Skip to content

Month: October 2007

Dear Roger Cohen

by tristero

Dear Roger Cohen,

I am, for the sake of this discussion going to accept the numbers you provide in your ever so serious and civilized blogpost listing death tolls in the decades-long catastrophe that is Iraq. It is an outrageous exercise to reduce even a single human life to a statistic in this context. But someone should let you know exactly what your support for the Bush/Iraq war has done.

Number of people killed by Saddam Hussein within Iraq before July, 1979 until April, 2003: Up to 1 million.

Number of Iraqis killed by the Roger Cohen-supported invasion and conquest of Iraq since 2003: Perhaps 200,000.

Number of Americans killed by the Roger Cohen-supported invasion and conquest of Iraq since 2003: more than 3700.

At the rate your invasion and conquest is going, you and your friends will be responsible for 1 million deaths within Iraq in around 20 years. It took Saddam around 24.

In response to the unspeakable carnage you asked for and which you got, you write this:

The difference between the Iraqi hell of yesterday and the Iraqi hell of today is that the former was without hope…

Please tell that to the kids who lost their parents, their relatives, and the use of their limbs due to bombs made in the US of A. Bombs you were all too willing to use.

Roger, as I said before, you are a goddammed fool.

love,

tristero

PS. Yes, but what about that second million killed in the Iran war? Oh, Bush seems to be working on that. Ever since Texas, Bush has learned how it felt to be the head of a state that kills lots of people. Maybe Bush won’t cause a million deaths in an Iran war but Roger, not even Bill Bennett would bet that he won’t.

PS By the way, Roger. I don’t need anyone whose pen and mouth are as engorged with the blood of dead Iraqis as yours are to lecture someone like me on the evils of Saddam Hussein. You’ve got one helluva lot of nerve.

Judgment Daze

by digby

Naturally, the flagship scumbag of the modern conservative movement throws himself onto the undulating pile of putrid winguttia with this today:

RUSH: I had some rudimentary information on this two weeks ago, and it wasn’t enough for me to trust going with. But since then, it has been verified, and most of it’s been verified by a “Freeper” at Free Republic. Everybody is writing about this now, since the Freeper posted it over the weekend. This 12-year-old kid that the Democrats used in the Saturday radio address to whine and moan and cry to President Bush about the SCHIP children’s health program, it turns out that the family of this kid sends its kids to “one of Baltimore’s expensive private schools.” This family owns a house in a neighborhood of homes valued in the $400,000 to $500,000 range. This family bought commercial property in 1999 for $160,000.

[…]

What’s the upshot of all this? This is nothing new. The Democrats lie! They have to in order to make their case. What was seductive to them was that this young man and his sister were severely injured in an auto accident, and they didn’t have private insurance. “That’s all we needed. That’s all. Just smear the president. That’s all we needed. We don’t need any other details, because we know that our buddies in the mainstream media are not going to uncover the details, and, if they do uncover ’em, they’re not going to report ’em — and when they do get uncovered a couple weeks later, a day later, the story is already ours. We already own it.”

So the bottom line for me is: They can’t rely on truth to make their case for their cause. They have to lie. Be it about me, be it about their own voters (such as the Frosts) be it about President Bush, they must lie — and anybody who stands in the way of their succeeding with that lie becomes an enemy, becomes a target. That’s where I and my buddies in talk radio come in. We are a thorn in their side because we represent the truth they are trying to hide, the truth that they are lying about, and they have to do something about it — and they have to do that by lying. The truth will not help ’em. The truth is inconvenient to today’s Democrat Party and today’s left. “Fiction” is their byword. Make it up. Make sure people cry about it. Have a lot of emotion attached to the fiction, and have no guilt about it. “Once you get past the lying, the rest is easy,” is their philosophy. The kid, Graeme Frost, in one of his radio addresses, asked the question: “Why doesn’t President Bush want children to have health care?” They send the kid out to lie. They filled this kid’s head with lies just as they have some of these soldiers about me. Put lies in the kid’s head or put it on the script that he’s reading. He goes out and reads it. He’s 12-years-old! They will use anybody! They’ll corrupt anybody, to get where they’re headed. That’s who they are, folks.*

Read the whole thing if you can stomach it. As most of us who read blogs know by now, it’s Rush who has just lied his ample ass off. (The true facts are here.) But now millions of half crazed wingnuts will think that this family has been scamming the government when it just isn’t true. The Frost family qualified for the SCHIP program under the government’s rules. They qualified for the program that Bush himself says he supports. (It’s the new money he opposes.)The Frosts support a program that has helped their two kids get medical care after a terrible, life threatening accident and so they spoke out about it, as they have every right to do as Americans. For that they are being lied about and smeared as con artists.

