Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

More Civility

by digby

I had read about this nonsense before, but the whole story hadn’t emerged. This is dipshit America in a nutshell:

KATY, Texas (AP) — A man unhappy with an Islamic association’s plans to build a mosque next to his property has staged pig races as a protest during afternoon prayers.

Craig Baker, 46, sold merchandise and grilled sausages Friday for about 100 people who showed up in heavy rain. He insisted he wasn’t trying to offend anyone with the pigs, which are forbidden from the Muslim diet.

“I am just defending my rights and my property,” Baker said. “They totally disrespected me and my family.”

Muslims don’t hate pigs, they just don’t eat them, said engineer Kamel Fotouh, president of the 500-member Katy Islamic Association in this Houston suburb.

“I don’t care if he races, roasts or slaughters pigs,” said Yousef Allam, a spokesman for the group.

The dispute began when the association asked Baker to remove his cattle from its newly bought land. The association plans to build a mosque, community center, athletic facilities and a school.

Baker agreed to move his cattle but thought the Muslims also wanted him off the land his family has lived on for more than 100 years.

Earlier this month, Baker conceded that the Muslims probably aren’t after his land, but he said he had to go through with the pig races because “I would be like a total idiot if I didn’t. I’d be the laughingstock now because I’ve gone too far.”

All the same, Baker plans to continue the weekly pig races until interest dwindles.

The association never meant to imply it wanted Baker to move, Allam said.

“If we somehow communicated that to him, then we apologize,” he said.

Resident Susan Canavespe said the pig racing wasn’t mean-spirited — “It’s just Texas-spirited.”

Texas-stupid.

Good thing we’re exporting our superior civilization and culture all over the world, huh? I can’t imagine why they aren’t more grateful.

Update: Speaking of pigs, a reader reminds me of this earlier embarrassment:

“I understand I may have the honor of slicing the pig,” Bush said at a news conference earlier in the day punctuated with questions about spreading violence in the Middle East and an intensifying standoff with Iran about nuclear power.

The president’s host, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, started a serious ball rolling at this news conference in the 13th-century town hall on the cobblestone square of Stralsund. But Bush seemed more focused on “the feast” promised later.

“Thanks for having me,” Bush told the chancellor. “I’m looking forward to that pig tonight.”

[…]

“Apart from the pig, Mr. President, what sort of insights have you been able to gain as regards East Germany?” a German reporter asked.

“I haven’t seen the pig yet,” Bush said, sidestepping the question about insights gained from his two-day visit to this rural seaside region that once rested behind the Iron Curtain.

And when an American reporter asked whether Bush is concerned about the Israeli bombing of the Beirut airport and about Iran’s failure to respond to an offer for negotiations, Bush replied with more boar jokes before delving into the substance of the questions.

“I thought you were going to ask about the pig,” said the president. “I’ll tell you about the pig tomorrow.”

.

Courtesy

by digby

It was interesting listening to Dick Cheney pay tribute to Gerald Ford for his civility yesterday at the memorial service. He said “he answered courtesy with courtesy and discourtesy with courtesy.”

As I’m sure you’ve all noticed, Republicans are talking about civility almost non-stop these days and so is the media. Everyone agrees that now that the Democrats won it’s time to bind the nation’s wounds once again and move into the future without dwelling on past unpleasantness. The Dems need to learn some of that Ford Administration courtesy:

On Tuesday, Cheney, serving in his role as president of the Senate, appeared in the chamber for a photo session. A chance meeting with Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, became an argument about Cheney’s ties to Halliburton Co., an international energy services corporation, and President Bush’s judicial nominees. The exchange ended when Cheney offered some crass advice.

“Fuck yourself,” said the man who is a heartbeat from the presidency.

Leahy’s spokesman, David Carle, yesterday confirmed the brief but fierce exchange. “The vice president seemed to be taking personally the criticism that Senator Leahy and others have leveled against Halliburton’s sole-source contracts in Iraq,” Carle said.

