Month: August 2010

Who’s Trash Talking The Imam?

by digby

Marc Ambinder takes both parties to task over the Cordoba House controversy, asking “from an ethical standpoint, which is worse: Are Republicans demagoguing the issue or are Democrats trying to stay silent because they’re afraid to engage?” I think the answer is pretty obvious, but I suppose your mileage may vary.

But I found this very puzzling. First he says this:

Stipulating that it’s OK to oppose the Ground Zero mosque, that Imam Rauf is fashionably moderate (and yet was eager to fault Americans for 9/11 and had trouble describing Hamas as a terrorist group) …. : it’s plain demagoguery to nationalize the issue.

Who but right wing demagogues have been saying that Imam Rauf is a “fashionable” moderate but was eager to to blame Americans for 9/11 and is sympathetic toward Hamas? I guess you can say that Ambinder was just stipulating this for argument’s sake, but it’s a major stipulation, especially since he later writes this in the same piece:

President Obama did not weigh in on the Cordoba House because it was a “constitutional issue.” He did so because his national security principles call for him to do everything possible to integrate American Muslims into America, and to project those actions to the world. It’s clear that he’s read up on the mosque, Imam Rauf, and the real estate machinations of lower Manhattan, and that he’s uncomfortable endorsing the decision to place a mosque near the pit.

If that’s clear, I hadn’t heard it. But then I don’t have the contacts inside the administration Ambinder has, so I’m not privy to the explanations they may be giving to journalists on the qt.

I don’t know that that’s what happened. But until now, I haven’t heard from anyone that the White House was “uncomfortable” endorsing the decision because of the Imam and real estate machinations. If that’s the case, then the president is falling for right wing clap trap. If it isn’t, then is Ambinder just making stuff up? Or is it that they are telling reporters this stuff off the record so they can get it out there that the President explicitly doesn’t endorse this project for those reasons?

Frankly until I read this it hadn’t even occurred to me that Obama actually opposed the project, much less for those reasons. I had assumed the opposite and that their decision to stay neutral on the “wisdom” of building it was an (ineffectual) attempt to stay above the fray. Even Harry Reid’s cowardly baby splitting today didn’t seem to be a comment on the merits of the project itself but merely the location. However if the White House now wants to get the word out that they aren’t endorsing because they disapprove of Imam Rauf, we are in very different territory. I sincerely hope that isn’t the case.

** There’s also Ambinder’s odd hosannas for Chris Christie’s lame statement, which Kevin Drum effectively skewers here. All in all, it’s a very strange post that raises more questions than it answers.

.

Reason, Sweet Reason

by digby

America may be awash in stupid at the moment but our neighbors to the north are still able to apply critical thinking:

The company that makes Tasers has lost its legal bid to quash a high-profile report that found the weapons can kill.The British Columbia Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a legal challenge by Taser International to overturn results of the inquiry into the death of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski.The company was trying to quash retired justice Thomas Braidwood’s findings that the weapons increase the risk of fatal heart failure.Dziekanski, 40, died on Oct. 14, 2007, at Vancouver International Airport after being Tasered five times by four RCMP officers responding to a 911 call.“Obviously I am very pleased,” said Braidwood, shortly after the decision was released Tuesday. “The court found there was fairness in the report for Taser International. They had full opportunity to present evidence.” In his report, Braidwood concluded that Taser hits contributed to Dziekanski’s death.“Conducted-energy weapons do have the capacity to cause serious injury or death,” he wrote, adding that risk increases with multiple uses, specifically when aimed at the chest near the heart

I guess he must have looked at the huge pile of dead bodies and correctly discerned that it was common sense that the fact that they were shot full of electricity just before they expired was the proximate cause of their deaths. Or perhaps it was all the medical evidence. Either way, reason prevailed. Huzzah.

Meanwhile, here in the states:

.

Who Are The Expendables?

by digby

We get lectured all the time by Democratic strategists and politicians, among others, who tell us that we shouldn’t take on Blue Dogs, that every seat is important, that the Party is a big tent that must contain different views and that we shouldn’t ever be rude to other Democrats who are just following their principles and their constituents.

Apparently, that only applies to liberals. Blue Dogs are allowed to attack other Democrats for being insufficiently bigoted and still get rewarded with millions of dollars from the Party’s donors.

Here’s Howie:

As we pointed out over the weekend, despite Pelosi’s efforts to tamp it down, the Blue Dogs are going on the warpath against progressive Democrats, using Henry Waxman’s interview with The Hill as an excuse. One thing we can always be sure of inside the Democratic Caucus– well, two, actually: Blue Dogs will always put self-preservation above the party’s principles, and the DCCC will do whatever it can to help them get re-elected.

