official. "But he did not want to use it as a basis for any affidavit in any court." Comey declined numerous requests for comment. Sources say Mueller and his general counsel, Valerie Caproni, continue to remain troubled by the domestic spying program. Martin, who has handled more intelligence-oriented criminal cases than anyone else at the Justice Department, puts the issue in stark terms: "The failure to allow it [information obtained from warrantless surveillance] to be used in court is a concession that it is an illegal surveillance." [Emphasis added.]

So they know it's illegal, they know that if the sourcing of the illegal intelligence were made public it could endanger the prosecution of terrorists - but they wanted to do it anyway.

I'll say it again.

IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH

Overkill at the Antiwar Rally/March?

As reported here, Pittsburgh held a rally and march to mark the third anniversary of the Iraq War. The main sponsor was the Thomas Merton Center which has received national attention recently when proof was offered demonstrating that the FBI had been spying on this pacifist group.

I and the Other Political Junkie attended the rally but not the march, but I didn't bring a camera (I was toting some largest posters for Democracy for Pittsburgh).

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette covers the march here and Pittsburgh Indymedia covers it here with LOTS of pictures including these two:




But the most interesting coverage may be a Recommended Diary at Daily KOS by Yellow Canary here.

Like, I said, I didn't do the march, but Yellow Canary did and took loads of photos, including these two:




The photos illustrate the point Yellow Canary makes in his diary:

Not so bad. Then I got the crowd itself. A nice drumbeat was being tattoo'd by an active group in the center, but mostly people were just milling around. Not the police. They had formed an impenetrable cordon. And I'm not kidding. The crowd was dressed in jeans, sweaters, jackets. It was a cold, sunny day. These police were in FULL RIOT GEAR.

That's a block-long line of police in full riot gear. High-tech stuff: shields, shin, knee, elbow, shoulder protectors, pads everywhere. About every eighth officer had an earset with a microphone. Notice that the crowd is not particularly menacing.

[snip]

Did you notice the arms? This was a significant show of force for the police state.



He wasn't unfriendly. Told me the gun fired "non-lethal crowd control rounds". That leaves, well, most everything.

I didn't get any pictures of the "greens". They were a team of riot police staying out of the way half a block to the north. They ALL had those nice canister launchers, and one guy -- luck of draw, he was the munitions mule -- was wearing a long vest covered front, back, and sides with five inch by two inch aluminum canisters.

That's a lot of cops, probably on overtime. Pittsburgh, by the way, is in receivership (it can't pay it's bills). But it sure can pull out all stops to keep an anti-war rally from turning ugly. The city of Pittsburgh has contributed more than $950,000,000 in federal taxes for Bush's illegal war of aggression in Iraq. We sure could use that money to pay for the schools (property taxes are forcing people out of the city). Or invest in the local economy. Paying Bush to kill Iraqis when you can't afford to pay your bills seems a misguided. But then we pay extra to show peace marchers the newest in police equipment.

As one person commented after viewing the pictures:

nonlethal crowd control rounds like the one that killed the young lady celebrating in Kenmore Square after the Red Sox won the Series? These pictures are straight out of V for Vendetta. The police are up-armed for tactical assault at the mere presence of peaceful citizens exercising their constitutional rights. We need to stop this. We cannot have local police rigged out as storm troopers. They will act like what they are dressed out to do. What in the hell happened to my country? Who are these police that stand ready to kill and maim with lethal non-lethal rounds in peaceful gatherings? Woe is this nation, woe, and in peril.

What is missing from the above diary is any mention of the incident that happened at the same recruiting station back in August 2005 when tasers, dogs, and chemical weapons were used to subdue protesters. In that protest, six were arrested, two hospitalized, and many were injured including a grandmother who was bitten by a police dog. However, that protest was organized by POG, not the Merton Center.

Pittsburgh City Council held a Post Agenda hearing on the incident, the police response, and the guidelines for use of force.

At the time, Chief Robert W. McNeilly, Jr., when asked and how much force should be used during group protests "declined to release those policies, saying sophisticated anarchist groups might use them against police."

We seem to have gone from perhaps too few police who seemed overeager (felt threatened?) and ill-equipped to handle a situation to something that resembles a phalanx of troopers out of Star Wars.

[sigh]

But, by all means, go to Daily KOS and Pittsburgh Indymedia and make up your own mind.

Local Girl Makes Good

Hey check out today's P-G.

Sue Kerr, John McIntire's "official lesbian correspondent" and local blogger, made it into our local rag today.

The story revolves around Sue's efforts to stop a local company from illegally dumping in her neighborhood.

Sue Kerr - sticking it to the man!

No, wait can I really say that??

With Religion and no brains

An eleventh century blind Syrian poet named Abul'-Ala' al-Ma'arri wrote:

The inhabitants of the earth are of two sorts:
Those with brains, but no religion,
And those with religion, but no brains.

And I normally think the lines a bit (ok more than a bit) unfair as he distiction between those with brains and those with religion is too harshly drawn.

However, every now and then I stumble across something that makes at least ponder whether our blind poet was onto something.

Read. It's from last February.

When Wendy DeVore, the drama teacher at Fulton High here, staged the musical "Grease," about high school students in the 1950's, she carefully changed the script to avoid causing offense in this small town.

She softened the language, substituting slang for profanity in places. Instead of smoking "weed," the teenagers duck out for a cigarette. She rated the production PG-13, advising parents it was not suitable for small children.

But a month after the performances in November, three letters arrived on the desk of Mark Enderle, Fulton's superintendent of schools. Although the letters did not say so, the three writers were members of a small group linked by e-mail, all members of the same congregation, Callaway Christian Church.

Those three members of the Calloway Christian Church must be very proud of themselves. They stomped their feet and got their way. Who cares about free speech? Who cares about free thought? We have to protect the children!

But now here's what they call the ironical part.

Dr. Enderle watched a video of the play, ultimately agreeing that "Grease" was unsuitable for the high school, despite his having approved it beforehand, without looking at the script. Hoping to avoid similar complaints in the future, he decided to ban the scheduled spring play, "The Crucible" by Arthur Miller.

"That was me in my worst Joe McCarthy moment, to some," Dr. Enderle said.

Do you think he understood his own joke? That cancelling The Crucible would be a Joseph McCarthy moment? In a letter to the editor Enderle tries to explain himself:

My decision was made in an attempt to help our students prepare for their spring production absent any residual criticism and attention that may have resulted from the problems experienced with the fall production. It should be clarified that no community group or members had contacted me in an effort to halt production of “The Crucible.” My decision was intended to be entirely preventative in nature.

Isn't that the scary part? No community group contacted him about The Crucible but he banned it rescheduled it anyway to avoid any future controversy - from the local Christian community, no doubt. Now why would a conservative Christian community object to a play that uses the 17th century witch trials as a metaphor for the McCarthy anti-communist scare tactics of a half century ago?

And guess how many of the three protesters actually saw the play?

Two.

Mark Miller, a 26-year-old graduate student, said he was moved to complain after getting an e-mail message about the show from Terra Guittar, a member of his church. Her description of the pajama party scene offended him, he wrote, adding that one character should have worn a more modest nightgown. Mr. Miller did not see the play.

And then there's this:

Dr. Enderle said he did not base his decision to cancel "The Crucible," which was first reported by The Fulton Sun, a daily, just on the three complaints and the video. He also asked 10 people he knew whether the play crossed a line. All but one, he recalled, said yes.

And this:

Others learned"The Crucible" was off limits through an internal school district newsletter. In it, Dr. Enderle said he dropped the play after seeing this summary on the Web: "17th century Salem woman accuses an ex-lover's wife of witchery in an adaptation of the Arthur Miller play."

Did he even read the play? Between the lines, it doesn't look like it. But something about the line struck me as odd: were they performing the play or an adaptation of the play? Out of curiousity, I googled the quotation. And first on the list is this. Did he really base this whole thing on one sentence from the Internet Movie Database?

Here's some background commentary that will become important in a minute:

"Grease" and "The Crucible" are hardly unfamiliar; they are standard fare on the high school drama circuit, the second-most-frequently-performed musical and drama on school stages, according to the Educational Theater Association, a nonprofit group. The most performed now are "Seussical" and "A Midsummer Night's Dream."