As it happens, the exchange occurred on the same day the Senate passed legislation described as the “Defense of Decency Act” by 99 to 1.

Cheney’s office did not deny that the phrase was uttered. His spokesman, Kevin S. Kellems, would say only that this language is not typical of the vice presidential vocabulary. “Reserving the right to revise and extend my remarks, that doesn’t sound like language the vice president would use,” Kellems said, “but there was a frank exchange of views.”

Gleeful Democrats pointed out that the White House has not always been so forgiving of obscenity. In December, Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry was quoted using the same word in describing Bush’s Iraq policy as botched. The president’s chief of staff reacted with indignation.

“That’s beneath John Kerry,” Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. said. “I’m very disappointed that he would use that kind of language. I’m hoping that he’s apologizing at least to himself, because that’s not the John Kerry that I know.”

[…]

Tuesday’s exchange began when Leahy crossed the aisle at the photo session and joked to Cheney about being on the Republican side, according to Carle. Then Cheney, according to Carle, “lashed into” Leahy for remarks he made Monday criticizing Iraq contracts won without competitive bidding by Halliburton, Cheney’s former employer.

[…]

Republicans did their best to defend the vice president. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), while pointing out that he was unaware of the incident, described Cheney as “very honest” and said: “I don’t blame anyone for standing up for his integrity.”

As Cheney said of Ford, “there are worse things to be remembered for than your capacity to forgive,” which is really moving coming from an honest, courteous, man of integrity like him. Surely we can do no less than Ford did and give a blanket pardon to the Republicans for their truly egregious, illegal behavior once again. Isn’t that how it works?

BTW: Did anyone notice that Junior apparently can’t bring himself to cut short his vacation to attend these various state funeral ceremonies? He’ll roll back into town on Tuesday for the big one. He’s tired. He spent three whole hours talking with his advisors about Iraq.

.

Saturday Night At The Movies

Crossover Dreams: Borderline Cinema

By Dennis Hartley

The spirit of Sam Peckinpah lives on (sans slo-mo) in The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada. First-time director Tommy Lee Jones casts himself as a contemporary Texas cowboy named Pete who befriends a Mexican “vaquero” (the namesake of the movie’s title). Estrada is an illegal looking for steady work and a brighter future here in the land o’plenty. Jones utilizes flashbacks to illustrate the growing kinship between the two compadres, who bond in the usual “cowboy way”-drinkin’ and whorin’, sleeping under the stars, and reaching a general consensus that A Cowboy’s Life Is The Life For Me (as a great man once sang.) In the key vignette, Estrada confides that, if “something” should ever happen to him, he wishes to be buried in his home town. In half-drunken sentiment, Pete vows to see it through if the unthinkable happens. Guess what happens next?

When Estrada is mysteriously killed, Pete becomes incensed by the indifference of the local authorities, who seem reluctant to investigate. When he learns through the grapevine that his friend was the victim of negligent homicide, thanks to a boneheaded border patrol officer (Barry Pepper), he goes ballistic. He abducts the officer, forces him to dig up the hastily buried Estrada, and informs him that the three amigos are taking a little horseback trip to Mexico (and it ain’t gonna be anything like Weekend at Bernie’s).

Much unpleasantness ensues as the story evolves into a “man on a mission to fulfill an oath” tale…on the surface. Despite the simplistic setup, astute viewers will begin to realize that there is a deeper, mythic subtext; this is one of those films that can really sneak up on you. Although my initial reaction was more visceral than philosophical (I didn’t find any of the characters particularly likeable, it started to feel overlong, and I was repulsed by some of the more graphic scenes) I eventually realized that I had just been taken on an Orphic journey, and it suddenly all made sense. The film gives you hope that, despite the rampant cynicism that abounds in this world, there is something to be said for holding true to a personal code that covets friendship, loyalty and a deep sense of honor.

