Obituary

Listen: Kurt Vonnegut has died.

A life long humanist, he's is up in heaven now. So it goes.

Listen: Like many university students at the time, I devoured whatever Kurt Vonnegut book I could find. I remember when, as a freshman music major at the University of Connecticut in 1981, I found a paperback copy of Slaugherhouse Five. It took me a couple of days and a few skipped music theory classes (sorry, Doctor Somer) but I made it through the book pretty quickly.

I can remember being absolutely crushed by the last page of the book - after reading about the Trefalmadorians, the meaningless devastation of the firebombing of Dresden, of the death of Edgar Derby, and so on, I got to the part where Billy Pilgrim (who's unstuck in time) wanders out onto the ash heap that once was Dresden and hears a bird go, "Poo-tee weet?"

I can remember putting the book down and finding it very necessary to go for a long long walk. So it goes.

Listen: He wrote in Breakfast of Champions that "we are healthy only to the extent our ideas are humane" and when one of the characters that book, Kilgore Trout, was asked about the meaning of life his response was:

To be
the eyes
and ears
and conscience
of the Creator of the Universe,
you fool.

This is also from Breakfast of Champtions:

I will come to a time in my backwards trip when November eleventh, accidentally my birthday, was a sacred day called Armistice Day. When I was a boy, and when Dwayne Hoover was a boy, all the people of all the nations which had fought in the First World War were silent during the eleventh minute of the eleventh hour of Armistice Day, which was the eleventh day of the eleventh month.

It was during that minute in nineteen hundred and eighteen, that millions upon millions of human beings stopped butchering one another. I have talked to old men who were on battlefields during that minute. They have told me in one way or another that the sudden silence was the Voice of God. So we still have among us some men who can remember when God spoke clearly to mankind.

Armistice Day has become Veterans' Day. Armistice Day was sacred. Veterans' Day is not.

So I will throw Veterans' Day over my shoulder. Armistice Day I will keep. I don't want to throw away any sacred things.

What else is sacred? Oh, Romeo and Juliet, for instance.

And all music is.

So it goes.

The Contemptible Ms. Carlisle

I caught the late replay of WTAE TV's 11:00 PM newscast and according to them Councilwoman Twanda Carlisle decided not to show up this evening, as ordered, to be fingerprinted and have her mugshot taken.

If she does not reschedule soon, she can be held in contempt and possibly go to jail before her trial even begins.

Carlisle currently faces 17 charges.

Yes, having to face an appointment to get fingerprinted is not something most people would want to do. But most adults know that they often have to do things that they may not like to do -- like not stealing from the city, for example. It would seem that Carlisle wants to continue to do exactly as she pleases. Perhaps she gets this from her mother, Constance Parker, who also seems to be having problems acting like an adult and dealing with reality.

Parker has a unique take on her daughter's troubles:

"And also, you know, if you look at our society, any time you have a person come out and say, 'rough, tough, nappy-headed hos,' this is what our society thinks of women, women as a whole," Ms. Parker said. "So it's really a dangerous type situation, how we can be handled when things happen.

If nothing else, Don Imus deserved to be let go from MSNBC for providing an opportunity to make this kind of idiot-headed excuse by those who are as far removed from reality as he is.


Councilwoman Carlisle andMom in matching red coats paid for by taxpayers' dollars.**

**OK, we can't guarantee that, buthell, the chances are pretty good.

Reform Pittsburgh Now

This evening, in the rooms where his mayoral campaign once hummed along and then shut itself down, Bill Peduto began an interesting political experiment. Using the network he has leftover from that campaign he's looking to kick start another local political movement - Reform Pittsburgh Now!

Clad casually (see picture), he began the meeting with a brief summary of the reasons he unplugged his run for the Mayor's office. He said he would have lost, and lost big. The loss would have damaged any chance of further reform in this city. The only way to level the playing field against Luke Ravenstahl's huge poll numbers was to go negative - big time. But going negative would inevitably have alienated his supporters and so on.

Peduto reiterated just how big Ravenstahl's poll numbers were with a joke (now safe to tell, he said, as it's no longer Holy Week). Peduto said that if Jesus himself were running in this campaign not only would Luke still win big, but he'd get the carpenter's union endorsement to boot.

Forgive me but it took me a few minutes to get the carpenter's union joke.

He went on to say that there's an odd mindset in the city. People are tired of business as usual, HOWEVER they see the solution to business as usual as Luke Ravenstahl.