Ms DeVore chose a Midsummer Night's Dream as a replacement for The Crucible.

Here's how the Times piece ends:

For the moment, Dr. Enderle acknowledged, the controversy has shrunk the boundaries of what is acceptable for the community. He added that "A Midsummer Night's Dream" was "not a totally vanilla play."

But asked if the high school might put on another Shakespeare classic about young people in love, "Romeo and Juliet," he hesitated.

"Given the historical context of the play," the superintendent said, "it would be difficult to say that's something we would not perform."

So high school students shouldn't see "Romeo and Juliet" either?

That was back in February.

Take a look at what's happened recently:

A central Missouri high school drama teacher whose spring play was canceled after complaints about tawdry content in one of her previous productions will resign rather than face a possible firing.

And:

But after a handful of Callaway Christian Church members complained about scenes in the fall musical "Grease" that showed teens smoking, drinking and kissing, Superintendent Mark Enderle told DeVore to find a more family-friendly substitute.

DeVore chose Shakespeare's "A Midsummer Night's Dream," a classic romantic comedy with its own dicey subject matter, including suicide, rape and losing one's virginity.

Uh-oh, just like "Romeo and Juliet" there's trouble in "Midsummer Night's Dream." Better fire the director.

Lord what fools these mortals be! - A Midsummer Night's Dream (III, ii, 115)

MO GOP Lawmakers Promote Abortion

Republican & Religious Right Jihad Against Women, Families & Privacy Proceeding as Planned

From KansasCity.com by way of Fired Up! Missouri by way of AmericaBlog:

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - An attempt to resume state spending on birth control got shot down Wednesday by House members who argued it would have amounted to an endorsement of promiscuous lifestyles.

Missouri stopped providing money for family planning and certain women's health services when Republicans gained control of both chambers of the Legislature in 2003.

But a Democratic lawmaker, in a little-noticed committee amendment, had successfully inserted language into the proposed budget for the fiscal year starting July 1 that would have allowed part of the $9.2 million intended for "core public health functions" to go to contraception provided through public health clinics.

The House voted 96-59 to delete the funding for contraception and infertility treatments after Rep. Susan Phillips told lawmakers that anti-abortion groups such as Missouri Right to Life were opposed to the spending.

[snip]

Others, including some lawmakers who described themselves as "pro-life," said it was illogical for anti-abortion lawmakers to deny money for contraception to low-income people who use public health clinics.

"It's going to have the opposite effect of what the intention is, which will be more unwanted pregnancies and more abortions," said Rep. Kate Meiners, D-Kansas City.

The other alternative is for low-income women to give birth to more children, which is only likely to drive up the state's costs to provide services to them, said Democratic Rep. Melba Curls, also of Kansas City.

[snip]

Missouri Right to Life said it was concerned with the contraception language because it was loosely written and could have included emergency contraception - often referred to as the morning-after pill.

The Missouri Catholic Conference also opposed the birth control funding.

"State taxpayers should not be required to subsidize activities they believe are immoral or unethical, relating to contraceptives or abortions," said Larry Weber, executive director of the state Catholic Conference.

So what have we learned from this article? We've learned:

1. Because some poor single women may get birth control, Missouri Republican Lawmakers will not pay for family planning services for any poor Missouri families, including for married Missourians.

2. Missouri Republican Lawmakers believe that not paying for family planning services will prevent the poor in Missouri from fucking.

3. Missouri Republican Lawmakers would rather not pay for family planning services for the poor in their state then dare to offend the Religious Right.

4. The Religious Right believes that contraceptives, and not just abortions, are immoral and unethical.

5. Missouri Republican Lawmakers and the Religious Right would rather ensure that more abortions occur when poor people inevitably do have sex than pay for family planning services.

6. Missouri Republican Lawmakers and the Religious Right are either complete idiots or are members of some sort of Cult of the Blastula.

7. Missouri welcomes it's new Uterus Gestapo Overlords.

You're all invited to my Birthday Party! / Pittsburgh still says "NO" to war!

WHEN: SATURDAY, MARCH 18, 1:00 PM
WHERE: Corner of Penn and Highland
WHAT: Birthday Party for Me!/ Something about a war... ***

THREE MILES FOR THREE YEARS

This Saturday, March 18th, the Thomas Merton Center Anti-War Committee is organizing a permitted mass rally and march that begins at 1:00 pm at the corner of Penn and Highland. The event kicks off with performances by Soma Mestizo, Short Dark Strangers and poet Debra Bowen followed by a few brief remarks by local activists. MARCH! Then, at 2:30 pm we will lead a three mile march that spans three neighborhoods, marking three years since the U.S.-led war on Iraq began. The march will proceed from the East Liberty Presbyterian Church to the Shadyside shopping district before terminating at Oakland military recruiting station on Forbes Avenue. (If you're worried about getting back to East Liberty note that there are several buses that can take you there: 71C, 77C, 78C and the 81B.)

BLOCS: Throw on your pink attire and join regional Codepink chapters for their fiesty Pink Bloc. Look for the big "Impeach Bush" banner...Or, join Pittsburgh Organizing Group's raucous Youth/Counter-Recruitment contingent. Look for the Youth Against Militarism banner at Baum and Liberty. Other contingents include Anti-Racist Action's Radical Pro-Choice Contingent and the free-wheeling Drop Bikes not Bombs protest ride that meets up in Friendship park at 1pm.

Or march with Democracy for Pittsburgh (one of the sponsors)/Allegheny for Pennacchio. We'll meet up at PNC office on 5934 Baum Boulevard at 12:30PM. It's about 2 blocks from the rally, has a parking lot and the bank itself closed on Saturday. (Mapquest -- Please note, there is also a PNC bank located on the corner of Penn & Highland. This is NOT the location that DFP will meet at, but instead we'll meet at a nearby PNC bank with a parking lot.) We will then walk together a couple of blocks to the rally at Penn and Highland. There will also be some of us with signs/support for Chuck Pennacchio, who is the only candidate in the race for Pennsylvania Senator, who actaully has an exit strategy for our troops to bring them home from this terrible war. (Any questions, please email or call Janis Williams at 412-680-1626/janis.jmw@comcast.net . ) Please make a sign!!!

AFTER THE MARCH: we invite you to join us for a post-march chill-down at the Shadow Lounge (5972 Baum Blvd., East Liberty) from 5:30 to 8:00 pm. Or join us for a special screening of Why We Fight at the Regent Square Theater (1035 S. Braddock Ave, Edgewood) at 9:15pm. Why We Fight is Eugene Jarecki's new must-see documentary about the military industrial complex. Representatives of the Thomas Merton Center will be present to introduce the film and lead a discussion afterwards.

VOLUNTEERS NEEDED: If you'd like to help out on the day of the event, come to a meeting at 12:30 pm at the rally site. Complete details can be found at http://www.pittsburghendthewar.org/.

***More than 300 events are being held across the country for my birthday! Check for one in you area here!


SPY-IN TO RESIST FBI & PENTAGON SPYING AND INTIMIDATION

You've heard of sit-ins, sleep-ins and die-ins. Well, you are invited to resist the FBI and Pentagon spying on local anti-war activists and join us for a SPY-IN on Tuesday, March 21st, 12-1pm at the Federal Buildling downtown (Grant and Liberty). Dress in spy gear––trench coats, black suits/fedoras (a la Abramoff), sunglasses, etc., try your local thrift shop. Bring cameras, toy cameras, note pads, binocs, telescopes. Organized by Thomas Merton Center Anti-War Committee and Pittsburgh Bill of Rights Defense Campaign.

Also consider filing your own Freedom of Information Act request to find out if the Feds have been watching. Attend the "File your own FOIA" party at the Thomas Merton Center on Wednesday, March 29th, 7pm.

Learn more about the recent release of documents which show that Thomas Merton Center anti-war efforts are being targeted by the FBI.

Bush Responds to Ever-dropping Poll #'s

(Atrios may have his ponies, but we have our melting Bushie.)

Garrison Keillor is still my favorite

Check it out.