And here’s a real shocker for you. This disgusting smear campaign isn’t just being flogged by the rightwing blogosphere or talk radio.

From ABC news (Via Steve Benen):

According to Senate Democratic aides, some bloggers have made repeated phone calls to the home of 12-year-old Graeme Frost, demanding information about his family’s private life. On Monday, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid accused GOP leadership aides of “pushing falsehood” in an effort to distract from the political battle over S-CHIP.

“This is a perverse distraction from the issue at hand,” said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid, D-Nev. “Instead of debating the merits of providing health care to children, some in GOP leadership and their right-wing friends would rather attack a 12-year-old boy and his sister who were in a horrific car accident.”

Manley cited an e-mail sent to reporters by a Senate Republican leadership aide, summing up recent blog traffic about the boy’s family. A spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., declined to comment on Manley’s charge that GOP aides were complicit in spreading disparaging information about Frosts.

The disgusting purpose of this is to have news organizations digging into every aspect of the Frost’s lives to determine whether the Woodward and Bernsteins of wingnuttia, (Freeper posters and stalker Michele Malkin) are “right.” And then the sanctimonious right wing vultures will determine whether they “deserve” to eat at Applebees once a month with their four kids or whether they are “cheating” the benevolent tax payers by having a television set or a cell phone since their catastrophically injured kids need help from the government. They will say that Mom and Dad should work two jobs or maybe they shouldn’t have had kids in the first place or started their own business. There will be no sense of “there but for the grace of God go I” or no recognition that sometimes life throws you a curve ball and that you need the help of others to get you through.

The Frosts can now expect that they will be bombarded with judgment from smug jackasses who will poke around in their private lives and tell them they are at fault, even though they both work, because their family couldn’t afford to pay the huge premiums for a family of six or the catastrophic costs associated with major injuries and the ongoing care necessary for a special needs child. And when these critics say this about these people they will also be saying it about millions of working poor and middle class families who are crumbling under the burden of the runaway health care costs that are breaking the American economy and the American family. They will all be told they are bad parents, bad citizens, bad people.

Yet it is Americans like the Frosts, who make 45,000 dollars a year trying to run a small business and raise a family who are the backbone of this country. They don’t deserve to be swift-boated or smeared or stalked just because they need some help when their kids are hurt and the costs for caring for them runs into the millions of dollars — or for speaking out about it. This sickening smear campaign against these people is unamerican, unchristian and inhuman, which actually isn’t all that surprising considering the people it’s coming from.

If you would care to help us ensure that Bush’s veto of the SCHIP bill is overridden, these five Democrats could use a call from you. And if you can contribute to Blue America’s telephone campaign to their constituents, we would be grateful. Overriding Dear Leader’s heartless veto and insuring that Americans like the Frosts can continue to care for their sick kid is the only thing that will make this awful ordeal they are undergoing worthwhile.

*Remember, you’re paying for that dishonest swill to be pumped to our soldiers allegedly protecting and fighting for our values overseas. The wingnuts are more than happy to have the US government subsidize that. Medical care for sick kids, not so much. You can do something about that too.

.

Theories Of Mind

by tristero

The Science Times had an extremely interesting article about the minds of baboons this morning. However, there is a serious mistake towards the end of the article which even a layman can see:

Why did language, expressed in combinations of sounds, evolve in humans but not in baboons?

A possible key to the puzzle lies in what animal psychologists call theory of mind, the ability to infer what another animal does or does not know. Baboons seem to have a very feeble theory of mind. When they cross from one island to another, ever fearful of crocodiles, the adults will often go first, leaving the juveniles fretting at the water’s edge. However much the young baboons call, their mothers never come back to help, as if unable to divine their children’s predicament.