In today’s climate of post 9/11 paranoia, and self-appointed “minutemen” who “guard” our borders, it’s a damn shame more Americans haven’t seen the 1983 “American Playhouse” drama El Norte, which is only available on Australian PAL DVD (Wha?!). Gregory Nava’s highly effective portrait of two Guatemalan siblings wending their way to the U.S. after their activist father is killed by a government death squad will stay with you long after credits roll. The two leads give naturalistic, completely believable performances as the brother and sister whose desperate optimism never falters, despite fate and circumstance thwarting them at every turn. Claustrophobic viewers be warned: a harrowing scene featuring an encounter with a roving rat colony during an underground border crossing though an abandoned sewer will give you nightmares. And don’t expect a Hollywood ending-this is tough going but thoroughly enlightening. Worth tracking down.

It’s a Lou Dobbs film festival! Try these: Maria Full of Grace, The Border, Lone Star, Touch of Evil, Border Incident.

On the lighter side: Born In East L.A.

Also…

R.I.P. Peter Boyle

According to the perfunctory news obits that aired recently, one might get the impression that the only claims to fame for the late Peter Boyle were his roles in Young Frankenstein, Taxi Driver and on TV’s Everybody Loves Raymond. He may not have been a big marquee name, and may have made a few ill-advised career moves (Where the Buffalo Roam comes to mind) but he was a dependable character actor who always left an indelible impression. Here is some of the Boyle legacy worth revisiting:

Joe-Although the socio-political rhetoric in this 1970 sleeper hasn’t dated so well, this was the starring role that first put Boyle on the map.

The Candidate-Boyle is in top form here as Robert Redford’s savvy political campaign advisor. Boyle delivers a number of wonderfully droll asides with perfect timing.

The Friends of Eddie Coyle (TV only)-A tough, realistic 1973 noir that cries out for a DVD release. Robert Mitchum stars, but Boyle excels as a two-faced, low-rent hit man.

Death and the Compass-This obscure crime thriller (set in a dystopian future) from director Alex Cox is a hit-and-miss affair, but Boyle’s intriguing character fascinates.

The X-Files – The Complete Third Season (Slim Set)-Worth renting just to watch the episode “Clyde Bruckman’s Final Repose”, a fan favorite that spotlights a memorable Boyle performance.

-DH

.

More Fun With Herblock

by poputonian

We posted this a year ago and I thought anyone who missed it might enjoy the not-so-instant replay. I wrote it in response to some smartass on another blog who claimed that Bush wasn’t the first prezninent to claim the right of extra-legal power in order to wiretap the citizens.

You are absolutely right to point out that Bush is not the first president to use the wiretap illegally. At least one past president confronted matters of grave national security by shifting the legal locus of control to his own domain. He understood how secret spy programs were necessary to preserve this great nation of his. He believed that citizens would willfully surrender their liberties to him, and he knew the threat constituted by a hostile media, and he knew what to do about it. He also understood how to make a nation of bedwetters feel more secure. But his theory died when an activist judge ruled against the argument of executive privilege, a ruling which was later upheld by the Supreme Court. By then, what might be called ‘harangue fatigue’ was creeping into the American living room and, frankly, people were sensing that they had reached their limit.

All of which now necessitates an illusory extra-legal theory in regard to what the founders really meant when they designed our system of government. Let’s call it — ‘The Separation of Powers, Except‘ — clause to the Constitution. Naturally, it would tip off the enemy if this extra-legal power was stated directly in the Constitution, so what the founders did was they cloaked it in mysterious ambiguity so only a future right-wing ideologue could detect its presence. But make no doubt about it, as a previous Chief Executive had ascertained, a very close reading of the Constitution shows the founders’ original intent, and it was as plain as the ski-nose on his face. It really does give the president extra-legal power, in spite of what the courts ruled.