The Republican Revolution has gone the way of all flesh. It took over Congress and the White House, horns blew, church bells rang, sailors kissed each other, and what happened? The Republicans led us into a reckless foreign war and steered the economy toward receivership and wielded power as if there were no rules. Democrats are accused of having no new ideas, but Republicans are making some of the old ideas look awfully good, such as constitutional checks and balances, fiscal responsibility, and the notion of realism in foreign affairs and taking actions that serve the national interest. What one might call "conservatism."

Geez, the man can write.

Over the course of time, the Chief Occupant has been cruelly exposed over and over. He sat and was briefed on the danger of a hurricane wiping out a major American city, and without asking a single question, he got up from the table and walked away and resumed his vacation. He played guitar as New Orleans was flooded. It took him four days to realize his responsibility to do something. When the tsunami killed 100,000 people in Southeast Asia, he was on vacation and it took him 72 hours to issue a statement of sympathy.

How long will it take for the Republican Noise Machine to denounce Garrison Keillor as a traitor?

He openly, brazenly, countenanced crimes of torture at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and Bagram. He engaged in illegal surveillance, authorized the arrest of people without charge and "disappeared" them to foreign jails. And he finagled this war, which, after three years of violence, does not look to be heading toward a happy ending. And now it's up to Republicans to put their country first and call the gentleman to account.

It's up to THE REPUBLICANS TO PUT THEIR COUNTRY FIRST?

Now that's depressing.

33%

He's at 33%.

In the aftermath of the Dubai ports deal, President Bush's approval rating has hit a new low and his image for honesty and effectiveness has been damaged.

33%

Bush's overall approval measure stands at 33%, the lowest rating of his presidency.

33%

The president's ratings for handling of several specific issues, particularly terrorism, have also declined sharply. Just 42% now approve of Bush's job in handling terrorist threats, an 11-point drop since February. In January 2005, as Bush was starting his second term, 62% approved of his handling of terrorist threats.

33%

Bush's personal image also has weakened noticeably, which is reflected in people's one-word descriptions of the president. Honesty had been the single trait most closely associated with Bush, but in the current survey "incompetent" is the descriptor used most frequently.

33%

INCOMPETENT

The FBI's been naughty!

The Post-Gazette is reporting that the Thomas Merton Center and the ACLU released documents claiming that the FBI has spied on peace activists in duh 'Burgh.

The FBI issued a statement that said that the agent involved wasn't investigating the group, but were investigating someone at a rally.

Here's the ACLU's page on this.

The P-G says there'll be more on this on Wednesday.

IN PGH COUNCIL DISTRICT 3? VOTE FOR KRAUS TODAY!

If you're in Pittsburgh City Council District Three, don't forget to come out and vote today for: Bruce A. Kraus Endorsed by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the South Pittsburgh Reporter!

Russ Feingold, American Hero

Senator Feingold stood up on the floor of the Senate and after being interrupted a couple of times by some childish Republicans delivered a historic speech. He began this way.

Mr. President, when the President of the United States breaks the law, he must be held accountable. That is why today I am introducing a resolution to censure President George W. Bush.

He must be held accountable.

The President authorized an illegal program to spy on American citizens on American soil, and then misled Congress and the public about the existence and legality of that program. It is up to this body to reaffirm the rule of law by condemning the President’s actions.

Bush authorized an illegal program.

All of us in this body took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and bear true allegiance to the same. Fulfilling that oath requires us to speak clearly and forcefully when the President violates the law. This resolution allows us to send a clear message that the President’s conduct was wrong.

The President violates the law.

I wondered what our two Pennsylvania Senators had to say about the resolution. Let me amend that. I really don't know yet, but I am pretty sure Senator Man-on-Dog will say something idiotic and embarrass himself and every other citizen of this Commonwealth.

But what did the sane half of our Senatorial duo say? Here's a "live blogging" description from thedailybackground.

4:52 Specter takes the floor. Says subject matter is worth debate. Wants Feingold to stay on the floor, and asks him to return to debate with him. Describes Feingold’s speech as a “long sollioquy”.

4:54 Specter says that although he agrees with many of the statements made in Feingold’s resolution, he thinks the censure resolution is “way over the top”. Feingold doesn’t seem to be returning.

4:58 Specter seems to be saying that the President has the power to do what he is doing, under the Constitution. He says that the President’s constitutional rights are above statute (FISA). Specter says that if Attorney General Gonzales is correct, then the President is legally okay.

5:00 Specter is basically saying that Article 2 of the Consitution superceeds any laws that the President may have broken. Specter says either the President should brief the Senate and House intelligence committee, or ask them to change laws about briefing, which require them to do so. He says there should be no in between. He says regarding not leaking– yes, Congress leaks, but that the White House leaks too, and neither have a perfect record.

5:04 Specter conceeds that he doesn’t “know what the [NSA] program is” and that Gonzales wouldn’t tell him at the Senate Intelligence Committee hearings.

So our "sane" Senator's rebuttal is this: Bush couldn't be guilty of breaking the law because the law in question is unconstitutional. The law is almost 30 years old - and good ole Arlen is just discovering its unconstitutionality now? Georgia10 at dailykos is absolutely correct:

Specter's arguments are nothing more than strained and baseless legal tripe meant to distract the public from the gravity of the President's crimes. The Constitution unequivocally gives Congress the right to regulate all powers "vested" in the Constitution, and that includes the inherent power claimed by President Bush. Congress chose not to abdicate its constitutional powers in 1978, and it cannot chose to do so now.

Oh Arlen, I am so dissappointed in you.

IMPEACH

Russ Feingold, Arlen Specter,

People who piss me off

...And those who don't

MAJORLY: Kate Michelman

This former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America first floated rumors that she would run as an independent against Bob "Women Have No Choice" Casey, Jr. Then she actually declared that she would run against Bob "You Best Believe I'm As Bad As My Dad" Casey, Jr. And now, she has endorsed Bob "I Got You Bitches By the Balls...Errr...Ovaries" Casey, Jr.

Michelman states in her Philadelphia Inquirer editorial:

"It's also about controlling the Senate and stopping future Alito confirmations."

Even though Bob "I Kiss Alito's Ass" Casey, Jr. endorsed Alito.

I don't have a problem with Michelman dropping out so much as I do have a problem with Michelman ENDORSING Bob "Fuck NARAL" Casey, Jr.:

"Despite profound and fundamental differences, I have decided that Pennsylvania will be better served by electing Bob Casey to the U.S. Senate than giving his opponent another term. I do this knowing that I may forever regret not responding one more time to the clarion call of principle."

What could have Michelman done instead?

She could have remembered that there is a primary and actually endorsed a pro-choice candidate:

Chuck Pennacchio

If everyone who cares about reproductive freedoms, or women's health issues, or a Constitutional right to privacy would stop saying "Chuck can't win" and actually support Chuck (and that includes, you, Markos), he could win.


MODERATELY: Joe Hoeffel

First he's running against Santorum and then he's not. Then he's running for Lt. Governor, then he's not. Joe, I supported your run against Specter, but just who runs you? I had already got pissed off at you at a PA statewide Democracy for America meeting when you turned your lunch speech into an endorsement of Bob "The State Owns Your Uterus" Casey, Jr. My respect dropped further when you started up you little Joe & Friends website (already taken down) to further play the good (whipping) boy. And, now you just look desperate every time you run at the sound of HMV (M=Rendell).

Thank goodness there is someone in this race who is progressive who's not afraid to run:

Valerie McDonald Roberts

Valerie is like the Anti-Swann: someone with actual experience in making government better, who has a record of being good for women, gays, African Americans, and those who don't make enough to be Republicans.

MINOR LEAGUE: Neal Andrus' Campaigners

OK, OK. I get that you're for Neal Andrus for City Council. I thought it was kind of funny or cute or something when you stuck your little 1/4 page flyer in my storm door under my BIG sign for:

Bruce A. Kraus

But going back and actually taping another one to my door is a no-no. I've done a lot of canvassing and lit dropping and I've never taped anything to anyone's house. And taping it to a house that is already displaying two large signs for another candidate is just wasteful and desperate.

Ack! Speaking of the special election tomorrow: I just got robo-called by Bobby O on behalf of Koch! Anyone out there that still thinks that Koch isn't Bobby's boy?

There's a fight abrewin'

Our good friend Sue over at Pittsburgh Lesbian Correspondents has a bit of a bone to pick with Catherine Specter, columnist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and writer for the popular "Cat's Call" column.