Giffords is emblematic of the tragic turn the House Democratic Party has taken. Over the weekend she launched a $350,000 ad buy in the Tucson media market that slams the principled stand Grijalva took against SB1070– throwing him directly under the bus in order to make herself look sufficiently xenophobic for the bloodthirsty Know Nothing mobs. As you can see in the ad, she makes a solemn vow to fight “these groups” who have protested this unjust law by boycotting the state. “These groups” include Latinos, liberals, and citizens across the country who know an injustice when they see one. She’s directly targeting Grijalva, Arizona’s most progressive leader and the Congressman who most consistently stands up for those who are hurt by the right wing’s agenda.

Howie’s sources have told him that many people in the Party tried to dissuade Gifford from doing this but she was backed up by the DCCC.

There’s a reason for it though, which Howie alluded to in that excerpt. Grijalva is the head of the Progressive Caucus, which is making strides to becoming an effective voting bloc in the House. Lots of people want to strangle this piece of progressive infrastructure before it starts seriously interfering with their simple collection of large sums from America’s owners. Allowing Giffords to make a low blow against Grijalva is about much more than just Arizona politics.

And, even if it weren’t, Grijalva has a tough race too. Evidently, he’s expendable. Howie concludes with this:

Raúl needs help fighting back, and Blue America is asking supporters to donate to the OneAmerica page so he has the funds necessary to defend himself.

Minutes before publishing time I reached Raúl in Tucson and I was surprised to find him in such a determined mood. “I kind of feel like a character in the movie The Expendables, he told me. “In an effort to maintain their presence in Congress, Blue Dogs are throwing progressives under the bus. I find it disheartening and, quite frankly, I am embarrassed as a Democrat. In their effort to be Republicans, Blue Dogs often paint progressives as expendable. They’re going to find out that we definitely are not.”

Keep in mind that Grijalva is not just a progressive leader, he’s one of the most visible Hispanic leaders in the Democratic party. The DC functionaries my think he’s expendable, but they should think long and hard about whether or not they want to take his constituency for granted by backing Blue Dogs who are hostile to immigrants. It’s about as short sighted as it gets.

You can donate to Grijalva here

.

Where’s Boehner?

by digby

.

They Were Asking For It

by digby

Jack Cafferty just asked the question:

Are Muslims buying themselves unnecessary problems by insisting on building a mosque near Ground Zero in New York?

This is a familiar refrain going way back. I recall Breitbart recently saying that John Lewis and Emmanuel Cleaver were looking to “provoke” the teabaggers by walking through the crowd. You know how these you-know-whats are. They’re always trying to trap racists and xenophobes into doing something racist and xenophobic. And then they get all mad and stuff.

This is why ghettoes and camps are so practical in these situations. It keeps the hated people from asking for trouble by walking among those who hate them. When you think about it, it’s really doing them a favor.

And by all means when genocidal maniacs start shrieking, you should immediately retreat and let them have their way. Isn’t that what the Churchill worshipping conservative patriots have been preaching for the past 50 years? Plus religious freedom, of course. That too.

.

The Mainstreaming Of Crazy Just Went Nuclear

by digby

“We have a President who is literally paving the way for an Islamic state in America” Atlas Shrugs VLOG July 2009

This Salon chronology of the Cordoba House controversy shows that it really is a one woman freakshow, led by none of the than Pamela “Atlas Shrugs” Geller. I went back in my archives to find the first time I became aware of her, and it turns out it was in 2005. Here was what I posted:

I see we have a wingnut blogger on the scene who goes by the name of “Atlas” (for Atlas Shrugged, natch.) She posts on Jackson’s Junction. She’s much more thoughtful than the e-mailer above, plus she posts a glamor shot of herself with each entry (that you can click for higher res!) Here’s a taste:

War Must be Declared on those Against us

Pamela aka Atlas says BASTA! Enough hand holding, appeasing, talking “their”talk……….

THE BUSH DOCTRINE…………….either you’re with us or against us

I say, first Declare War on Syria with our Coalition (Brits, Japanese, Baltic Nations, Israel, Australia) with a tactical approach to moving into Iran. The young people Of Iran (75% of the population) will rise and fight with us.

You can’t say she isn’t consistent.