December, 2006

by digby

US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
UK NAME NOT RELEASED YET Basra – Basrah Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Baghdad (north of) Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant Edward W. Shaffer Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Corporal Christopher Esckelson Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Lance Corporal William C. Koprince Jr. Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
LAT dižkareivis Vitalijs Vasiljevs Diwaniyah (near) – Qadisiyah Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
LAT dižkareivis Gints Bleija Diwaniyah (near) – Qadisiyah Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Douglas L. Tinsley Baghdad (South of) – Babil Non-hostile – vehicle rollover
US Specialist Joseph A. Strong Baghdad (South of) – Babil Non-hostile – vehicle rollover
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Baghdad (northwest of) Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Baghdad (northwest of) Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Baghdad (northwest of) Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Corporal Joshua M. Schmitz Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Sergeant John T. Bubeck Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Captain Hayes Clayton Balad – Salah ad Din Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant 1st Class Dexter E. Wheelous Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant Jae S. Moon Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Private Eric R. Wilkus Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. – Baghdad Non-hostile
US Specialist Aaron L. Preston Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Private 1st Class Andrew H. Nelson Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant Jason C. Denfrund Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Private Evan A. Bixler Hit – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – indirect fire
US Lance Corporal Stephen L. Morris Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Michael J. Crutchfield Balad (Camp Anaconda) – Salah ad Din Non-hostile
US Specialist John Barta Buhritz – Diyala Hostile – hostile fire – indirect fire
US Specialist Chad J. Vollmer Salman Pak – Babil Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Private 1st Class Wilson A. Algrim Salman Pak – Babil Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Private Bobby Mejia II Salman Pak – Babil Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant Curtis L. Norris Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Elias Elias Baghdad (southwest of) Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Joshua D. Sheppard Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire
US Lance Corporal Fernando S. Tamayo Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Lance Corporal Ryan J. Burgess Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Lance Corporal Ryan L. Mayhan Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Hospitalman Kyle A. Nolen Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Lance Corporal Myles Cody Sebastien Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Specialist Scott D. Dykman Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Staff Sergeant Jacob G. McMillan Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire, IED
US Specialist Robert J. Volker Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US NAME NOT RELEASED YET Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Specialist Andrew P. Daul Hit – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Corporal Joshua D. Pickard Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Captain Kevin M. Kryst Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire – mortar attack
US Staff Sergeant Brian L. Mintzlaff Taji – Baghdad Non-hostile – vehicle rollover
US Private 1st Class Seth M. Stanton Taji (Died in Balad) – Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Lance Corporal Nick J. Palmer Fallujah – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – sniper fire
US Private 1st Class Joe L. Baines Taji – Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Staff Sergeant David R. Staats Taji – Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Matthew J. Stanley Taji – Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Staff Sergeant Henry K. Kahalewai Brooke Army Med Center, TX – Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Private 1st Class Paul Balint Jr. Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire
US Staff Sergeant Theodore A. Spatol Thermopolis Non-hostile – illness