So what was the meeting for? He's looking to have Pittsburgh's progressive community have a greater hand in setting the agenda for reforming city politics. The crowd of about 75 was faced with 10 or so desks, each with a sheet of paper taped to it. Handwritten on each sheet of paper was a policy issue - Economic Development, Education, Art/Technology and so on.

Everyone was then invited to head over to the policy group with which they were most comfortable and start brainstorming. The plan was to have a set of reform policies in place by the end of the month of May. At that point, Peduto would then begin to present them, one by one, to City Council. Within a few minutes each table had some sort of crowd around it, though of the ten or so tables there, most of the buzz seemed to be happening around the Economic Development, Transit, and Public Safety tables.

I guess that's what's on people's minds.

Peduto said while he was happy with the showing tonight, he's looking to expand the group to possibly 600 by the end of the year. It'll be made up of people interested in policy, but not necessarily politics.

When I asked him HIS place in the group, he said he's the voice. When the agenda is set, his seat at City Council will be the access point for the reform group into city politics. The existence of the group, he said "is to show other elected officials that it's safe to jump into water."

Earlier in the evening, when commenting on why it's important to have such an organization pushing a reform agenda, he said, "If we don't do it, no one's going to."

Two More Events

I saw these after I posted my last list.

Morton Mintz: Business Sense, Common Sense and Health Care
WHAT: Lecture on Health Care
WHEN: Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 3:30 PM - 5:30 PM TODAY!
WHERE: 2315 Doherty Hall, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh PA

Award-winning journalist and investigative reporter for the Washington Post, Morton Mintz is one of America’s watchdogs. His article “Single-Payer: Good for Business,” published in November 2004’s The Nation, makes a convincing case for a health care system to benefit all Americans. Hear Mintz discuss this pivotal issue that impacts everyone from employees to business owners. Find out how he proposes to ease the struggles of families and businesses by solving the problem of expensive health care. Sponsored by Catalyst Connection.

Free

RSVP: 412.918.4229 or events@pghtech.org

An Evening with Evan Wolfson, author of Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People’s Right to Marry
WHAT: WOMEN’ S RIGHTS SEMINAR SERIES
WHEN: Thursday, April 19, 2007 6:30 pm (Wine & Hors d’oeuvres Reception), 7:00 pm Presentation and Q&A
WHERE: Kelly-Strayhorn Theater, 5941 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206

The Women’s Law Project and Persad Center present An Evening with Evan Wolfson, author of Why Marriage Matters: America, Equality, and Gay People’s Right to Marry.

FREE & OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
(CLE credit available through the Women’s Bar Association of Western PA $15 for one hour of substantive CLE credit, payable to WBA at door.)

Cosponsors (partial list):
ACLU Greater Pittsburgh, Democracy for Pittsburgh, Equality Advocates Pennsylvania, Feminist Law Forum, University of Pittsburgh School of Law, Gay & Lesbian Community Center of Pittsburgh, Marriage Equality USA (Southwest PA), New Voices Pittsburgh: Women of Color for Reproductive Justice, One Church, People of Color Center, PFLAG Pittsburgh, PA League of Young Voters, Steel City Stonewall Democrats, Value All Families Coalition, Women & Girls Foundation of Southwestern PA

RSVP: 412-227-0301 or treynolds@womenslawproject.org

Councilwoman Carlisle to be arraigned on multiple criminal charges today

Now we know why Pittsburgh Councilwoman Twanda Carlisle hired a lawyer yesterday: she's being arraigned in Brookline today at 10:00 AM.

The charges include:

Theft by conspiracy

Criminal conspiracy

Violations of the state Ethics Act

Election Code violations

Failure to file required financial disclosures

From the Post-Gazette:

An affidavit filed by Detective William Miller of the Allegheny County District Attorney's office indicates that on 50 occasions, Ms. Carlisle made cash deposits into her personal bank account at Dollar Bank within one day of one of the consultants cashing a city check.

Ms. Carlisle faces seven challengers for her Council seat in May.

The Trib covers it here. (Short) video at KDKA TV here.

The Pelosi Smearing Continues

Even into the next election cycle.

I caught a little of Ron Francis last night on the Pintek-Hosted NightTalk. Francis is a former county councilman and is looking to challenge Congressman Jason Altmire for the Pennsylvania 4th Congressional district seat.

Anyway, back to the Pintek hour. They dutifully parrotted the RNC line about the recent trip by Speaker Pelosi to the mid-East. She shouldn't have gone. She shouldn't be meddling in foreign affairs. Blah-blah-blah.