But people have a very strong ability to recognize the mental states of others…

It is far from clear why humans acquired a strong theory of mind faculty and baboons did not.

So, “people have a very strong ability to recognize the mental states of others,” do they?

That will certainly come as surprising news to anyone who read Digby’s post on the disgusting antics of Malkin, et al. Apparently, the only kind of mind Republicans can recognize or respect is the fictitious kind Bill Frist perceived in the ruined tissues that were once the brain of Terri Schiavo (which also reveals quite a lot about the kind of mind Republicans respect in a woman).

Now, if you read that article, you will notice something else of interest. Baboons engage in infanticide, which is distressingly similar to what Malkin is doing. But I want to make this crystal clear. I am not – repeat NOT – comparing Michelle Malkin to a wild baboon. After one takes the time to study them, it becomes quite apparent that baboons do have many redeeming qualities.

For one thing, baboons actually can think.

Special Note For Righwingers And Others Who Have Difficulty Understanding English: It may occur to you that I am implying that Malkin is neither a baboon OR human. And that this is the kind of eliminationist rhetoric the right deploys and which helps no one. No. This post is merely a critique of the science.

I fully accept that Malkin is human even if she is behaving. in the metaphorical sense, in an inhuman fasion. While normals – ie, liberals, moderates, and others who are not Republicans – certainly have some empathic skills, even we are not that sophisticated when it comes to composing theories of mind. Need proof? A simple thought experiment will make this quite clear:

Can YOU possibly imagine what Michelle Malkin is thinking that causes her to behave like that?

Neither can I. Our ability to infer mentation is clearly quite limited, at least when it comes to extremely altered states, like modern Republicanism. Therefore, we must conclude that she, like us, is indeed human (that doesn’t mean she’s a fine specimen of humanity, of course) and that the scientists here are just plain wrong. When it comes to the so-called “theories of mind,” humans, even normals, are at least as bad at it as baboons.

Fetid Compost Where Their Hearts Should Be

by digby

This is sick. The right is going after the 12 year old who gave the Saturday Democratic address supporting the SCHIP program. Remember him?

Graeme and his 9-year-old sister, Gemma, were passengers in the family SUV in December 2004 when it hit a patch of black ice and slammed into a tree. Both were taken to a hospital with severe brain trauma. Graeme was in a coma for a week and still requires physical therapy.

Bonnie Frost works for a medical publishing firm; her husband, Halsey, is a woodworker. They are raising their four children on combined income of about $45,000 a year. Neither gets health insurance through work.

Having priced private insurance that would cost more than their mortgage – about $1,200 a month – they continue to rely on the government program. In Maryland, families that earn less than 300 percent of the federal poverty level – about $60,000 for a family of four – are eligible.

Think Progress reports that the pathological rightwing freakshow has accused this family of being “rich” because Graham earns a scholarship to go to private school, and his sister goes to a special school paid for by the state because she was handicapped by the accident. Oh, and they have a house they bought years ago for 55,000 when the neighborhood was dicey. Apparently, they should be living in their car and the handicapped daughter should be selling pencils on the street corner. That’s the world these empty souls want to live in.

The right-wing immediately condemned Democrats for daring to put a human face on the SCHIP program at a time when Bush was proposing a “diminishment of the number of children covered.” Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) — who has posed with children to advance his own political agenda — claimed Graeme was being used “as a human shield.”

This from the people who had a party in the white house with “snowflake babies” to justify vetoing stem cell research, another cruel and hateful policy decision by the so-called compassionate conservatives of the Republican party.

Conservatives have more recently turned their targets on young Graeme Frost himself. A poster at the Free Republic propagated information alleging that Frost was actually a rich kid being pampered by the government. Among other bits of information, the post by the Freeper “icwhatudo” asserts that Graeme and his sister Gemma attend wealthy schools that cost “nearly $40,000 per year for tuition” and live in a well-off home. The smear attack against Graeme has taken firm hold in the right-wing blogosphere. The National Review, Michelle Malkin, Wizbang, Powerline, and the Weekly Standard blog have all launched assaults on the Frost family. The story is slowly working its way into traditional media outlets as well.