US Lance Corporal Luke C. Yepsen Fallujah – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire
US Lance Corporal Matthew W. Clark Albu Hayatt – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Major Gloria D. Davis Baghdad Non-hostile
US Sergeant Brent W. Dunkleberger Mosul – Ninawa Hostile – hostile fire – RPG attack
US Lance Corporal Budd M. Cote Khaldiyah – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Corporal Matthew V. Dillon Khaldiyah – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Lance Corporal Clinton J. Miller Khaldiyah – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Master Sergeant Brian P. McAnulty Al Anbar Province Non-hostile – helicopter crash
US Staff Sergeant Thomas W. Clemons Diwaniyah (near) – Qadisiyah Non-hostile – illness – heart attack
US Private 1st Class Shawn M. Murphy Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Philip C. Ford Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant Brennan C. Gibson Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Nicholas P. Steinbacher Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US 1st Lieutenant Nathan M. Krissoff Al Taqaddum – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Lance Corporal Brent E. Beeler Fallujah – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire
US Staff Sergeant Henry W. Linck Baghdad (South of) Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Micah S. Gifford Baghdad (South of) Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Staff Sergeant Kristofer R. Ciraso Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Nicholas R. Gibbs Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire
US Lance Corporal Cody G. Watson Fallujah – Anbar Non-hostile
US Sergeant Yevgeniy Ryndych Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Private 1st Class Travis C. Krege Hawijah – At-Ta’mim Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Yari Mokri Hawijah – At-Ta’mim Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Jason Huffman Hawijah – At-Ta’mim Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant Jesse J.J. Castro Hawijah – At-Ta’mim Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant Joshua B. Madden Hawijah – At-Ta’mim Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Captain Travis L. Patriquin Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Vincent J. Pomante III Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Corporal Dustin J. Libby Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire
US Major Megan M. McClung Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Jordan W. Hess Brooke Army Med Center, TX – At-Ta’mim Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Marco L. Miller Landstuhl Reg. Med. Ctr. – Salah ad Din Hostile – hostile fire – indirect fire
US Private 1st Class Roger A. Suarez-Gonzalez Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire
US Private 1st Class Albert M. Nelson Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – small arms fire
US Lance Corporal Thomas P. Echols Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire
US Hospitalman Christopher A. Anderson Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire
US Sergeant Jay R. Gauthreaux Ba’qubah (died in Balad) – Diyala Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Nicholas D. Turcotte An Nasiriyah – Dhi Qar Non-hostile – vehicle accident
US Private Ross A. McGinnis Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – grenade
US Specialist Dustin M. Adkins Haditha – Anbar Non-hostile – helicopter crash
US Captain Shawn L. English Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Corporal Joshua C. Sticklen Haditha – Anbar Non-hostile – helicopter crash
US Major Joseph Trane McCloud Haditha – Anbar Non-hostile – helicopter crash
US Captain Kermit O. Evans Haditha – Anbar Non-hostile – helicopter crash
US Private Troy D. Cooper Balad – Salah ad Din Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Kenneth W. Haines Abu Hishma (died in Balad) – Salah ad Din Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Corporal Billy B. Farris Taji – Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Lance Corporal Jesse D. Tillery Al Anbar Province Hostile – hostile fire
US Specialist Corey J. Rystad Fallujah – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Specialist Bryan T. McDonough Fallujah – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Sergeant Keith E. Fiscus Taji (near) – Baghdad Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack
US Staff Sergeant Robert L. Love Jr. Ramadi – Anbar Hostile – hostile fire – IED attack