Let's bring some facts to the table. For all the outrage from the right about how a Speaker of the House of Representatives shouldn't be doing any foreign policy, no one from God's Own Party (and by the way the day before Mike Pintek declared the a few things on his show; that he knew the mind of God and that the Democrats are, indeed, "anti-God") seems to remember when Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich travelled all the way to China to deliver a message contrary to the Clinton Administration's foreign policy.

From the New York Times, March 31, 1997 and via Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com:

Speaking with startling bluntness on an issue so delicate that diplomats have tiptoed around it for years, Newt Gingrich said today that he had warned China's top leaders that the United States would intervene militarily if Taiwan was attacked.

As he left for Tokyo after a three-day trip to China, Mr. Gingrich said he had made it absolutely clear how the United States would respond if such a military conflict arose.

Referring to his meetings with China's leaders, Mr. Gingrich said: ''I said firmly, 'We want you to understand, we will defend Taiwan. Period.'"

He also said, ''I think that they are more aware now that we would defend Taiwan if it were militarily attacked.''

Which led, according to Greenwald, to this a few days later in the Times:

China admonished the United States today to speak with one voice on foreign policy and accused Newt Gingrich of making ''improper'' statements on Washington's commitment to defend Taiwan from any military attack by the mainland.

The criticism was made by the Foreign Ministry spokesman, Shen Guofang, who earlier this week had expressed basic satisfaction with remarks made by Mr. Gingrich, the Speaker of the House, during a three-day visit to China.

The visit followed Vice President Al Gore's first trip to Beijing. Both men spoke on issues of contention between Washington and Beijing, but Mr. Gingrich's remarks were noteworthy for their directness and for exceeding the normal State Department formulations on American commitments to Taiwan.

Unmentioned, of course, by either Pintek or Francis. The political double standard on the right continues.

Patrick Dowd - Candidate for City Council

I got a chance late last week to chat with another candidate for Pittsburgh public office. This time it was Patrick Dowd. He's running for City Council-District 7.

I started the chat with the same question I start all my candidate chats, "How's the campaign going?"

"Pretty exciting, so far." he said. And we were off. By the end of the campaign, he said he's planning on knocking on 9,000 doors. Ouch.

From the beginning of the interview, Dowd took (for me at least) a unique approach to answer the question "what ails the city of Pittbsurgh?" For him, the biggest issue facing the city is its population loss. That's the main issue he's looking to address and it's from that problem most of the city's other problems (tax revenue, urban renewal and so on) flow. Coincidentally, this came the same day it was reported in the P-G that:

The Pittsburgh region has lost more residents since 2000 than any U.S. metropolitan area except New Orleans, but there's no hurricane responsible for it dropping 60,309 people.

Dowd's general plan (and this is in the broadest sense) is to build a city that will be more attractive - more attractive so that young people will stick around AND non-Pittsburghers will want to move here and then stick around.

In order to do that, for example, the problem of the city's 15,000 vacant and abandoned houses will have to be solved. The problem here, he said, was the drain these houses placed on their neighborhoods. "People worry" about what's going on in them. They're a sign of decline as well.

He's looking to solve it via tax incentives for people to reinvest in those houses, rather than boarding them up and tearing them down. He's looking for a way to boost property values - this leads back, for Dowd, to his idea of building up an attractive city people won't want to leave.

Another issue, public transportation, also plays into Dowd's general plans. He's less than satisfied with the City Council's work on this issue. He says they've "done nothing" for Pittsburgh public transportation.

When I asked whether it's in fact the council's responsibility, considering the bus system is county-wide rather than city-wide, he answered that while that's true the system is county wide, the City Council could be a bully pulpit for city residents in this matter. It could be pushing for a restructuring of the system, driving for change on public transportation. The city, he said, is the hub of the region , the majority of those taking public transportation are city residents - so it is a council responsibility. Dowd added that there are legislative tools available to the council and they should use them.

In the face of public transport cuts "what has the City Council done?" he asked rhetorically. "Nothing." he answered back.

In terms of the functioning of city government, he's looking for a greater transparency (for example in terms of the City Council's discretionary spending) and a greater reliance on solid data from which any city program would grow. He said he'd start by finding out exactly what the city is doing - how many manhole covers does it have? How many does it replace in a given year, that sort of thing - in order to better utilize the city's resources.

Throughout our chat, he emphasized his ability to form broad coalitions around issues rather than labels. He's looking to find the middle of the city council, and build a coalition there around anyone willing to work seriously about the issues facing the city.