[…]

Desperate to defend Bush’s decision to cut off millions of children from health care, the right wing has stooped to launching baseless and uninformed attacks against a 12 year old child and his family. Right wing bloggers have been harassing the Frosts, calling their home numerous times to get information about their private lives. Compassionate conservatism indeed. UPDATE: TP commenter Mr. Ed notes that Malkin visited the Frost’s home and business today. A coworker of Mr. Frost tells Malkin that the family is “struggling,” but she refuses to believe it. UPDATE II: More from John Aravosis.

This is so loathesome I am literally sick to my stomach. These kids were hurt in a car accident. Their parents could not afford health insurance — and sure as hell couldn’t get it now with a severely handicapped daughter. And these shrieking wingnut jackasses are harassing their family for publicly supporting the program that allowed the kids to get health care. A program, by the way, which a large number of these Republicans support as well.

They went after Michael J. Fox. They went after a wounded Iraq war veteran. Now they are going after handicapped kids. There is obviously no limit to how low these people will go.

They’d better pray that they stay rich and healthy and live forever because if there is a hell these people are going to be on the express train to the 9th circle the minute they shuffle off their useless mortal coils.

Scum.

.

The War On Fucking

by tristero

I have a confession to make. When I was a teenager, I had sex with other teenagers. I enjoyed it. My girlfriends enjoyed it. It was real fun.

The general impression I have, and I admit that I haven’t done an extensive survey, is that most people enjoy sex quite a bit. But clearly, Republicans don’t. Having never knowingly slept with a Republican I can only guess at this, but I suspect they don’t know very much about what actual sex entails. They probably think of how Bush fucked New Orleans during Katrina. Or the way he’s screwed the men and women who trusted their government and wanted to serve their country by signing up for the military. So to the GOP, sex must seem catastrophic, a duty to perform, undertaken during times of stress, and potentially deadly. (Note to self: it’s probably a good idea to encourage this attitude towards sex amongst Republicans.)

Their total ignorance is the only reason I can think of as to why they are wasting money urging us to “Tell your kids you want them to wait ’til they’re married to have sex.” Me, I’m telling my kid to enjoy her life, and that includes having a happy, joyful, and abundant sex life. You go, girl!

Price Of Admission To The Big Tent

by digby

There’s a lot of talk these days, and books being written, about what it means to be a majority party Democrat living under the Big Tent. It requires coalition building and compromise and negotiation, for sure. But there are some issues that are so fundamental to what being a Democrat is, by definition, that if you don’t support them, you aren’t one. Health care for kids is one of those things — it’s simply not negotiable.

The DCCC is running a telephone and radio campaign to persuade Republicans who who voted against it to switch their vote and overturn the veto when it comes to the floor. They are trying to get 15 GOP House members to vote with the large number of their brethren who are already on board this extremely popular legislation. They are hopeful they can persuade some of them to split with the administration.

But there are five Democratic Bush Dogs who have also said they will continue to vote no on this bill and help Bush sustain his veto, whom the Democratic leadership cannot persuade to behave like Democrats. So this morning Blue America and BlogPac are going to take a crack at it and send these so-called Democrats a message — a full time working mom with a sick kid who depends upon S-CHIP, named Michele James, has recorded a call for constituents of these five Bush Dogs in the hopes they will put some pressure on their representatives to switch their vote. (You can hear one of the calls here.)

We would appreciate your help. If you would like to donate to this campaign, you can contribute via this ActBlue page.

And if you can make some calls yourself, that would be helpful as well. The five Bush Dogs will be hearing from their constituents at their local offices — and if you are one, please contact your congressman today! But I’m sure their Washington offices could use some pressure from the rest of us.

Jim Marshall (D-GA)–Washington, D.C. Office (202)225-6531; Macon, GA Office 1-877-464-0255; Tifton, GA Office (229)556-7418.

Baron Hill (D-IN)–Washington, D.C. Office (202)225-5315; Jeffersonville, IN Office (812)288-3999; Bloomington, IN Office (812)336-3000.

Gene Taylor (D-MS)–Washington, D.C. Office (202)225-5772; Bay St. Louis, MS Office (228)469-9235; Gulfport, MS Office (228)864-7670; Ocean Springs, MS Office (228)872-7950; Hattiesburg, MS Office (601)582-3246; Laurel, MS Office (601)425-3905.