And she’s always had friends in high places. My favorite Atlas moment was her up close and personal interview in 2006 with neocon fruitcake John Bolton when he was the UN Ambassador:

What I most admire about John Bolton is his steely demeanor and moral clarity. His spectacular fortitude in the face of scoundrels, liars, and internationally sanctioned criminals never fails to surprise and delight me. What was completely unexpected was the other side of Bolton. He was funny, thoughtful, deliberate. I really enjoyed the chat. Atlas: If I could I’d like to talk about you. [he is looking at me askance, laughing here] What formed you……….what is your favorite book? JB: That’s a good question actually. I’d say one of the things that made a big impression on me was Edmund Burke’s book Reflections on the Revolution in France and I’ve read a lot of John Locke and that had a big impact on me and Ayn Rand. Atlas: You’re just saying that to make me feel better…….. JB: No it’s true. Atlas: Growing up, were you one of many? JB: No, I had one sister, nine years younger. Atlas: So you were the oldest. Your parents were tough? Encouraging? Non approving?Trying to figure out where you developed that spine of yours……..I find that quality rare. There’s a lot of it in that administration. JB: My father was a firefighter in the city of Baltimore, my mother was a housewife. Atlas: YAY, the great American story.[…]

JB: Oh its do-able, under the right circumstances. I’m not so naive that I would be doing it if I didn’t think there was a chance which makes it in some senses more frustrating. You can see sometimes how close you can get and yet you can’t finish a particular thing. Like Iran, I’ve been working on this for three and a half years Atlas: And you’ll be working on it for three and half more. JOB: I hope not, I hope not because now that it’s in the Security Council, now is the time to say this is their chance that either they give up their pursuit of nuclear weapons or we go to what the President said, we do something else. Atlas: We do something else? That’s a little vague, don’t you think? Deliberately vague? JB: Yeah, sure absolutely. The President said I never take options off the table. And you’ve got to be that way. Look this has happened to me enough times before …. if I said, well — I’ll give you an example……after the invasion of Iraq, after Saddam was overthrown I said something in a BBC interview like I hope the governments of Syria and Iran take notice of what’s just happened and I got into enormous trouble for that because it sounded like I was threatening the invasion of Iran and Syria. Atlas: yeah but you get in enormous trouble for waking up in the morning JB: Well that’s true too. to be continued More to come guys, but right now I am going to take a break, head downstairs, meet up with some AIPAC folks, and have me a glass of pinot noir…………I’ve had it. Long day. But great.

The interview continues with Pamela cooing some more about Big John’s manly, macho manhood between asides about vaporizing Iran and nuclear holocaust. It’s very hot.

But there is nothing more indicative of Atlas’s unique contribution to political discourse than this Youtube of her bikini clad self in in the surf talking her special brand of politics on a vacation to Israel. It think it captures the real her. (And you can’t deny that she has a slammin’ bod.)

But there are so many “Vlogs” to choose from, that it’s a shame to pick just one. This one pledging her troth to Sarah Palin is filled with notable quotes, like the one featured at the beginning of this post:

“Sarah Palin is not a full of shitnick” should be her 2012 campaign slogan.

.

Button Up

by digby

Howard Fineman almost has a moment of clarity:

If we had any sense, the fall elections would be about just one thing: the economy. But we do not have any sense. We are facing what Wall Street would call the “triple witching hour.” Republicans have their finger on three social-demographic hot buttons. The first is illegal immigration (in proposing a review of the 14th Amendment), and the second is Islam in America (in objecting to the mosque at ground zero). They won’t be able to avoid pushing the third, race, even if they wanted to, given that the two leading congressional Democrats facing ethics charges are African-American.

Uh, Howard. It’s the same button.

Lee Atwater observed long ago that the right needed to develop racist dog-whistles once it became publicly and legally unacceptable to express racist sentiments. There have been many permutations over the years. There’s always something.

Here’s how I like to put it:

1955 – They are an inferior race
1965 – They are lazy workers
1975 – They make old white customers uncomfortable
1985 – Affirmative action means their diplomas are bogus
1995 – They are a litigation risk for discrimination claims
2005 – They are racists who discriminate against white people

Now we have a black president and he is widely believed to be a secret Muslim, thus conflating the terrorist threat with white fears of black and brown social equality.

It’s getting more desperate and bizarre, which I think would surprise even Atwater, who assumed it would die out as it became more obscure. But it’s still there and it still has power, particularly in a right wing populist framework.

I’m a little surprised at how crude it is, but unleashed beasts tend not to have many social graces.

.