The Ravenstahl tip

Just wanted to reblog on the tip we'd received lastnight.

I got a tip (a text message on my phone, actually) that there was something of a shakeup over at Ravenstahl campaign HQ. This was news to me. I hadn't heard anything about it. I checked around to some other sources and no one had heard anything about anything. As I didn't have much of any context for the tip, I wasn't comfortable posting what I'd heard - only that I'd heard something.

Late last night (or very early this morning) my source e-mailed me back to say that the Mayor had let everyone of his campaign staff go except a skeleton field crew and the finance director. There wasn't much point in spending the amount of money they were spending.

I'm still trying to track down more details.

That's all I know.

Any further info would be greatly appreciated. E-mail me at numbah_6@yahoo.com

-DAYVOE

Reminder Announcement

I'll be on OffQ this Friday, the 13th.

The weird thing is that the picture they're using:

Doesn't really look like me any more as I shaved the beard about a year ago. But I'll be on in a suit and tie, sitting next to my good friend Fred Honsberger.

Another USAttorney Wrinkle (with a local connection)

Here's an interesting wrinkle to the USAttorney story. It's in the Washington Post.

You remember the story, right? There was a buncha USAttorneys who were effectively fired for not being loyal enough to the Bush Administration's political policies. They were replaced by less qualified, more loyal Bushies and because of a little known prevision quietly slipped into the USAPatriot Act, the replacements did not need to be OKed by the Senate.

Well one of those replaced, David C. Iglesias USAttorney of New Mexico, was reportedly replaced for not being at his office enough. From the Post:

One of them, David C. Iglesias of New Mexico, was publicly accused by the Justice Department of being an "absentee landlord" who was away from his job too much.

Iglesias himself has protested this. You know why

Iglesias filed a complaint with federal investigators last week, alleging that his dismissal amounted to discrimination based on his status as an officer in the Navy Reserve, which took him away from the job for 40 to 45 days a year. Alleged absenteeism has been the Justice Department's main public criticism of Iglesias, although officials have more recently added concerns about his handling of voter fraud and immigration cases to their arguments about him.

Ok, so that's the set-up. The point of the Post article is that there've been a number of USAttorneys (including our own Mary Beth Buchanan) who have been given double appointments:

A half-dozen sitting U.S. attorneys also serve as aides to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales or are assigned other Washington postings, performing tasks that take them away from regular duties in their districts for months or even years at a time, according to officials and department records.

And a few paragraphs down:

The number of U.S. attorneys pulling double duty in Washington is the focus of growing concern from other prosecutors and from members of the federal bench, according to legal experts and government officials.

Our own Mary Beth Buchanan is pulling double duty as well, serving as the acting director of the Office of Violence Against Women.

So they toss the merely loyal USAttorney for spending too much time in the Naval Reserve, while keeping other more "loyal Bushies" in their positions.

Can they get any more disgusting?

EVENTS

Reform Pittsburgh NOW!
WHAT: You are Invited to a Policy Party! (w/ People for Peduto)
WHEN: Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 6:00 - 8:00 PM
WHERE: People for Peduto Headquarters, 201 South Highland Avenue, Suite 203, Pittsburgh PA 15206

Join with other Pittsburghers to Reform Pittsburgh NOW!

In the past, People for Peduto was looking for your time and $$$ -- now, they want your IDEAS.

Let your voice be heard! SHARE policy ideas, best practice models, research (they encourage you to donate photocopied materials). COMMIT to an issue and join with others to formulate sound policy. BUILD a movement of progressive ideas.

Refreshments provided

RSVP to Danae at 412-363-2909 or email danae@billpeduto.com

2007 Write-A-Thon for Human Rights
WHAT: Amnesty International Pittsburgh's Write-A-Thon
WHEN: Wednesday, April 11, 2007, 6:30 PM.- 9:30 PM
WHERE: Calvary Episcopal Church (315 Shady Avenue), Pittsburgh, PA

Write letters to authorities involved or connected with human rights issues; in furtherance of the rights of the victims.

Candle lighting ceremony, 8:00 p.m

More info at http://www.amnestypgh.org

Together we can! Meet & Greet with Patrick Dowd
WHAT: Meet & Greet with Patrick Dowd
WHEN: Thursday, April 12, 2007, 5:00 PM
WHERE: Upstairs at Lot 17, 4617 Liberty Ave, Pittsburgh, PA

Join in for a happy hour with Patrick Dowd, candidate for Pittsburgh City Council District 7.