Bob Etheridge (D-NC)–Washington, D.C. Office (202)225-4531; Raleigh, NC Office (919)829-9122 or 1-888-262-6202; Lillington, NC Office (910)814-0335 or 1-866-384-3743.

Mike McIntyre (D-NC)–Washington, D.C. Office (202)225-2731; Lumberton, NC Office (910)735-0610; Fayetteville, NC Office (910)323-0260; Wilmington, NC Office (910)815-4959; Bolivia, NC Office (910)253-0158.

I’m going to be calling Gene Taylor’s office myself. I lived for a time in his district as a kid, in Bay St Louis. It barely exists anymore, sadly, because it was nearly destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. There are many hard working families in Mississippi who were living hand to mouth before the disaster and are still trying desperately to work their way back to where they were. I suspect quite a few of them depend upon S-CHIP for their kids’ health care.

I’m going to remind Congressman Taylor what the definition of being a Democrat is. It seems he’s forgotten.

Again, you can contribute to this campaign go here.

Other bloggers are involved as well: FDL, Down With Tyranny, Open Left, C&L

more to come…

.

Chickenhawk Scramble

by digby

Paul Waldman at Media Matters has written a nice post synthesizing the Limbaugh flap:

Think about how much time and effort they expend on convincing Americans that progressives and Democrats are “anti-military,” “hate the troops,” and even “hate America.” So any progressive veteran who criticizes Bush administration policies represents a profound threat to all the arguments they have made. It becomes particularly thorny when nearly the entire current leadership of the conservative movement — not only media figures like Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly, but also political figures including President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, and many others — were of draft age during the Vietnam war but managed to stay out of harm’s way.

Let’s be clear: I’m not arguing that any particular individual on that list didn’t have legitimate reasons to avoid serving in Vietnam — some may have. Nor am I arguing that the opinions of veterans on matters of national security are necessarily more valid simply because they are veterans. The point is that accusations of troop-hating and insufficient patriotism are difficult to wield at veterans, particularly when thrown by those who were subject to the draft but managed to avoid it.

Unless, that is, they can argue that the veteran in question isn’t a real veteran, that his service wasn’t real service, that his sacrifice wasn’t real sacrifice, and that his patriotism isn’t real patriotism. So that’s exactly what they do.

If this were the first, or second, or even third time this had happened, one might be able to come up with another plausible explanation. But what we heard this week with Rush Limbaugh was a replay of a record we’ve heard many times before: a war critic with a military record emerges, and the right responds by attacking his patriotism, arguing that his service wasn’t real, or both.

Exactly. And the blind salmon that call themselves political journalists, never see the story. Ever. Indeed, they just go on helping the right stage its little phony hissy fits and bellow about values and patriotism as if the GOP glass houses weren’t all lying in shards at their feet:

We could go on to list the many Democrats who have had their patriotism assaulted — like Air Force veteran Tom Daschle, who was accused of treason by Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) (Davis said that comments Daschle made in 2002 questioning the success of the war on terror had “the effect of giving aid and comfort to our enemies,” language taken directly from the Constitution’s definition of treason), and was the subject of a press release by since-disgraced Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) titled “Foley Questions Daschle’s Patriotism.” But that would take far more space than we have at hand. One thing that all these cases have in common is that no one in the media even considered referring to these conservative attacks as “anti-military,” while media figures routinely characterize progressives as “anti-military” if they take issue with policies like the Iraq war, not to mention the converse, that Iraq war supporters are by definition “pro-military” folks who “support the troops” (see here, here, here, here, or here).

So let’s consider Limbaugh’s comment about Hackett. As far as Limbaugh is concerned, a progressive can’t possibly join the military out of a commitment to national service or simple patriotism; if a progressive joined the military, his or her motives must have been dishonorable, in this case to “pad the résumé.” By the same token, if a soldier opposes the war, he must not be a real soldier. After making the “phony soldiers” statement, Limbaugh and his caller went on to discuss how real soldiers want to be in Iraq. “They joined to be in Iraq!” said Rush.

