Month: October 2008

Long Arc Of History, Justice, Etc.

by dday

I had heard that Connecticut was going to wait out a decision on same-sex marriage until after the elections to see what happened with California and Prop. 8. But the state Supreme Court couldn’t wait.

HARTFORD, Conn. – Connecticut’s Supreme Court ruled Friday that same-sex couples have the right to marry, making the state the third behind Massachusetts and California to legalize such unions.

The divided court ruled 4-3 that gay and lesbian couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry under the state constitution, and Connecticut’s civil unions law does not provide those couples with the same rights as heterosexual couples.

“I can’t believe it. We’re thrilled, we’re absolutely overjoyed. We’re finally going to be able, after 33 years, to get married,” said Janet Peck of Colchester, who was a plaintiff with her partner, Carole Conklin.

“Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice,” Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote in the majority opinion that overturned a lower court finding.

“To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others,” Palmer wrote.

You really can’t claim to promote a freedom agenda while wanting to curtail freedom to select members of society. The concept of freedom isn’t about freedom for everything you LIKE – it’s about diversity and tolerance and mutual respect. This latest civil rights issue allows people of good faith to be as true as the ideals they like to wear on their sleeves.

Otherwise, they can descend to the levels of bigotry.

Over the past 24 hours, we’ve raised over $30,000 to fight the forces of intolerance and maintain equality for all in California. Donate to No on Prop. 8 if you can so we can raise those numbers.

.

FYI

by digby

In case you would like an explanation as to why people believe the government should take temporary ownership of the banks, this essay is the most concise explanation I’ve seen for why they believe the move is necessary and what it means.

But it’s important to remember that it’s just a band-aid to stop the bleeding and get things rolling again:

The temporary nationalisation of the banking system and the substitution of private debt by public debt will allow us to reach a new equilibrium. When this happens, a fundamental reform of the banking system will be necessary in order to remain in this benign equilibrium. When this is achieved the governments will be able to privatise the banking system again.

It’s possible that everyone in government and business and on wall street is scared enough to make that happen. But fear fades as fast as it appears. I hope they move quickly.

.

No There There

by tristero

WeatherProsecutor:

As the lead federal prosecutor of the Weathermen in the 1970s (I was then chief of the criminal division in the Eastern District of Michigan and took over the Weathermen prosecution in 1972), I am amazed and outraged that Senator Barack Obama is being linked to William Ayers’s terrorist activities 40 years ago when Mr. Obama was, as he has noted, just a child.

Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen.

Because Senator Obama recently served on a board of a charitable organization with Mr. Ayers cannot possibly link the senator to acts perpetrated by Mr. Ayers so many years ago.

Game, set, match. And then we get a very interesting final paragraph:

I do take issue with the statement in your news article that the Weathermen indictment was dismissed because of “prosecutorial misconduct.” It was dismissed because of illegal activities, including wiretaps, break-ins and mail interceptions, initiated by John N. Mitchell, attorney general at that time, and W. Mark Felt, an F.B.I. assistant director.

Got that? The indictment of Weathermen failed because of illegal wiretaps and other corrupt behavior on the part of a Republican administration.

(And for those of you who remember your history, W. Mark Felt is none other than Deep Throat which, since he colluded in this illegal activity, should give you some indication of how seriously lawless Nixon was that he agreed to become the Watergate whistleblower.)

Party Like It’s 1932!

by tristero

Your coffee didn’t wake you up? This will:

With today’s plunge in the stock market, the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index has now fallen 42 percent over the last year. Just how bad is that?

It’s nearly as bad as one terrible 12-month period from late 1973 to late 1974. Other than that, it’s the worst decline since 1932.

These historical comparisons are best done in real — that is, inflation-adjusted — terms, so that’s what we will use from here. In real terms, the decline since Oct. 9, 2007, has been about 45 percent. From the end of September 1973 to the end of September 1974, the S.&P. 500 dropped 48 percent.

Robert Shiller, an economist, keeps stock-market data going back to 1871. The only other 12-month periods worse than the current one all came in 1932. In the early months of 1932, stocks were trading for about 45 percent to 55 percent less than they had been a year before. And then they kept falling.