The campaign is focused on reforming our government, reinvesting in our neighborhoods, and promoting the great (and green!) potential of our city.

Snacks & cash bar to be provided. Please consider a contribution of $20, $40 and beyond! Your support counts and is greatly appreciated.

Contributions will be accepted at the event, or can be submitted online at www.dowdforpittsburgh.org

RSVP @ Campaign HQ - (412) 403-9295 or online @
http://www.evite.com/pages/invite/viewInvite.jsp?inviteId=CJZTKJYXTFGUAVFKVGPP&li=iq&src=email&trk=aei3

The Great Healthcare Debate of Pennsylvania Leadership Action Conference
WHAT: Help Fund PA Single Payor Healthcare Debate
WHEN: Friday, April 13th, 2007, 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM
WHERE: Kearns Spirituality Center (Pittsburgh), 9000 Babcock Blvd., Allison Park, PA 15101

The movement for single payer health care in Pennsylvania and nationally is diffuse and diverse -- which is what the allies of our broken status quo count on. We're convening this, the sixth Action Conference, to solidify leader-to-leader communication, synch our mutual health care agendas, and coordinate the fight ahead. Leaders and representatives of all groups working on health care reform are welcome.

Proponents of the Governor’s private insurance based “Prescription for Pennsylvania” (HB 700) will debate supporters the public health trust single payer based “Family & Business Health Care Security Act” (SB 300).

Lunch: $7.50 (regular and vegetarian), though you are welcome to bring your own. Refreshments provided.

RSVP: Please confirm your attendance @ http://www.helpfundpa.org/evt04-13.htm

Rally on the River
WHAT: Rally on the River for Global Warming Solutions
WHEN: Saturday, April 14, 2007: Rally and Picnic: 11:00 AM-1:00 PM; Action! Walk: 1:00 PM -3:00 PM
WHERE: The Historic Homestead Pump House, E. Waterfront Drive - Munhall, PA (just east of The Waterfront)

Join the Blue-Green Alliance, Sierra Club, and United Steelworkers for live music, speakers, food, door prizes, and activities for kids and adults. AND they're collecting used batteries, compact fluorescent light bulbs, and cell phones for recycling.

For more information: 412.802.6161

14th Ward Independent Democratic Club Fundraiser
WHAT: Annual Fundraiser Event
WHEN: Saturday, April 14, at 7:30 PM
WHERE: Minadeo Elementary School, 6502 Lilac St., Pittsburgh, PA 15217

OBIE-Award winning Actor, Playwright and Correspondent from The Daily Show, Aasif Mandvi, is their featured performer at this year’s fundraiser event. He will perform excerpts from his new solo show, The Adventures of the Curry Pot Cowboy.

Plus, the political humor of John McIntire and Gab Bonesso.

ORDER YOUR TICKETS NOW! Seating is limited. More info at http://www.pgh14widc.org/Welcome.html

DEVELOPING

DEVELOPING: We received a tip that there may be some interesting news about the Ravenstahl campaign coming out tonight.

I don't want to give out too much info as it's still unconfirmed.

I'll update you on whatever I learn.

-DAYVOE

Update 10:06pm: Haven't heard anything back, sorry folks. I put in an e-mail to the Mayor's campaign (via the contact page at his campaign website) asking for a confirmation, just to be sure.

I'm pretty confident in my source - but as I don't have enough context I'm not yet comfortable posting my tip. But if anyone has any information about anything new happening in the inner circle of Luke Ravenstahl's campaign HQ, please drop me a line. Confidentiality is assured.

Update Tuesday 2:02am: Ok, here's what I got. My source tells me that Mayor Ravenstahl is letting everyone on his campaign go except for a skeleton field staff and finance director. The decision was apparently a financial one, my source adding "no sense in spending the money he was spending."

For what it's worth, that's what I got.

Developing...

Funniest Easter Post from the Burghosphere

Those T&A dudes give us "Bunnorato."

More Evidence of White House Incompetence

This time it's the Rudy Giuliani-Bernard Kerik-Alberto Gonzales network of incompetence.

From the New York Times:

When former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani urged President Bush to make Bernard B. Kerik the next secretary of homeland security, White House aides knew Kerik as the take-charge top cop from Sept. 11, 2001. But it did not take them long to compile an extensive dossier of damaging information about the would-be Cabinet officer.