Scandal Pimp

by digby

Darrel Issa’s going to be a lot of fun with subpoena power, isn’t he? Here’s the latest “scandal” he’s pimping:

Darrell Issa is out with a report this morning claiming that the Obama Administration has engaged in an unprecedented amount of illegal propaganda. The charge is almost undoubtedly true: As the report drily catalogues, virtually every 20th Century administration, particularly in wartime, skirted the limits on propaganda. The first administration fully in the new media age produces a far, far larger volume of media than any of its predecessors, and Issa argues that some of it crosses the line. One puzzling footnote: Issa’s report includes the claim, floated on the right but never substantiated, that Justice Department blogger Tracy Russo posted anonymous comments to conservative blogs. If she did, that could qualify as propaganda. (Though perhaps its single least effectual form. Anonymous blog comments!)

Tracy, be sure to wear something conservative for your hearings and Grand Jury appearances.

What’s most impressive about Issa is how he’s managed to piggyback on vague public knowledge of huge scandals in the Bush administration and apply them to Democrats. (Sestak, this one.)

Basically, he’s going to go after propaganda, including anonymous blog posts, when this wasn’t even considered worthy of further investigation. I’m sure he knows that people are vaguely aware of this and other scandals like the Armstrong Williams case, but don’t know the details. So he’ll apply that awareness to this new “scandal” and everyone will say “it’s about time they got to the bottom of this!” It’s good politics for them — for a while. He’ll keep the Democrats constantly on defense and the media entertained with trivia.

But it has its limits, even in good times. Right now, I don’t know how well this will play. But it might play very well. Isn’t it a truism that during the Depression everyone wanted light entertainment to take their mind off their troubles?

.

A Glimpse Of The Future

by digby

Why do I have the feeling that ignoring this is a huge practical and moral mistake?

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon met Sunday with Pakistan’s president, and both men urged the international community to step up efforts to help the millions affected by flooding in Pakistan…

He said he has visited scenes of natural disasters worldwide, but has seen “nothing like this. The scale of the disaster is so large — so many people and in so many places, in so much need.”

“Thousands of towns and villages have simply been washed away,” Ban said. “Roads, buildings, bridges, crops — millions of livelihoods have been lost. People are marooned on tiny islands with the floodwaters all around them. They are drinking dirty water. They are living in the mud and ruins of their lives. Many have lost family and friends. Many more are afraid their children and loved ones will not survive in these conditions.”

When you read about the effects of climate change, you see these moving maps where large parts of the land mass become submerged and you think, “boy that’s really something.” But what this shows is the depth of human misery that mass flooding causes. And the probability that this will be happening with frequency and sometimes simultaneously going forward is quite high. What that translates into, aside from the aforementioned human misery, is political instability, mass migration and social upheaval. This is a peek at our future, and it’s happening in one of the most dangerous places on earth.

I hope somebody’s paying attention because we certainly aren’t.

.

Catch-22 21st Century Style

by digby

Why does everything have to be so damned hard?

At the height of the Iraq war, the Army routinely dismissed hundreds of soldiers for having a personality disorder when they were more likely suffering from the traumatic stresses of war, discharge data suggests.

[…]

Unlike PTSD, which the Army regards as a treatable mental disability caused by the acute stresses of war, the military designation of a personality disorder can have devastating consequences for soldiers.

Defined as a “deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior,” a personality disorder is considered a “pre-existing condition” that relieves the military of its duty to pay for the person’s health care or combat-related disability pay.

According to figures provided by the Army, the service discharged about a 1,000 soldiers a year between 2005 and 2007 for having a personality disorder.

But after an article in The Nation magazine exposed the practice, the Defense Department changed its policy and began requiring a top-level review of each case to ensure post-traumatic stress or a brain injury wasn’t the underlying cause.

After that, the annual number of personality disorder cases dropped by 75 percent. Only 260 soldiers were discharged on those grounds in 2009.

At the same time, the number of post-traumatic stress disorder cases has soared. By 2008, more than 14,000 soldiers had been diagnosed with PTSD — twice as many as two years before.

The Army attributes the sudden and sharp reduction in personality disorders to its policy change. Yet Army officials deny that soldiers were discharged unfairly, saying they reviewed the paperwork of all deployed soldiers dismissed with a personality disorder between 2001 and 2006.

The story chronicles the ridiculous Catch-22 situation these vets are in, many of them suffering from traumatic brain injury (another horror story of the Iraq and Afghan wars.)

We went through this in Vietnam with Agent Orange and it caused huge amounts of needless pain for thousands of veterans and their families. It takes years to sort out and in the end it’s always determined that a bunch of people suffered and were denied help for no good reason.

It’s five thousand people at mos. Just cover them. Even if a few of them were legitimately messed up before they went in, you know damned well, they were worse off when they came out. And since there’s no way to really know, just cover them all. They’re vets. They need treatment, give it to them. It won’t cost more than one useless airplane to cover them all for the rest of their lives.

.