A while ago, Sue took issue with something Cat wrote in her column.

Take a look the blog. Sue doesn't suffer fools gladly and I am green with envy at anyone who can pull that off. Take a look at what Sue wrote about some advice Specter gave:

Apparently, Catty was too busy applying lip gloss to pay attention in history class. Because guess what? Silence is complicit endorsement. This reader wants to feel better for not speaking out against injustice and racism. She doesn't get a pass from me or any other reasonable person.

The good news, according to Sue, is that:

This week's version of the PG column Cat's Call manages to avoid being racist or sexist. She even musters up a little "catty" rant that is mildly amusing if not actually funny. Otherwise, it was boring as can be. I guess that's the best we can expect.

I am so glad I haven't pissed off Sue.

ITMFA

Senator Feingold: Censure Bush

The national discussion advances.

On This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Senator Russ Feingold:

called on the Senate to publicly admonish President Bush for approving domestic wiretaps on American citizens without first seeking a legally required court order.

I've written here that I think the continuing assault on the Bill of Rights can be remedied by nothing short of impeachment, but censure is a good first step, I guess. If anything it will force all the members of the Senate to go on the record and answer the question posted by georgia10 at the dailykos:

Are you for an unaccountable King, or for the rule of law?

Rawstory has the full transcript.

Which is it? An unaccountable ruler, or the rule of law?

Update on Barbra Bonfiglio

I've posted a number of things about Rick Santorum's "charity" and his leadership PAC here at 2PJ. One name that kept popping up was Barbra Bonfiglio.

I hadn't found any connection between her and Tom Delay, that wasn't true. I wrote that she works for the firm of Williams & Jensen. Well, as of early this afternoon, that's also not true. Here's the story from TPCMuckraker.

Barbara Bonfiglio, who was once treasurer to political action committees and other organizations for ethically challenged lawmakers Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA), former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) and others, just quit D.C. superfirm Williams & Jensen. She also stepped down from her post as treasurer of Rep. Richard Pombo's (R-CA) RichPAC.

The site gives some more info on her:

Bonfiglio's got a colorful past: She was subpoenaed in 2004 by Texas DA Ronnie Earle as part of his investigation into Tom DeLay. She may have been involved in the effort by DeLay crony Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX) in sic'ing the IRS on the Texas watchdog group Texans for Public Justice. And she was listed as treasurer for Santorum's Operation Good Neighbor "charity," which used less than half of its money to do actual good deeds.

Wow.

CHUCK PENNACCHIO HERE TODAY & TOMORROW

Tune in to hear more about the fabulous candidate we have in Chuck Pennacchio for Senate to take down Tricky Ricky:

Friday, March 10, 2006: 11:00 - 11:30 AM
WPTT AM 1360 The Lynn Cullen Show (Live stream @ http://www.1360wptt.com )
Call in line: (412) 333-1360

Also, Chuck Pennacchio will be at the Panera Bread Friday night in Mt. Lebanon at the Galleria, if you'd like to meet him or ask a few questions in person. Meet & Greet starts at 8:00 PM.

Also on Friday night, you can join in on a Pub Crawl with Chuck at Oakland Bars to help get the word out. To help with the Pub Crawl and to work with Chuck on this most important Race, please contact Janis at janis.jmw@comcast.net or contact Tanya at tanya_bennitt@hotmail.com

Saturday, Chuck will be at Pittsburgh's St. Patrick's Day Parade! Help is needed handing out candy, literature and lapel stickers to the crowd. If you can help, meet at 9:00 AM under the Kaufmann's Clock downtown. If you can only come for one hour or stay all day, your help is still needed!

After the parade, Chuck's supporters will be hitting Station Square to continue handing out information about Chuck and giving him an opportunity to talk to Pittsburghers. If you can help with the Parade or Station Square, please show up at Kaufmann's at 9:00 AM or call Janis at 412-680-1626 or send an email (janis.jmw@comcast.net).

Come out and help support a True Democrat win the Primary Race!

Update on Rick Santorum's "Charity"

An eagle-eyed reader of this blog e-mailed me this link this morning.

The story, by Channel 4's Jim Parsons, was broadcast this past Wednesday and it looks like Parsons has dug up even more dirt on "Operation Good Neighbor" Rick Santorum's "charity."

The thing that makes me very happy is that I was writing about this last month. So maybe it means that Jim Parsons reads this blog. Maybe not. Maybe it means that I'm so good at this blogging thing that I'm actually a few weeks ahead of Pittsburgh's TV news stations! Maybe not.

Anyway, here's the story's lede:

Senator Rick Santorum calls himself the Republican point man on lobbying reform in Washington.

But Santorum's reform plan doesn't deal at all with lobbyists running charities on behalf of members of Congress.

Good thing for the Senator, because Team 4 has discovered that's exactly who's in charge of his charity, Operation Good Neighbor.

But we kinda already knew that.

Parsons reported that almost half ($216,000 out of $501,000) of the money donated to community organizations (mostly in Philadelphia) went for "unexplained travel and meetings" through 2004. Lil Ricky doesn't want to mix the charity with politics.

Bad choice of words, Rick. You opened yourself up for Parsons to say this:

But politics is involved in the charity. Santorum put political lobbyists and campaign staffers in charge of Operation Good Neighbor.

Parsons then goes on to discuss the politicos who are active with Rick's "charity." The tasty morsel happens right there. Check this paragraph out:

Barbara Bonfiglio is treasurer of Operation Good Neighbor. She's also treasurer of Santorum's reelection campaign and his political action committee, America's Foundation. Bonfiglio is a principal in Williams and Jensen, a top Washington lobbying firm.

When I wrote about her last month, I didn't know that along with being the treasurer to Both Rick's "leadership PAC" and his "charity" she's also the treasurer to Rick Santorum's reelection campaign.

Small world, ain't it?

I have to end this posting with some of our junior Senator's choiciest weasel words in some time. Parsons, bless his heart, actually got some face time with Rick. Here's it is:

Parsons: "Why are you paying a lobbyist, Rob Bickhart, to run that charity of yours?"

Santorum: "Well, first of all, he's not a lobbyist, No. 1."

Parsons: "Well, he's a principal in a lobbying firm."

Santorum: "No, he's a principal in a public affairs firm, a government relations firm. And he does a whole bunch of other things."

But Capitol Resource Group's Web site clearly lists lobbying as a service it provides to clients.

And just last month, when Sen. Arlen Specter was facing questions about his ties to lobbyists, published reports in the Post-Gazette and New York Times said Bickhart and his Capitol Resources Group lobbied Specter.

Parsons: "Sen. Specter said last month that he was lobbied by Rob."

Santorum: "That's fine. Look, the bottom line is, I have a charity … My name is associated as the founder."

"Beyond that, the operation of the board is the board's decision. It's not my decision," Santorum said.

But Santorum is chairman of the board for Operation Good Neighbor, according to the charity's most recent IRS tax filings.

Rick's the Chairman of the Board? For a board that he says he doesn't have any control over??

I especially like how when confronted with a fact that he couldn't weasel away from (that Rob Bickhart lobbied Senator Spector) Rick did what every weaselly politician does, he changed the subject. But Rick, and I am assuming he had that "deer in the headlights" look going on right about that time, changed the subject into something ELSE he would stumble on - the Governing Board of his "charity."

Rick Santorum - Best friend to lobbyists everywhere (on K Street).

I, for one, do not welcome our new Uterus Gestapo Overlords

I'm going to break my own rule by quoting our own resident troll, Braden, who responded to The Other Political Junkie's post "An Abortion Question" with this comment:

Or, how about women who use abortion as a literal tool because they don't want to be inconvenienced by a child on account of her addiction to screwing?

Considering that there are some eleven states now that have either banned almost all abortions outright, or are trying to ban them or are passing even more restrictive anti-choice legislation, I have been meaning to write this post for some time now. (And, no, this rash of anti-choice laws couldn't possibly have anything to do with Alito's appointment to the Supreme Court because it was impossible for him to say where he stood on the subject -- you know, he just doesn't really have his own opinion on the matter. [gag])

In that same comments section Axinar first posted the following:

Of course it's a foregone conclusion that all this banning abortion silliness is just to try to discourage people from deriving pleasure from sex.