They learned about questionable financial deals, an ethics violation, allegations of mismanagement and a top deputy prosecuted for corruption. Most disturbing, according to people close to the process, was Kerik's friendship with a businessman who was linked to organized crime. The businessman had told federal authorities that Kerik received gifts, including $165,000 in apartment renovations, from a New Jersey family with alleged Mafia ties.

Alarmed about the raft of allegations, several White House aides tried to raise red flags. But the normal investigation process was short-circuited, the sources said. Bush's top lawyer, Alberto R. Gonzales, took charge of the vetting, repeatedly grilling Kerik about the issues that had been raised. In the end, despite the concerns, the White House moved forward with his nomination -- only to have it collapse a week later. [Emphasis added]

You just gotta love that finely tuned, fiercely exercised ethical radar they got over there in dubya's White House, huh?

Then there's this:

A reconstruction of the failed nomination, assembled through interviews with key players, provides new details and a fuller account of the episode -- how Giuliani put forward a flawed candidate for high office, how Bush rushed the usual process in his eagerness to install a political ally and how Gonzales, as White House counsel, failed to stop the nomination despite the many warning signs. "The vetting process clearly broke down," said a senior White House official. "This should not happen." [Emphasis added

My god, who would've thought that the White House would have stepped over "the usual process" in order to install a political ally in a hugely important position? Anyone? Anyone?

But just as there's always room for jello, there's always room for the White House to lie about their decisions:

The White House explanation has shifted significantly. Just after Kerik withdrew, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said that "we have no reason to believe" he lied and that it "would be an inaccurate impression" to say the vetting was rushed. Now current and former White House officials assert that Kerik lied "bald-faced," as one put it, and say they erred by speeding up the nomination.

I don't really need to comment on that, do I?

Is there anyone in the White House who isn't completely corruptly incompentent?

Another Pelosi Myth

Recently, I caught a few minutes of Fox "News" watcher Mike Pintek guest-hosting on John McIntire's old show over at PCNC.

For what it's worth McIntire's back on the radio these days at 93.7, The Zone. He and Wolverine-fan Gab Bonesso can be heard daily doing bits like "Johnny Mac, Lesbo-flipper" and "Gab Bonesso, bad phone sex operator." Give it a listen if you like. Some are appalled, some are entertained. Some are at work and can't listen to it anyway.

Anyway back to the political bloggery.

If there's any more evidence that Pintek's been drinking the conservative cool-aid, this is it. He's been parroting the RNC talking point that Speaker Pelosi blundered on that recent trip to the Middle East. If you look closely, you can actually see the panic-based spittle when Pintek's forced to pinch out those two words: "Speaker Pelosi."

The "blunder" was something about her claiming to be bringing a message from Israel, and the Israeli Prime Minister claiming otherwise.

Josh Marshall has the story. Unlike the political construction the wingnuts inhabit, reality is far far more complicated. Marshall's piece is based in part on this article from Haaretz.com. In it, you'll find these two paragraphs:

Following his visit to the forces in the field, a decision was made to publicly address the concerns of a possible deterioration with the Syrians, and to send a message that Israel has no intention of attacking Syria, nor is there any coordinated plan with the U.S. for a joint attack against Iran.

The speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, is scheduled to meet with Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus today, and will deliver a message of calm from Israel.

So much for Pintek's RNC talking points.

As I wrote, the real story is a lot more complicated than Pintek or the Washington Post editorial thinks.

Are British Schools REALLY Dropping Holocaust Studies?.

In today's column by our good friend and resident rightwing nutjob Jack Kelly, I was stuck something in the 11th paragraph:

This extent to which liberals are willing to accept inferior status to Muslims even in their own countries is mind-boggling. In Britain, schools are dropping references to the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims, the Daily Mail reported.

It stuck out somehow. Is it really possible that in land of Oxford and Cambridge, they're actually dropping Holocaust classes for teenagers? I decided to hunt it down (something Jack should have done his own damn self).

Here's the article. By the way, the Daily Mail is a conservative tabloid newspaper in the UK - think the New York Post but with an English accent. If you read the article (again, Jack you really should have done this before submitting your column for publication) you'll see this:

Schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, a Governmentbacked study has revealed.

It found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial.

See that? It switched from "Schools..." in the first paragraph to "Some teachers..." in the second. Already, we've moved away from a government mandated restriction, haven't we? And what of this study?

The study, funded by the Department for Education and Skills, looked into 'emotive and controversial' history teaching in primary and secondary schools.

It found some teachers are dropping courses covering the Holocaust at the earliest opportunity over fears Muslim pupils might express anti-Semitic and anti-Israel reactions in class.