Yet you would have had trouble finding too many Republicans in Washington willing to step forward and condemn Limbaugh, or do what Democrats are asked to do whenever a progressive anywhere says something controversial, and “distance themselves” from his remarks. Why? Because Rush Limbaugh is one of the most important components of the conservative spin machine. After all, when Republicans scored their dramatic electoral victory in 1994, they named him an honorary member of the 104th Congress. He’ll have to go a lot further than insulting soldiers to get them to turn on him.

I have said many times that the difference between the 90’s and now is that our side will no longer be relegated to screaming impotently into the void while the cable gasbags and talk show screamers assassinate the characters of our politicians and spokespeople. But it is a two way street, as the Republicans know very well.

There are many lessons to be learned by the MoveOn and Limbaugh episodes. I just hope they are the right ones.

.

The Lady is A Tramp

by digby

And another moral leader turns out to be a corrupt hypocrite. How shocking. But this time he’s just stealing his University blind while it’s the wife who seems to be getting all the perv action:

Twenty years ago, televangelist Oral Roberts said he was reading a spy novel when God appeared to him and told him to raise $8 million for Roberts’ university, or else he would be “called home.”

Now, his son, Oral Roberts University President Richard Roberts, says God is speaking again, telling him to deny lurid allegations in a lawsuit that threatens to engulf this 44-year-old Bible Belt college in scandal.

Richard Roberts is accused of illegal involvement in a local political campaign and lavish spending at donors’ expense, including numerous home remodeling projects, use of the university jet for his daughter’s senior trip to the Bahamas, and a red Mercedes convertible and a Lexus SUV for his wife, Lindsay.

She is accused of dropping tens of thousands of dollars on clothes, awarding nonacademic scholarships to friends of her children and sending scores of text messages on university-issued cell phones to people described in the lawsuit as “underage males.”

We really are getting to the point where it’s easier to assume that conservative religious leaders are crooks, perverts or liars. Sometimes all three. It’s amazing that the Christian right (to which I would add the Catholic Church’s moral teachings in light of the priest scandal) has thrived as long as it did.

It’s no wonder this is happening:

.

Mum’s The Word

by digby

When I saw the roundtable line-up this morning on Meet The Press, I was actually interested, for once. Since Monsignor Tim insists on having David Brody, a “journalist” from Pat Robertson’s Christian Broadcast “Network” on, I thought at least we could get some inside information on the reported unhappiness among the religious right with the Republican front runner.

Russert didn’t even bring it up. Neither did Brody. Neither did anyone else.
They talked about many aspects of the presidential race but not that one, with Brody opining on both Romney and Thompson and their issues with “hypocrisy:”

MR. RUSSERT: And what generally happens in a campaign is that Giuliani’s opponent would say, “Hold on a second. Those aren’t the view you had when you were mayor of New York.” The difficultly is, Mitt Romney is one of his opponents, and Mitt Romney, when he was governor or Massachusetts, had many similar views. The Log Cabin Republicans, who are gay Republicans, have purchased an ad what they believe is the truth about Mitt Romney. Let’s watch that.

(Videotape of Romney political ad)

Voice #2: For years, he’s fought conservatives and religious extremists. Mitt Romney:

MR. MITT ROMNEY: I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, that we should sustain and support it.

Voice #2: Mitt Romney opposed the gun lobby. Even Ronald Reagan.

MR. ROMNEY: Look, I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.

Voice #2: A record fighting the religious right. A pro-choice record. Massachusetts values. Mitt Romney.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: David Brody:

MR. BRODY: Massachusetts values. You know, you know, I would say this, that listen, he has so many people against him, so many groups. I mean, it’s not just the Log Cabin Republicans, but it’s the Massachusetts Democrats, it’s the Democratic National Committee, it’s his fellow Republicans that are running against him. I mean, you can make the case that Mitt Romney has more people going—and groups going against him than Rudy Giuliani at this point. Now, the Romney campaign will say, “Well, that’s because they know he’s a threat and they know he’s going to win.” But what Mitt Romney needs to do is change the narrative. And the question is, has the flip-flop narrative that’s been so prevalent over the last six months, will that continue? He wants to make it on the competent CEO narrative. You know, the guy that’s a—that can come into Washington and change things. That will be very important as we go forward in Iowa.