So is it about wantonly "killing babies" or about some religions trying to discourage pleasure, or is it somewhere in between? Well, lets take an honest look at what Christianity teaches on the subject. And, yes, it must be Christianity that we take a look at because it is the Christian Bible that the hard-core anti-choice religionists and politicians refer to when making their arguments. (And, in case anyone wants to know: yes, I'm including Catholics here -- I once had a Baptist boyfriend who was surprised to find out that Catholics were Christians.)

According to the Bible we know that:

1. God the FATHER (no MOMMY needed) created a perfectly innocent man and woman. 2. Life was SWEET 3. But EVE (the woman -- all women) are WEAK and EASILY SEDUCED by the first SNAKE that comes along. 4. Woman ate the forbidden fruit (KNOWLEDGE -- a BAD thing!), and not being happy just to defy God herself, dragged along the poor dumb SCHLUB of a man with her because we just can't leave shit alone. 5. SHITSTORM ensues (Pandora's BOX -- it always the same old story) and now we have to wear clothes, file taxes, kill each other, and stuff. 6. And because the woman (all women) are such weak-willed, easily seduced, unclean things, we must bear our children in pain (this does not have anything to do with like, say, trying to pass something like a grapefruit through a nostril -- nope -- it's our badness that causes the pain). 7. The woman, having introduced SIN into the world now means that all BABIES are born with SIN (hell, the sin is right there with them from the moment of conception -- and isn't SIN what you see when you look at a newborn's face?).

8. Jesus had to be born to die on the cross just to give women and men the chance not to BURN FOREVER IN HELL. (See, it wasn't "The Jews" who are ultimately responsible for making Jesus suffer -- it's the chicks.)

9. BABIES (children/adults -- check your sect's owner's manual) must be BAPTISED/BORN AGAIN (check your sect's owner's manual) in order to REMOVE SIN from them or they will BURN IN HELL/GO TO PURGATORY/BE LOST IN LIMBO/BE LOST TO GOD (check your sect's owner's manual -- published date of manual especially important on this one).

10. If the weak-willed, easily seduced woman/evil baby-killer abortionist ABORTS the BABY before it can be BAPTISED/BORN AGAIN, the BABY will BURN IN HELL/GO TO PURGATORY/BE LOST IN LIMBO/BE LOST TO GOD and never reach HEAVEN.

NOTE: I acknowledge that there exist some people who may not be particularly religious who believe that abortion may be murder/find abortion icky/ and think that it should be ILLEGAL/HIGHLY RESTRICTED/LEFT TO "THE STATES" but the ones that I have come across who believe this seem to be almost always staunch LIBERTARIANS (GREEDY ANARCHISTS), who will HOWL when THE STATE wants to touch a penny of their money but have little/no problem when THE STATE want to OWN A WOMAN'S UTERUS, so fuck 'em.

Now if you believe the above, you believe that a BLASTULA (early stage of an embryo produced by cleavage of an ovum; a liquid-filled sphere whose wall is composed of a single layer of cells; during this stage [about eight days after fertilization] implantation in the wall of the uterus occurs) has the exact same rights as a BORN WOMAN/GIRL because they can all go to HELL.

And if you do believe this, it logically follows, that you MUST BELIEVE the following:

1. All non-barrier methods of birth control (including NORPLANT, IUD'S, THE PILL, and EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION) can result in KILLING BABIES AND CONDEMNING THEM TO HELL. 2. Having EXCEPTIONS FOR RAPE and INCEST will result in KILLING BABIES AND CONDEMNING THEM TO HELL. 3. IN VITRO FERTILIZATION will result in KILLING BABIES AND CONDEMNING THEM TO HELL.

4. Stem-cell research will result in KILLING BABIES AND CONDEMNING THEM TO HELL.

5. If a fire breaks out in a fertility clinic, you must give equal weight towards saving a PETRI DISH with five blastula in it as you would a two year-old child -- in fact, since the two year old has a chance of walking out on their own steam, you should probably save the PETRI DISH first.

And, yet, I know plenty of people (and I'll bet you do too) who are opposed to abortion who use the pill and/or have gotten pregnant as the result of in vitro fertilization.

And, while there are those who do want an end to the Pill and emergency contraception, I have yet to see the same kind of protests outside a fertility clinic that I see outside of an abortion clinic.

Why is that?

Now if we leave religion for a moment and get to the biology/science (KNOWLEDGE -- a BAD thing!) side of things for a moment, what do we find? Well, this seems significant:

When John M. Opitz of the University of Utah testified before the President's council on Bioethics in 2003, he noted that between 60 and 80 percent of all naturally conceived embryos are simply flushed out in a woman's normal menstrual cycle in the first 7 days after fertilization, and that women never even know that conception has taken place.

(As a side note, at the same meeting, Harvard government professor Michael Sandel, also a member of the Bioethics council, noted that "If the embryo loss that accompanies natural procreation were the moral equivalent of infant death, then pregnancy would have to be regarded as a public health crisis of epidemic proportions: Alleviating natural embryo loss would be a more urgent moral cause than abortion, in vitro fertilization, and stem-cell research combined."

And yet, there are those who will continue to insist on FORCED PREGNANCIES here, much in the same way that China insists on forced abortions there. There are those who will go so far to insist that even a microscopic clump of cells has the same rights as a woman.

They know full well that without the right to fully control her own body and keep her reproductive freedoms, a woman truly cannot have control of her own life. But they cannot wait to wrest that control away.

Since both major parties in my very own Pennsylvania has seen fit to run candidates (Casey & Swann) who do not believe in reproductive freedom for women and have stated publicly that they are for putting an end to legal abortions in almost all cases, I ask demand that they take their role as the new Uterus Gestapo Overlords seriously. To that end they must pledge the following:

IF YOU ARE AGAINST ABORTION, YOU CANNOT:

...use "the Pill' or have sex with women who use "the Pill' ...have in vitro fertilization or have a partner who uses in vitro fertilization ...use any medical procedure that is the result of stem cell research ...have sex at anytime unless you are actively trying to have children ...allow exceptions for rape and incest (no matter what sick, creepy hurdles you set) ...take your own daughter to have an abortion

AND, IF YOU ARE AGAINST ABORTION, YOU MUST:

...insist on jail time for the woman having/seeking the abortion, not just the doctor who performs abortions ...protest outside fertility clinics ...insist on outlawing in vitro fertilization ...insist on outlawing stem-cell research ...hold funerals for all used female sanitary products lest even one "BABY" be flushed down a toilet (I propose they put Braden in charge of this one)

Rick Santorum - flip flops on Lobbyist meetings!

The Washington Post is reporting something verrry interesting about our boy Rick.

Here, I'll let them tell it. Here's the lede:

After saying in January that he would end his regular meetings with lobbyists, the third-ranking Republican leader in the Senate has continued to meet with many of the same lobbyists at the same time and on the same day of the week.

Imagine that.

There's a saying, my friends, that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

The next two paragraphs are interesting in a "between the lines" sort of way:

[Santorum] suspended his biweekly encounters on Jan. 30. His decision came after the guilty plea of lobbyist Jack Abramoff to charges of conspiring to corrupt public officials.

But in the month since his announcement, Santorum has held two meetings attended by the same core group of lobbyists, and has used the sessions to appeal for campaign aid, according to participants.

So he suspended the biweekly meetings on Monday, January 30. But the article says that "in the month since his announcement", Santorum held two meetings at the same time during the week (Tuesday mornings). There were four Tuesdays in February, (the 7th, 14th, 21st and 28th) so when was the first Tuesday morning meeting?

If it was the 7th, then Rick's "suspension" of the Tuesday morning lobbyist meetings lasted exactly 8 days. Since there were two Tuesday meetings, the first had to occur no later than the 21st (making room for the second on the 28th). So Rick Santorum's grand gesture of suspending the lobbyist meetings lasted somewhere between 8 and 22 days. What a committment to principles! The suspension lasted (at most) one day more than three weeks!

To be completely honest, the meetings were held in different places. The original Santorum-lobbyist meetings were held in the Capital. The new Santorum-lobbyist meetings were reportedly held three blocks away at the HQ of the RNSC. The next meeting was at the Heritage Foundation around the corner. Must've been some walk for all those lobbyists.