The worst 12-month period happened between June 1931 and June 1932, when the stocks fell 62 percent. (Mr. Shiller’s data is monthly, so there was probably a 365-day period that was slightly worse than this.)

Earlier this week, I mentioned that the market was closing in on a dubious milestone: having fallen more than 50 percent from its inflation-adjusted peak, which came in August 2000. This afternoon, it blew through that milestone. It’s now 53 percent lower than its peak.

This is the third great bear market of the last century.

I’m starting to think I should maybe worry about all this.

UPDATE: Fortunately, Paul Krugman has reassuring news… Actually, no.

UPDATE: As of 9:43 Eastern, Dow down 340.

Pallin’ Around With Extremists In Wasilla, AK

by tristero

By now, everyone who’s been paying attention for the past 15 plus years has copped to the rightwing tactic of accusing opponents of exactly what they themselves do.

So it should not be surprising that they lie about Obama’s early political associations. Nor should it be surprising that Sarah Palin today has some truly sick pals who supported her rise to power, and are waiting in the wings should this country have the misfortune of having her as vice president. As Max Blumenthal and Dave Neiwert make clear in their chilling investigation, Palin is the stealth extremist they accuse Obama of being.

Read about the real Sarah Palin who, like Michael Huckabee, has no business whatsoever being part of the national political or cultural discourse of a healthy country. She is utterly ignorant. She is a pathological liar. And her political milieu is just a few steps removed – this is no exaggeration – from that of Timothy McVeigh and friends.

Blumenthal and Neiwert have written an explosive article that deserves the widest possible readership. Tell everyone you know to read it.

Updated with link to Palin’s ignorance on energy issues, her supposed “strong suit.”

Craps-tacular

by digby

From Michael Kinsley:

It comes in an email from my friend Jeff Dearth, a media investment banker and former publisher of The New Republic. We also went to junior high and high school together in Michigan. He would not make this up. In 2005, Jeff attended a magazine industry conference at a casino hotel in Puerto Rico. (I was there, too, though not a witness to what follows.) The guest speaker was McCain. He put on a terrific performance, breaking up the friendly crowd by referring to journalists as “my base.” (To anyone who remembers this period in McCain’s history, his attempt this year to paint Barack Obama as Britney Spears or Paris Hilton because Obama is now the media darling seems especially cheap.) McCain’s game is craps. So is Jeff Dearth’s. Jeff was at the table when McCain showed up and happily made room for him. Apparently there is some kind of rule or tradition in craps that everyone’s hands are supposed to be above the table when the dice are about to be thrown. McCain—“very likely distracted by one of the many people who approached him that evening,” Jeff says charitably—apparently was violating this rule. A small middle-aged woman at the table, apparently a “regular,” reached out and pulled McCain’s arm away. I’ll let Jeff take over the story: “McCain immediately turned to the woman and said between clenched teeth: ‘DON’T TOUCH ME.’ The woman started to explain…McCain interrupted her: ‘DON’T TOUCH ME,’ he repeated viciously. The woman again tried to explain. ‘DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM? DO YOU KNOW WHO YOU’RE TALKING TO?’ McCain continued, his voice rising and his hands now raised in the ‘bring it on’ position. He was red-faced. By this time all the action at the table had stopped. I was completely shocked. McCain had totally lost it, and in the space of about ten seconds. ‘Sir, you must be courteous to the other players at the table,’ the pit boss said to McCain. “DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM? ASK ANYBODY AROUND HERE WHO I AM.” This being Puerto Rico, the pit boss might not have known McCain. But the senator continued in full fury—“DO YOU KNOW WHO YOU’RE TALKING TO? DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?”—and crisis was avoided only when Jeff offered to change places and stand between McCain and the woman who had touched his arm. What is bothersome about this story, if it’s true, is only partly the explosive anger. More, it’s the arrogance. At the craps table, who cares who he is? And there’s the recklessness of such a performance in a casino full of journalists (unless McCain absolutely couldn’t control himself, which is even scarier). But this gamble paid off. Although there were published reports that McCain had gambled late into the night, which properly treated that matter as charming, this particular episode has gone unreported until now. Maybe no journalist saw it. Or maybe this illustrates the unwritten rule of political journalism that all human-interest anecdotes must reaffirm a previously established belief. Arrogance is something McCain is not known for. Quite the opposite. Logic might dictate that an anecdote showing that, say, Obama has webbed feet would be more interesting than one showing that he is a skinny guy with big ears. But that’s not how it works.