First of all, it’s disgusting to hear any of these people, including the “journalists” get away with derisively using the term “Masachusetts values” on television without somebody calling them out for its divisiveness. It is a derogatory right wing talking point. The Larry Craig Republicans should be ashamed of themselves — the people of Massachusetts were the first in the union whose values translated to full equality for gay people.

But I digress. Here you have Brody talking about a GOP gay rights group and Mitt Romney. No mention of the Religious Right CNP confab last week where the Village clerics all went nuts and threatened a third party bid if the party nominated a pro-choice, pro gay marraige candidate. Romney’s flip flopping — and that ad — speak directly to that issue.

Then Russert called on him again to talk about Thompson, who is also suspect on the issue of choice because he once lobbied for Planned Parenthood — and for whom James Dobson seems to have a particular antipathy:

MR. RUSSERT: David Brody, Fred Thompson was in Des Moines talking about gay marriage, and his answer is that if the states decide they want gay marriage, and the legislature passes it, the governor signs it, so be it. How’s that going to play with evangelical Christians?

MR. BRODY: Yeah, I mean, I think to a certain degree it was a little flip, those words, “so be it.” You know, the reality is, the Thompson campaign will say, “Well, well, who’s the better choice?” I mean, I mean, they were concerned for a bit here with Mike Huckabee. But when those numbers came out where he raised about a million dollars, there seems to be more of a, of a, a wait and see attitude now with Huckabee. So there’s, there’s a concern, there’s no doubt about that. But I think with Thompson, you know, he’s trying to fit the federalism issue regarding marriage, and he’s trying to weave the two together. And you know, for Fred Thompson, this is all about first principles. I mean, what he’s going to say is, whatever the situation is, whether it be marriage or anything else, it’s going to fit my first principles. Will that be enough? Will this—the idea that it’s generic enough for the voters is—really does remain to be seen.

No mention in the entire round table of the Dobson op-ed in the NY Times, no mention of the threatened schism on the right. Even though they had a “journalist” from the religious right media there at the table, they didn’t say a word about the unrest among the powerful christian conservatives. Why not?

In any case, Brody should not be on the show after writing this anyway. He works for a crazy man who calls for foreign heads of state to be assassinated and says the US state department should be nuked. And this:

To see Americans become followers of, quote, Islam, is nothing short of insanity. Terry, you know, I’ve been in Africa many, many, many, many times, and you see people over here learning Swahili, for example. Swahili was the language of the slave traders. The Islamic people, the Arabs, were the ones who captured Africans, put them in slavery, and sent them to America as slaves. Why would people in America want to embrace the religion of the slavers, and the language of the slavers?

That a man who works for that lunatic’s alleged “news” network is now welcomed to MTP as one of the boys says to me that Russert, like the rest of the Village, is as usual way out of step with the rest of the country, which is no longer interested in catering to the Christian Right. Naturally, the media is determined to become even more hypocritically sanctimonious now that the public has tired of listening to it.

The Religious Right is threatening to bolt the Republican party and the flagship Village gasbag show doesn’t even mention it. This is the first show since September 9th that Russert hasn’t discussed the Move On ad.

*** Meanwhile you have Margaret Carlson going on about Fred Thompson being an intellectual, which is just funny. But then Margaret has always been hot for Frederick of Hollywood:

The New York Post, of all venues, reported recently that the Tennessee senator had of late become something of a sex object for “Capitol Hill hotties,” one of whom complained about “all these other women” who wouldn’t leave the senator alone. “I can’t get up to get a cocktail at a party without coming back and finding some girl sitting at my chair,” the woman was quoted as saying.

Margaret Carlson, the writer for Time and host for CNN, is described this way: “She calls his apartment all the time. It’s the joke all over Washington that Margaret has this huge crush on him. And Fred is clearly not interested.” (To which the gallant Thompson responded: “I generally don’t comment on these matters, but as it relates to the statements made about my friend Margaret Carlson, I should be so lucky.”)

The woman quoted in the first paragraph is reportedly his future wife and campaign manager, Jerri. I guess she put Margaret in her place, didn’t she? And once again, I wonder what is wrong with the Village that they ever thought Frederick was a “sex object.”

Who are these people?

.