Hey, do you think the republican lobbyists had any trouble finding the RNSC or the Heritage Foundation? Just asking.

Here's Rick's defense (weasel word alert):

Mark Rodgers, staff director of the Senate Republican Conference, explained that the old meetings had been sponsored by the conference, had sometimes included other lawmakers, and had been meant to get out the GOP message to interested groups in Washington. The recent meetings were largely about how to help Santorum’s fundraising and get-out-the-vote efforts.

So that makes it completely and entirely different. It only looks like Rick is still meeting with lobbyists at the same time of the week. It only looks like exactly the same meeting that Rick said he suspended in late January.

Yea, it only looks like Rick Santorum is telling the truth about this.

Rick Santorum - his word's good for about 3 weeks (maybe).

Wishing Jerry Bowyer well.

The P-G is reporting that local radio guy Jerry Bowyer:

...suffered chest pain after cross-country skiing a few weeks ago. It wasn't a heart attack, his wife Susan Bowyer said, but Bowyer is still undergoing tests.

The P-G is also reporting that he's on "indefinite medical leave" from his afternoon radio show.

While we can't agree with much of Bowyer's politics or metaphysics, we wish him the best of health in whatever's going on.

Here's his website.

Get well, Jerry.

Rick Santorum on Intelligent Design (he flops back)

There's a new book on Intelligent Design (ID) that's just come out (or is coming out soon) and wouldn't you know it Our boy Rick's wrote the forward.

The AP has published the text.

See it here.

Better yet, here's the text:

This volume celebrates Phillip Johnson's leadership in the intelligent design (ID) movement. Scholars who have known Phil best and worked with him most closely assembled in April 2004 at Biola University to present him with a collection of papers in his honor. I wish I could have been there to offer my congratulations and thanks in person. Instead, I have the privilege of writing this brief foreword from Washington.

Since the publication of "Darwin on Trial" more than ten years ago, Phillip Johnson has provided extraordinary leadership for an extraordinary cause, namely, to rid science of false philosophy. The importance of the cause is clear: what could be more important than showing that only a shallow, partisan understanding of science supports the false philosophy of materialist reductionism with its thoroughly unscientific denial of formal and final causes in nature and its repudiation of the first cause of all being? As the decline of true science has been a major factor in the decline of Western culture, so too the renewal of science will play a big part in cultural renewal.

Johnson's extraordinary leadership also is clear: rather than fall into the trap of building a cult of personality around himself and his own considerable intellectual talents, he has instead helped raise up and promote a whole group of intellectual leaders in the cause of scientific renewal. This kind of selfless Christian leadership is a shining example to us all, young and old.

Speaking of the young, I personally wish to commend Phil for the great help he has given me in my efforts to inject a renewed and unbiased understanding of science and its practice into the curricula of our public schools. There is much more for us to do, but working with Phil's colleagues at Seattle's Discovery Institute, we have begun the difficult fight for removing the stranglehold of philosophical materialism on textbook science.

Phil, I congratulate and praise you for your tireless work to return science to a sure philosophical grounding in the nature of things as they really are. Please know that during your Biola celebration, I was with you and your colleagues in spirit. As much as I was delighted when I first heard about this celebration in your honor, I am again delighted now that the proceedings from that celebration have appeared in book form.

Here let me help out and list what Rick says about evolution:

Paragraph 2, sentence 1: It's a "false philosophy."

Paragraph 2, sentence 2: It's a false philosophy of "materialist reductionism with its thoroughly unscientific denial of formal and final causes in nature and its repudiation of the first cause of all being." Also, only a "shallow, partisan understanding of science" supports evolution.

Paragraph 2, sentence 3: ID is "true science" and it's decline is one of the reasons for the decline of Western Civilization. By renewing "true science" we'll see a cultural renewal.

Paragraph 3, sentence 1: The cause of ID is the cause of "scientific renewal."

Paragraph 4, sentence 1: ID is "renewed and unbiased understanding of science and its practice" and that he's been working to "inject" it into the curriculum.

Paragraph 4, sentence 2: Evolution is "philosophical materialism."

Paragraph 5, sentence 1: ID is science returned to a "sure philosophical grounding in the nature of things as they really are."

Rick Santorum thinks that evolution is a "false philosophy" that is "unscientific" due to its repudiation of "the first cause of all being" (i.e. God) and that only those with a "shallow" understanding of science support it.

Rick Santorum thinks that Intelligent Design is the "true science" of "sure philosophical grounding" that will usher in a new age of "cultural renewal" with its "unbiased understanding" of the nature of things.

But didn't Rick back away from the controversy over intelligent design?

And didn't we already point out Ricky's flip-flop?

Rick Santorum - Flips then flops then flips back on Intelligent Design.

An Abortion Question

I'll let digby ask it:

I have a question for the innocent life crowd: how come none of the proposed laws anywhere, as far as I can tell, believe that a woman should be tried for the murder of her child if she gets an abortion? Indeed, there is no penalty in the South Dakota law for the woman at all. She isn't even charged as an accessory. Does that make sense? She could be tried for first degree murder for leaving a newborn baby to die on a church doorstep.

In another, later blog entry, he links to a video in which anti-abortion protestors are asked that same question. (Note: there must be a lot of traffic around that site - I haven't been able to see the video myself.) Digby reports that most of the protestors say they've never thought about it before.

After a bit, digby sums it all up:

So I think we need to have this discussion. Let's debate it out in the open and "air both sides" because from where I sit it's the "pro-lifers" who haven't thought this thing through. Nobody says they can't agitate against abortion and stand out there with their sickening pictures and try to dissuade women from doing it. I will defend their right to argue against abortion forever. But when they use the law to enforce their moral worldview they need to recognize that they can't have it both ways. If fetuses are human and have the same rights as the women in whom they live, then a woman who has an abortion must logically be subject to the full force of the law. It would be a premeditated act of murder no different than if she hired a hit man to kill her five year old. The law will eventually be able to make no logical moral distinction. Is everybody ready for that?

I wonder who'll be first to speak up and declare that a woman who gets an abortion should be tried for murder and a woman who plans on getting an abortion should be tried for conspiracy to commit murder. How about a woman who doesn't know she's pregnant and loses the baby due to something she did, shouldn't she be tried for negligent homicide?

And, finally, what about the woman who knows she's ovulating but chooses an evening alone with a good Candide Royale DVD instead? An evil pre-emptive contraceptive if ever there was one. With pornography to boot!

Better Bring Out Franco Harris!

The folks at PoliticsPA have a poll that shows that:

Governor Ed Rendell leads Lynn Swann among Eagles fans 57 - 26, but Swann leads Rendell among Steelers fans, 50 - 36.

Anyone have the phone number for Franco Harris?

He was all over the Kerry campaign introducing him at every rally in the 'Burgh:


(While the woman fussing with his collar certainly isn't me, I did put a Kerry button on Franco at this CMU rally as well as at the one at Market Square.)

I hope that he'll be doing the same for Rendell.

Of course, it should be said that Steelers Country extends into the conservative T and that the Eagles Microworld is pretty much just Philly which is Rendell's stomping ground so I don't know if this poll proves anything.

SIDE NOTE: After the Steelers won the Super Bowl much of the non-Pittsburgh left half of the blogosphere went wild denouncing the Steelers as the "Diebold Steelers" and "Haliburton Steelers" due to their fears that a Steelers win would help Swann (and because CondiLiar Rice was in the stands cheering them on). I thought that their fears were a little crazy at the time...

EVENTS THIS WEEK

TUESDAY 3/7/06

All Day Mailer for Bruce A Kraus
Tuesday, 3/7/06
10:00 AM - 10:00 PM
157 S 18th St.
Pittsburgh PA 15203

Looking for volunteers to assist with a mailing ALL DAY (from 10am to 10pm). Your help & support is greatly appreciated as Election Day is fast approaching (Marxh 14th). Please stop by campaign headquarters @ 157 S. 18th Street to lend a hand (any amount of time you can contribute is greatly appreciated).