This is interesting, but there have been many accounts recently of McCain acting like a psychopath (especially toward women) which were witnessed by reporters and never shared with the public. I find it unbelievable that this was kept under wraps because it didn’t fit McCain’s established image. In fact, it did.

The problem is that the boys on the straight talk express seem to actually like this behavior. They loved it when Bush was rude and dismissive too — and especially seemed to like it when he abused them personally. Maybe it made them feel like they were in boot camp or something. Or a member of the “team.” Whatever it was, both Bush and McCain benefited from this common belief among the press corps that macho frat boys and daddy figures are, like, totally awesome leaders. They drooled over both of those obnoxious pricks for years.

Now it seems that the crotchety, kook McCain is no longer cool. Maybe it’s just that Obama is cooler — or that Bush so degraded the macho stereotype that even these sycophantic wannabes have sheepishly come to their senses. Whatever it is, this immature insider behavior greatly affected this country’s politics for many years and is partially responsible for where we are today. I’m not inclined to forgive quite yet.

.

A Guy Of The Street

by digby

Needless to say, Dennis Miller is in no position to condemn anyone for cocaine use, and even he seems to realize just how hypocritical that would be.

But the rest is well, disgusting. This is Miller and e-Oklahoma governor Frank Keating on Miller’s radio show:

MILLER: It’s the most liberal, let’s just say that. We’re talking to Frank Keating, former Oklahoma Governor, John McCain supporter. Frank, let’s just say, it’s the most liberal. The thing that bothers me the most about all this with Barack Obama is not the — I know he’s the most liberal guy. You know, I know he’s gotten this close to the White House and I know most people don’t realize he’s probably the most liberal senator we have. The thing that bothers me the most is I recognize the obfuscation and the smoke and mirrors as Clinton-esque. When I hear him reduce Ayers to “this is a guy who lives in my neighborhood” or Rev. Wright, “I was there 500 times and never saw him.” The acts themselves don’t bother me as he’s starting to treat me like an idiot too when he’s blowing this smoke my way. He ought to just come clean and say, “listen, I came up through Chicago, you make some errors there.” I’d almost be able to absolve it more easily then.
KEATING: Well, and that’s what concerns me, Dennis, because when I was in the State Senate and statehouse of my state, if someone had voted against the entire state budget because it had too much money for corrections, all of us would have, you know, strained our necks to find out who is this because that would have been a very extreme position, basically saying to a law enforcement officer as I was or my son was a state trooper, “you know, you make an arrest, you risk your life, for nothing” because we’re going to make sure that person doesn’t go to prison even though the laws of the state require it. So, that puzzles me. Just he ought to admit, “you know, I’ve got to be honest with you. I was a guy of the street. I was way to the left. I used cocaine. I voted liberally, but I’m back at the center.” I mean, I understand the big picture of America. But he hasn’t done that…MILLER: He’s copped to that… KEATING: Jeremiah Wright is… MILLER: Wait, I’ve got to jump in Frank. He has copped to the blow use, right? I mean, he did so in his own book he said he did blow. KEATING: Oh yes, he did. MILLER: Well, I’m just saying that doesn’t enter this to me.

the GOP talking point, coming from McCain on down today is that Obama needs to “come clean” and be honest with the American people. I assume that’s the best focus grouped way to bring in all this filth.

I know I’m sounding like a broken record, but what we are really seeing is the beginning of a right wing story line about the next president of the United States — he is a drug user, a foreigner, a terrorist and a traitor. And the importance of that is that it gives permission to the right wing machine to do anything and everything to destroy him. He will not really be president, you see. He will be illegitimate — a usurper.