Again, "some teachers." Hardly nationwide.

So how many examples does the Daily Mail article site? Three. Here they are.

1 - The researchers gave the example of a secondary school in an unnamed northern city, which dropped the Holocaust as a subject for GCSE coursework.

2 - It added: "In another department, the Holocaust was taught despite anti-Semitic sentiment among some pupils.

"But the same department deliberately avoided teaching the Crusades at Key Stage 3 (11- to 14-year-olds) because their balanced treatment of the topic would have challenged what was taught in some local mosques."

3 - A third school found itself 'strongly challenged by some Christian parents for their treatment of the Arab-Israeli conflict-and the history of the state of Israel that did not accord with the teachings of their denomination'.

First take a closer look at example 2. Looks like it's the same school as in example 1, but in some other department, the Holocaust was being taught. The complaint was that the Crusades weren't being taught to 11-14 year olds (a bit of a jump from what Kelly wrote). Now look at the third example. This is the one that J-Kel missed entirely. Christian parents challenging the school's treatment of the the Arab-Israeli conflict.

I'll remind everyone that J-Kel was using the Daily Mail article to prove that British Schools were dropping Holocaust studies out of fear of offending Muslim students.

How many examples in that article that support Kelly's position? One - that unnamed school in northern England that dropped the Holocaust as a subject for GCSE course work. What is GCSE coursework anyway? According to the Wikipedia, GCSE stands for "General Certificate of Secondary Education." The courses are not compulsory, by the way.

I dug deeper and found the study itself. You can find it here. If you read the thing, the parts so carefully selected by the wingnuts are all from one section of the study - Page 15, section 6. The study itself is 48 pages long and includes such Holocaust study details as:

Addressing emotive and controversial history effectively requires an understanding of student misconceptions. Without this awareness of misconceptions about events such as the Holocaust, appropriate learning strategies are rendered impossible. Students often bring misconceptions and stereotypes with them. For example (in relation to the Holocaust), the beliefs that all Germans were Nazis, that the Nazis invented anti-Semitism, that all Jews were helpless victims and that all the victims died in gas chambers. (pg 17)

Doesn't sound like they're dropping the subject are they? Then there's this from page 32:

Good practice at Key Stage 4 results when the planning of emotive and controversial history is explicit within the context of the theme or unit. This means exploring multiple perspectives and challenging commonly held misconceptions. For example, in relation to the teaching of the Holocaust, students are taught that Nazi persecution of the Jews was part of a wider policy, which included other groups. They are therefore provided with a context, which sets the Holocaust alongside other genocides and the history of anti-Semitism. In attributing responsibility for the Jewish Holocaust, care is taken that all Germans are not labelled as anti-Semitic. Rescue, resistance and the cultural diversity of Europe in the period are studied, particularly to counter the stereotyping of Jews as helpless victims, awaiting extermination.

If read carefully, it's obvious that the parts chosen by the wingnuts to show British reluctance to offend Muslim students are actually quiet criticisms of those teachers who aren't teaching history well. The rest of the study is a recommendation on how to approach sensitive topics and teach them.

I realise that this story is only a slight part of J-Kel's rant this week, but this is how a right wing myth becomes "real." It's distorted and repeated over and over until enough people believe it's true.

It's bad writing and (oddly enough) it makes for bad history.

Good going Jack. We always knew you had it in you.

Bill Donohue Vs. Jesus

Warning: Many of you may want to skip this post -- especially on Good Friday.

There are not a few Catholics who believe that Bill Donohue, President of the Catholic League, gives Catholics a bad name. His relentless tirades in the media and the threats he issues against everyone from makers of chocolate Jesuses, to pro choice Catholic politicians (Dems only, natch), to "potty-mouthed" feminist bloggers, to the Jews he claims "control" Hollywood and who "hate Christianity" (and like anal sex) are both legendary and embarrassing to many for whom he claims to speak.

As someone who, while non believing now, was raised as a Catholic, I have to admit I have fantasized more than once on how a meeting between good ol' Bill Donohue and Jesus might go down.

I need not fantasize any longer, though, because the boys from South Park have supplied their own version of this meeting in their Easter edition of the show this week.

In it, Jesus asks Bill, "What is your problem, guy?"

Let's just say it goes downhill for Bill after that.

Here's the last third of that South Park episode. (You can probably see the entire show by searching for "Easter" and "South Park" at YouTube, if you're game. It also is a spoof of The Da Vinci Code.)