RSVP: bruce4council@aol.com (or just show up)

http://www.bruce4council.com
bruce4council@aol.com
412-583-6082
412-431-8104

Put Susan in the House II
Tuesday, March 7
6:00 PM - 8:00 PM
Coca Cafe
3811 Butler Street
Lawrenceville, PA
Host: FRIENDS FOR SUSAN BANAHASKY

Join with other friends of Susan for another opportunityto talk with the woman herself!

Pay Now: PAYPAL Donation (Suggested Donation: $25 -- All contributions appreciated )
RSVP: HERE

http://www.susaninthehouse.org


WEDNESDAY 3/8/06

Allegheny for Pennacchio Strategy Meeting
Wednesday, 3/8/06
7:00 PM
BEEHIVE Coffeehouse & Dessertery
1327 E Carson St
Pittsburgh, PA 15203
(412) 488-4483

Come out and help support the Real Democrat in this race.

http://www.chuck2006.com


THURSDAY 3/9/06

Cocktail Reception for Georgia Berner with Barbara Hafer
Thursday, March 9
5:00 PM - 7:00 PM
Bossa Nova
123 Seventh Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15222

Please join Former State Treasurer Barbara Hafer for a cocktail reception with GEORGIA BERNER, Democratic Candidate for Congress

For more information or to RSVP: phone 724-766-8025 or email contact@georgiaberner.com

Click Here to donate online - www.georgiaberner.com/march9
Or mail your check with the following information to:
Georgia Berner for Congress
PO BOX 8359
New Castle, PA 16101-8359
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor $1000/person, Patron $500/person, Friends $250/person, Supporter $100/person, Student/Young Professional $25/person

http://www.georgiaberner.com


SATURDAY 3/11/06

Kraus Poll Staffing Orientation
Saturday, 3/11/06
9:00 AM - 12:00 PM
157 S. 18th St
Pittsburgh PA 15203

Please stop by campaign headquarters @ 157 S. 18th Street this coming Saturday anytime between 9am & Noon. We will be passing out T-shirts, literature & providing a brief orientation to those who will be able to assist with staffing the polls. Also, you will be able to sign up for the polling location & times which best suit your schedule.

(If you are unable to make it during those times, please let us know & we will accommodate your schedule & provide you with the information you will need to assist. Any volunteers you are able to recruit would also be greatly appreciated.)

http://www.bruce4council.com
bruce4council@aol.com
412-583-6082
412-431-8104

Bruce A. Kraus for City Council

You may have noticed a new ad on the right of this blog. It's a free ad for Bruce A. Kraus who is running in the special election on March 14th for City Council in Pittsburgh's third district. Consider the ad and this post as my own endorsement for Kraus. But don't just take my word for Bruce A. Kraus being the best person for the job. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette called him "the best choice in the city's special election."

The Post-Gazette states that:

But if the voters of District 3 are bewildered by so many names, they need remember only one. Bruce A. Kraus is an articulate, intelligent advocate for his community. He would bring a balanced package of skills, views and values to public service.

The self-employed owner of an interior design firm, Mr. Kraus engages his city both as a resident and as a businessman (he's president of the South Side Chamber of Commerce). Although a registered Democrat, he did not receive the party hierarchy's nomination. That's a good thing, though, which should afford him some independence on Grant Street, like that of Councilman Bill Peduto, who is supporting him in the race.

And, as Lou of Lou's List put it when describing the endorsement of Kraus by a caucus of local progressives from a broad array of groups:

But in the end, Bruce Kraus won a strong consensus among the group. Kraus offers the strongest background of community involvement of any candidate, has reached out to all neighborhoods of District 3 during his campaign, and offered the most professional and engaging presentation. In my opinion, he is the candidate most able to gain the widespread support necessary to defeat the committee-endorsed candidate and to be a strong proponent of necessary change.

If you're at all interested in having a more independent vote on City Council -- one that is not machine-driven -- and one that will be a plus for the city no matter what district you live in, please help support Bruce A. Kraus

You can contact his campaign here, or email me at lupinaccim@aol.com to help.

You can also attend a fundraiser tonight (I'm heading over there right now):

Support BRUCE A. KRAUS For City Council
Folino’s Restaurant
1717 East Carson Street
Monday, March 6
6 to 9 p.m.
• Complementary Glass of Wine
• Complementary Hor’dourve Table
Cash Bar Will Be Available
Donation: $25.00

2005 Koufax Awards -- The Polls Are Open

The Koufax Awards recognize the best of the Left side of the blogosphere. 2 Political Junkies, along with a couple of other local blogs, have been nominated for awards.

You can go to each of the links below and leave a comment to vote. Or you can email Wampum (wampum@nic-naa.net ) with your vote. You may only vote for ONE blog/post in each category and only vote once. You can also see all the categories here.

Show Pittsburgh blogs some love and vote:

The 2005 Koufax Awards: Most Deserving of Wider Recognition
http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002302.html
Vote for 2 Political Junkies or Comments From Left Field

The 2005 Koufax Awards: Best Post
http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002325.html
Vote for 2 Political Junkies (vote for only ONE of the posts listed)

The 2005 Koufax Awards: Most Humorous Post
http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/02/002326.html
Vote for 2 Political Junkies

The Koufax Awards 2005: Best state and local blogs
http://wampum.wabanaki.net/vault/2006/01/002309.html
Vote for The Angry Drunk Bureaucrat

If I missed any other Burg blogs that were nominated, please let me know and I'll add them to this list.

THANKS!

UPDATE:
Apparently, there's some confusion -- this is how you vote:
1. Click on a link.
2. Then scroll all the way to the bottom of the page.
3. There, you will see a place where you can "Post a comment"
4. You write in your vote there.
(No Diebold involved! All write-in)

Rick Santorum gets Spanked

This time by Human Events Online.

After doing the intro Jason High (described as "activist and editor of FreePA.org") gets into the spanking:

There is another factor, though, that needs to be considered. Santorum has found himself increasingly on the wrong side of the conservative base that has been responsible for electing him again and again. He not only supported liberal Sen. Arlen Specter over the staunchly conservative Pat Toomey in 2004, but Santorum actively worked toward Specter’s re-election. Santorum has endorsed the idea of raising the minimum wage by $2 over two years, and refused to rule out raising taxes to offset the cost of Social Security reform.

Uh-oh.

High writes that many of Pennsylvania's conservatives aren't real happy with our boy Rick. "Increasingly apathetic over what they percieve as betrayals by Santorum" is the phrase he uses.

Ouch, that's gotta sting.

High makes the case that Santorum needs to reignite the passion of conservatives because, as we all know, "conservatives have few champions" in the federal government. High asserts that Rick's courting of moderate voters will do more damage than good. Here's the final spank:

To make sure that this happens, Santorum needs to change philosophies. The current strategy seems to be to attract moderates, likely resulting from the fact that many pro-life Democrats that previously voted for Santorum will abandon him to vote for Casey. Santorum seems to feel that he must give them another reason to vote for him.

This strategy, in fact, will only exacerbate the problem. The more moderate Santorum tries to become, the more disenfranchised conservatives will feel. This will create a dream scenario for Casey and a nightmare for Santorum. Santorum simply needs to get back to basics. More talk about tax cuts, strong anti-abortion statements, and many, many more events with Toomey.

That's right - the true Conservatives in this state are worried that if Rick Santorum becomes too moderate, he could loose his senate seat.

One can only hope.

BUSH IS A GODDAMN LYING BASTARD

The lying, corrupt and incompetent Bush Administration has been a "catastrophe within a catastrophe."

Bush declared four days after Katrina hit, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees"

However, the video here proves that he was advised of this possibility during an August 28th briefing -- the day before Katrina hit shore.

As the video clearly demonstrates a top hurricane expert voiced "grave concerns'' about the levees. Moreover, Michael Brown (then Federal Emergency Management Agency chief) warned the president and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that he feared that this was a "big one" and that there weren't enough disaster teams to help evacuees at the Superdome.

Bush did not ask one single question during the briefing.

Bush "attended" the briefing via teleconference while on vacation at Crawford, TX.

The video actually makes Brownie look good (from the NYT):

''My gut tells me ... this is a bad one and a big one,'' then-federal disaster chief Michael Brown told the final government-wide briefing the day before Katrina struck the Gulf Coast on Aug. 29.

"I'm concerned about ... their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe,'' Brown told his bosses the afternoon before Katrina made landfall.