Equality, Freedom And Tolerance Need Your Help

by dday

The Mormon Church and their allies who have taken over the Yes On 8 campaign aren’t hiding it anymore. Their entire argument for banning same-sex marriage has nothing to do with taking away the right of gay people to marry – if it was they’d straight-up lose. Instead, they are offering a whole array of residual effects, like claiming that this would force homosexuality to be taught in public schools (not true) and churches will lose their tax exemptions (not true) and your son will be forced at gunpoint to gay marry the neighbor boy (not true, and not what they’re claiming, but it might as well be).

The entire point is to allow people an outlet to hide their prejudices and to make it seem like a vote to ban the protected rights of hundreds of thousands of citizens is actually a vote to protect their own rights. It’s Machiavellian and really ugly. The No side is fighting back, finally presenting a spot calling out the lies.

Until now, this had been a weird meta-campaign where nobody was talking about the real issue, just their “feelings” and their faulty assumptions of scenarios that would never happen. Hopefully this will change the debate. Because there’s a lot of concern right now. Two recent polls show Prop. 8 winning, though not over 50% yet. Their ads are having an effect and they have lots of money, a big chunk of it from Utah. The Mormon Church is trying to buy the California state Constitution and they’re sending in an amry to see to the job.

Mormons living outside California have been asked to volunteer for a telephone campaign to help pass a ballot initiative banning same-sex marriage in the state.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is part of a coalition of conservative groups backing Proposition 8, which would amend California’s constitution to limit marriage to a man and a woman.

Church elder L. Whitney Clayton said members may be asked to call friends and family at home in California before the Nov. 4 election to encourage support for the measure. The out-of-state phone campaign would be on an “if-needed” basis.

The words “tax” and “exempt” come to mind, but that’s a battle for another day. A ban in California would set the equality movement back for a long time.

California initiatives are battles waged more on the airwaves than on the ground. The No campaign has to be able to compete. If you can, donate to No on 8. That’s number one. And give some of your time. Pass around this ad from the Courage Campaign. Spread the word. We have to defeat any and all attempts to enshrine discrimination into our state constitutions.

.

Empty Suit Case

by digby

The other day, I criticized John Roberts of CNN for acting like the church lady and scolding the campaigns’ economic advisors for injecting politics into their debate. He wasn’t pleased that I called him an empty suit and wrote back to tell me that he would continue to call out these people for their bad manners. (He also forwarded some emails from his fans also congratulating him for not putting up with any guff — for some people “seriousness” is defined by how calm you are when you completely you miss the point.)

I admit that I was hard on Roberts. In fact, I edited my post substantially after I wrote it because I felt I was too rude in my criticism. The reason for this is because Roberts is a particularly offensive purveyor of Village CW. As Glenn Greenwald reminded me in an email, he is the guy who said this about the Frost family who was being stalked by right wing nuts for needing public health care for their sick child (video at the link):

CNN’s John Roberts reported: “Some of the accusations [against the Frosts] may be exaggerated or false. But did the Democrats make a tactical error in holding up Graeme as their poster child?” A CNN political analyst then placed the blame squarely on the Democrats’ shoulders:

I think in this instance what happened was the Democrats didn’t do as much of a vetting as they could have done on this young man, his situation, his family. […]

I wrote at the time:

Right. It’s the fault of the Democrats, of course, who according to John Roberts didn’t “vet” this family. Except, of course, they did, as has been incessantly disseminated by the progressive blogosphere and the mainstream media over the course of four days.

So why did Roberts say that the family hadn’t been properly vetted?

ABC News reported earlier in the week that an e-mail sent to reporters by “a Senate Republican leadership aide” in McConnell’s office suggested that “GOP aides were complicit in spreading disparaging information about the Frosts.” A McConnell spokesman refused to deny the office’s involvement in the affair. ThinkProgress has obtained an email that congressional sources tell us was sent to reporters by Sen. McConnell’s communications director Don Stewart. On Monday morning, Don Stewart sent an email with the following text to reporters:

Seen the latest blogswarm? Apparently, there’s more to the story on the kid (Graeme Frost) that did the Dems’ radio response on SCHIP. Bloggers have done a little digging and turned up that the Dad owns his own business (and the building it’s in), seems to have some commercial rental income and Graeme and a sister go to a private school that, according to its website, costs about $20k a year ‹for each kid‹ despite the news profiles reporting a family income of only $45k for the Frosts. Could the Dems really have done that bad of a job vetting this family?