Bill O'Reilly's On Air Mental Meltdown

Watch Bill O'Reilly totally lose his mind:

Senator Casey on the Iraq War Funding

KDKA's Jon Delano got a chance to sit down to talk with Senator Bob Casey to talk about the Senator's first 100 days in office. The conversation (as is inevitable, I suppose, these days in DC) turned to Iraq. In the course of the conversation, Casey made these two points:

If the President vetoes a funding bill and the effect of that becomes the troops don't have funding, that's on his watch. It's not the Congress' fault.

We want to fund the troops to make sure they have the resources they need but we're not going to allow the President to dictate on his own. The American people have a right to speak and they're speaking, I think, through the voice of Congress.

Good for him. Say what you will about the Bobster, but on Iraq he's right on the money.

McNeilly Source Material

I saw FOP President Malloy on NightTalk last night (guest hosted by Mike Pintek) spin and spin again on the McNeilly settlement. The spin was so bad I thought it might be a good idea to bring everyone back to some primary source material, namely Judge Donetta Ambrose's preliminary injuction. The Judge begins (page 1, line 8-15):

Why are we here? We are here because the Plaintiff, Catherine McNeilly, on October 9th, 2006, sent e-mails to City Council, the Fire and Medic Bureau chiefs, she blind copied the same to her husband and her brother; and in these e-mails and attachment she questioned the appointment of Dennis Regan as Public Safety Director and Dennis Regan's interference with her attempts to discipline a police officer under her command, who was the brother of Regan's housemate.

The Plaintiff attached to her e-mails a disciplinary action report she had filed on this police officer which contained personnel information. She was subsequently demoted for having sent the e-mail -- the attached disciplinary action report to the e-mail.

Malloy last night accused (or at least implied) McNeilly of leaking confidential information to the public. Not so, wrote Judge Ambrose (page 9, line 10-16):

As to the confidentiality matters, Plaintiff made every effort to keep the e-mail and attached DAR confidential. Indeed, she marked the e-mail confidential and disclosed the information only to those individuals who themselves had a duty to keep it confidential. It was someone to whom Plaintiff disclosed the information, not the Plaintiff herself, who revealed the information to the public.

Judge Ambrose wrote that McNeilly had two claims in the case, a 1st Amendment claim and a claim under the Pennsylvania Whistleblower Act (showing his own spinning self, Pintek oddly referred to this as a "so-called Whistleblower" case). The Judge found that if McNielly was acting as a private citizen, and if the issue was and issue of public concern, and if she was acting in good faith, then she had 1st Amendment protections. Judge Ambrose (page 10, line 6-17):

As I said earlier, this is a balancing test. Plaintiff's allegations and evidence of wrongdoing and governmental misconduct and concerns that wrongdoers would be placed in high government positions outweigh the city's concerns the Plaintiff's actions would disrupt the Police Department, which they apparently did not; and that the confidentiality of a disciplinary report was compromised, especially in light of the fact that the e-mail which the Defendants are not complaining about contained the same information as the disciplinary action report, which the Defendants are complaining about. Therefore, the Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits of her First Amendment claim.

And now onto Pintek's "so-called" Whistleblower protection (page 10, line 18-23):

She also has a claim under the Pennsylvania Whistleblower Law which prohibits public employers from retaliating against an employee who makes a good faith report of wrongdoing to appropriate authorities. For the reasons already stated, I find that the Plaintiff made a good faith report of wrongdoing.

Judge Ambrose finishes up (page 11, line 21 to page 12, line 4):

Finally, I must consider whether the public interest will be served by granting the injunction. The public interest is always served by disclosure of wrongdoing and undue and/or inappropriate influence by public officials in Police Department matters. The chilling effect of discipline and demotion to a police officer who makes a good faith report of what she believes in good faith to be wrongdoing and inappropriate influence in Government never serves the public interest.

There was even a little something about that 120-day rule from Ambrose (page 5, line 10-14):

She consulted the Assistant City Solicitor for assistance in preparing a disciplinary action report. He told her about the 120-day rule and subsequently told her that what she described to him as her approach sounded like a good approach to him.

She consulted the Assistant City Solicitor on this? That I didn't know. I also didn't know that that ACS told her her approach sounded like a good idea.

Something else Pintek and Malloy left out of their collective spins.

Malloy also stated that because the Police Department was so short of funds (for instance, the cars are old, he said) this settlement is a bad bad idea.

Uh, sorry. That's not McNeilly's problem. If the financial situation of the city is such a concern, then perhaps they should have thought of that before retaliating against McNeilly.