"The Superdome is about 12 feet below sea level.... I don't know whether the roof is designed to stand, withstand a Category Five hurricane,'' he said.

"Not to be (missing) kind of gross here,'' Brown interjected, ''but I'm concerned'' about the medical and mortuary resources ''and their ability to respond to a catastrophe within a catastrophe.''

Now here's what you need to do:

1. Go to ColorOfChange.org and join their campaign to call on Congress to censure the President for misleading the American people.

2. Pass this information along to everyone you know and urge them to join us in this effort.

Sorry, no jokes in this post. It's all too sickeningly real:



(More pictures here)

"Washington is for sale," (The Santorum edition)

This is getting redundant. Fun, but redundant.

Will Bunch, of the Philly Daily News, has dug up MORE on our junior senator and his financial dealings.

The largest known giver to a controversial charity founded by U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum made its $25,000 donation as the senator was working to win as much as $8.5 million in federal aid for the donor's project in Delaware County.

Federal tax records show that Preferred Real Estate Inc., the developer of the Wharf at Rivertown project in Chester, wrote the check to Santorum's Operation Good Neighbor Foundation in 2002.

Oh oh.

But it does look like a good investment for Preferred Real Estate, doesn't it? Donate $25K to a sleazoid and get $8.5 mil in return.

But good-government experts were troubled by the appearance of a developer giving money to the senator's charity at the same time it was lobbying for federal dollars. Unlike a campaign contribution, checks to a charity can be written by a corporation and are not subject to any limit.

"It's a neat window into how Washington works," said Gary Ruskin of the Congressional Accountability Project, one of several watchdogs troubled by the potential conflicts when a member of Congress also solicits funds for a charity he runs. "It shows that, more and more, Washington is for sale."

I don't know about ALL of Washington, but it certainly looks like Lil Ricky is for sale. A few more details really need to be exposed on this side of the state:

The Operation Good Neighbor Foundation - a charity that Santorum established in 2001 with the aim of helping faith-based groups and others battling poverty and social ills - already is under fire for spending considerably less on aid and more on expenses than the Better Business Bureau and other charitable watchdogs recommend.

Also, several campaign aides are on the payroll or connected with the charity, including Santorum's campaign finance chief, lobbyist Rob Bickhart, who's been paid $75,000 by Operation Good Neighbor in salary and whose company also receives rent from the charity.

One big happy family.

Garrison Keillor on George Bush

When will the Bush-haters stop spewing their vile hatred of our beloved leader? Like some sort of George Romero zombie, Garrison Keillor has turned into one of THEM. Check it out:

This liberal kook begins with this:

These are troubling times for all of us who love this country, as surely we all do, even the satirists. You may poke fun at your mother, but if she is belittled by others it burns your bacon. A blowhard French journalist writes a book about America that is full of arrogant stupidity, and you want to let the air out of him and mail him home flat. You hear young people talk about America as if it's all over, and you trust that this is only them talking tough. And then you read the paper and realize the country is led by a man who isn't paying attention, and you hope that somebody will poke him. Or put a sign on his desk that says, "Try Much Harder."

I question whether Garrison Keillor actually "loves this country." He's a Democrat Kerry-supporter and as Ann Coulter says:

The idea that the Democrats have any meaningful interest in America's national security is a joke...

So that settles that, I guess.

And then there's this:

The Feb. 27 issue of the New Yorker carries an article by Jane Mayer about a loyal conservative Republican and U.S. Navy lawyer, Albert Mora, and his resistance to the torture of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay. From within the Pentagon bureaucracy, he did battle against Donald Rumsfeld and John Yoo at the Justice Department and shadowy figures taking orders from Dick (Gunner) Cheney, arguing America had ratified the Geneva Convention that forbids cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of prisoners, and so it has the force of law. They seemed to be arguing that the president has the right to order prisoners to be tortured.

One such prisoner, Mohammed al-Qahtani, was held naked in isolation under bright lights for months, threatened by dogs, subjected to unbearable noise volumes, and otherwise abused, so that he begged to be allowed to kill himself. When the Senate approved the Torture Convention in 1994, it defined torture as an act "specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering." Is the law a law or is it a piece of toast?

Why can't Keillor see that he's only helping The Enemy? He'll be sorry when another 9/11 happens, won't he? Only then will he realize that by spewing such lies, he was aiding and abetting The Enemy - a treasonous act as all right-thinking people know.

But this anti-American hypocrite's greatest sin occurs at the end:

The peaceful lagoon that is the White House is designed for the comfort of a vulnerable man. Perfectly understandable, but not what is needed now. The U.S. Constitution provides a simple ultimate way to hold him to account for war crimes and the failure to attend to the country's defense. Impeach him and let the Senate hear the evidence.

Impeach him? Yea right!

We all know that impeachment was only meant for unfaithful Democrat hypocrite presidents, don't we? Not for a God-fearing conservative republican president who's decided that what's best for us is for him to take the reigns of government back from the ACLU and all the other terrorist-enablers who hide behind the Bill of Rights!

Why do our troops hate our troops?

I guess you can be against the war and for our troops...

From Editor & Publisher:

Poll Finds U.S. Troops in Iraq Urge Pullout

A poll of U.S. troops currently serving in Iraq—reportedly the first of its kind—shows that 72% advocate a U.S. pullout within a year, with only 23% for staying as long ”as necessary,” reports Nicholas Kristof in his New York Times column today. Some 29% urge withdrawal “immediately.”

Kristof recently came out for setting a deadline for withdrawal at the end of next year.

The poll of 944 service members was conducted by Zogby International and LeMoyne College. Recent Gallup and CBS News polls have shown that most Americans at home also advocate the beginning of a pullout.

[snip]

Asked what it would take to “control the insurgency,” those surveyed strongly suggest that it would take doubling the number of ground troops and bombing missions. But as Kristof points out, this is not going to happen at this point. The message he takes from this: “they believe this war to be unwinnable.”

[snip]

Further findings: only 26% percent of the U.S. troops say that the insurgency would end if foreign fighters could be kept out.

Another Cost in Bush's War

From today's P-G:

More than a third of the soldiers and Marines returning from Iraq received outpatient mental health care within a year of ending their deployment, according to a large new screening study.

The next paragraph is just as chilling:

Nearly 6 percent were hospitalized for psychiatric conditions during that one-year period, researchers found in a study published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association.[Emphasis added]

Let's look at the numbers:

The study involved assessments obtained from more than 300,000 soldiers and Marines from May 2003 to April 2004. More than 222,000 of the respondents were returning from Iraq.

220,000 is the number we start with as I want to concentrate on only those returning from Iraq.

If I am reading this right, 77,000 (35% of 220,000) soldiers and Marines returning from Iraq received outpatient mental health care and about 13,000 (6% of 220,000) were so traumatized that they required some sort of hospitalization.

And since "inpatient" and "outpatient" seem to me to be two descriptions that don't overlap, I think it safe to assume that we're talking about about 90,000 soldiers and Marines upon returning from Bush's war who required some sort of mental health care (either in- or out- patient). But let's give dubya the benefit of the doubt and say the two groups completely overlap. 77,000 is still a pretty big number.

As an illustration, PNC Park (where the Pittsburgh Pirates supposedly play Major League Baseball - though I'm never quite convinced) holds about 38,000 people. So imagine a sold out PNC park. You'd have to imagine another sold out PNC park right next to it to even come close to 77,000.

That's a lot of people - and a lot of trauma.

For what, exactly? WMD? Not there. Saddam's ties to al-qaeda? Not there, either. Oh, that's right! We're there to establish peace and democracy in the region! But I am sure Bush is saying right about now, "No one could have predicted that the insurgency would be this terrible."

Guess again.

U.S. intelligence agencies repeatedly warned the White House beginning more than two years ago that the insurgency in Iraq had deep local roots, was likely to worsen and could lead to civil war, according to former senior intelligence officials who helped craft the reports.

Among the warnings, Knight Ridder has learned, was a major study, called a National Intelligence Estimate, completed in October 2003 that concluded that the insurgency was fueled by local conditions - not foreign terrorists- and drew strength from deep grievances, including the presence of U.S. troops.

Worst. President. Ever.

IMPEACH