In the email, Stewart attacks Democrats for allegedly doing a bad job “vetting this family.” That effort to blame Democrats for the smear campaign seems to have swayed some reporters, as CNN this morning claimed that the real story is that “the Democrats didn’t do as much of a vetting as they could have done.”

I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that Roberts used exactly the same language and then chalks it up to some sort of tepid “they all do it” sort of thing.

Aside from the almost comic illustration of journalistic malpractice this shows, it also proves what many of us have been saying for years: the press parrots right wing talking points — in this case verbatim. It’s rare that we actually can see a copy of the memos they send out, because the press “protects its sources” but it’s right there in this case. Does anyone think this is unique? I suspect that if it hadn’t been for liberal bloggers relentlessly speaking out in horror over the course of many days, this nasty little smear would have been passed along by everyone else exactly as John Roberts passed it along, implying that the Frosts were con artists.

Nice work CNN. How much are you paying this guy?

This was one of the lowest points of the right wing smear machine in recent years. Sliming that family was reprehensible. And there was our friend Mr Roberts — the new Miss Manners of CNN — blithely passing along Republican talking points, probably without even knowing what he was doing.

And then the other day other day I see him jabbering about how he wouldn’t stand for any “name calling” to two presidential economic advisers in the midst of an economic crisis — and smugly congratulating himself for keeping them in line.

Empty suit or useful idiot? You be the judge.

.

Today’s Dispatch From Torture Nation

by digby

More freedom for you and me:

Everyone’s favourite stun gun manufacturer Taser has unveiled it’s latest loving piece of “non lethal” technology, The Taser Shockwave.

The new weapon is significantly different to the Tasers currently used by police in that it has six different electrified charges and is designed to target crowds rather than individuals.

The cartridges are tethered by 25-foot wires, which can be fired from a distance of up to 100 meters in a 20-degree arc. The “probes” on the end of the cartridges can pierce through clothing and skin, emitting 50,000 volts of electricity in the process.

“Full area coverage is provided to instantaneously incapacitate multiple personnel within that region” Taser explains.

[…]

Clearly it is anticipated that these things will be used on sizable crowds, meaning an increased likelihood of indiscriminate targeting.

The Shockwave isn’t the only new development on Taser’s books either. The Extended-Range Electronic Projectile (XREP) is touted as the first electric shock weapon that can be fired from a normal gun, in this case a 12-gauge shotgun. It delivers a 20-second shock, compared with the default setting five-second shock of a traditional taser X26.

[…]

Watch a demonstration:

Both the Taser Shockwave and the XREP are scheduled to go into full production by the end of this year.

Taser has been the subject of much controversy and outrage. One year ago the UN’s Committee Against Torture issued a statement on the TaserX26, which read: “The use of TaserX26 weapons, provoking extreme pain, constituted a form of torture, and that in certain cases it could also cause death, as shown by several reliable studies and by certain cases that had happened after practical use.”

These bleeding hearts don’t seem to understand that torture isn’t torture if it doesn’t leave a mark. It isn’t even illegal for police to put 50,0000 volts of electricity to anyone they choose at any time they choose, even when people are shackled or incapacitated. There are no limits. Police are almost never even reprimanded for tasering completely innocent people.

So, I would assume that any peaceful assembly which the authorities determine needs to be dispersed (at their total discretion) will be subject to weapons like these new ones. If a few protesters get trampled, well that’s the price they pay for failing to follow orders. And if citizens understand that they will likely suffer excruciating pain when they protest, maybe they’ll think twice about doing such unamerican things in the future. After all, the police have much better things to do than waste time dealing with political activities and people shouldn’t waste the taxpayers money on this stuff in the first place.

Maybe, if we’re lucky, we can end this silly political protest business once and for all with these modern advances in mass torture. I think that’s what we call freedom.

.