Total 110 | US: 107 | UK: 1 | Other: 2

In Iraq today we have a responsibility to do what is strategically and morally right for our nation over the long term — not what appears easier in the short term. The daily scenes of death and destruction are heartbreaking and infuriating. But there is no better strategic and moral alternative for America than standing with the moderate Iraqis until the country is stable and they can take over their security. Rather than engaging in hand-wringing, carping or calls for withdrawal, we must summon the vision, will and courage to take the difficult and decisive steps needed for success and, yes, victory in Iraq. That will greatly advance the cause of moderation and freedom throughout the Middle East and protect our security at home. Joseph Lieberman

Very brave, Joe. Very inspiring. We’ll all try to contain our “handwringing, carping and calls for withdrawal” as we view the “infuriating” scenes of “death and destruction” … and that list of names of our fellow Americans. Instead, we’ll all clap our hands and join you in Neverland.

Via Kos.

Ugh

by digby

In the early days of the war you’ll recall that there were a spate of beheadings in Iraq which were videotaped and circulated on the internet. I stupidly watched one of them and wrote:

I watched the video of Berg’s beheading and it literally made me sick to my stomach. Do not watch it. It’s a barbaric, horrible display of inhumanity. I wish I hadn’t seen it. I’ll never forget it.

I’m sure the same people who couldn’t stop watching that footage — ostensibly because they were outraged by the atrocity — are enjoying this footage of Saddam going to his death today. They aren’t all that different. There’s the same sense of frenetic excitement among the executioners, the same vivid emotion, the same fear in the soon to be executed man’s face. I’m hard pressed to say how that kangaroo court and this rushed, chaotic execution represents something so different. Saddam was undoubtedly a guilty man — but the execution was done with the same symbolic purpose — and in much the same style — as those psychos who executed Nick Berg on camera and then ghoulishly passed around the video to make their political point.

This video illuminates what I hate about the death penalty. In my name, whether just or unjust, the state is killing another human being, not in self defense or in the process of a (just) war. It is done with the prisoner completely helpless, tied down and knowing he is about to be killed. Regardless of whether that person deserves to die or not, the state (us) becomes a pre-meditated, cold-blooded murderer when we do it. Two wrongs don’t make a right and all that.

This half-assed, jailhouse execution by what appear to be a bunch of random thugs in leather jackets and black hoods milling around the prisoner, puts the final coda to our pretentions of helping the Iraqis build a civilized society.

.

What Is A Lynching?

Hear about it from an eighty-six year old with a PhD in Humanities. He was at this scene in Marion, Indiana on August 6, 1930. (NOTE: The audio does not contain graphic detail, but is a very moving testimonial.)

Saving Us From Ourselves

by digby

A reader reminded me that Atrios wrote this other other day and I think it’s worth discussing a little bit more:

As Yglesias says, the only alternative to a full and blanket pardon wasn’t putting Nixon in chains, though that was a possibility. The important thing was to find out the truth. Our elites repeatedly redefine “getting past it” as “sweeping it under the rug” based on their apparent opinion of themselves as necessary moral and spiritual leaders for the riffraff. If they are revealed to be greatly flawed then without them as a shining beacon to light the way the riffraff will go astray and the country will collapse.

They are our betters and we need them they think, and so their class must be preserved even if the occasional unpleasantness must be swept under the rug.

There is a very recent example of that very thing. On election night 2000 as the CNN crew sat in the studio discussing whether Al Gore was going to retract his concession, what comes out of John King’s mouth?

SHAW: Were I Al Gore, I don’t think I’d be that terribly much in a hurry to rush out there and make the concession. This has to be one of the most difficult things in this man’s life.

KING: Intensely frustrating. You know, historically, when Richard Nixon lost in 1960, he was urged by many people to challenge the vote in Illinois. And he decided in the end not to do it because he said he didn’t want to create a constitutional crisis.

Yes, that good man Richard Nixon waa a big enough man to spare the country such an ordeal. Would Al Gore do the same?

The next day:

SCHNEIDER (voice-over): The Gore campaign points to the highly unlikely results in Palm Beach County, Florida, which suggests a high level of voter confusion over the ballot. Florida has already undertaken a recount as required by law when the results are so close. If the Gore campaign undertakes a legal challenge to the results in Florida, that could open the floodgates to legal challenges by the Bush campaign all over the country.

[…]

SCHNEIDER: What we are seeing is a dangerous politicization of the vote-counting process. Each candidate has to ask himself: How much is winning this election really worth? Is it worth creating a constitutional crisis? Is it worth undermining your ability to unite the country?

Soon, we had this:

The Bush administration argued from the beginning that: “Further recounts could unnecessarily delay the elections process, potentially leading to a federal constitutional crisis.”

A week later, we had worked our way up to this:

WOODRUFF: Well, it has been a full week since Election Day and there is still no official word on the winner. Coming up, our Jeff Greenfield takes on the question of whether Election 2000 has reached crisis stage.

[…]

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SENIOR ANALYST: “Constitutional crisis.” It’s a tempting phrase to utter. It carries with it its own sense of importance, like “defining moment.” But is this a crisis? Could it turn into one? Well, to use another tempting phrase, it depends upon what the meaning of crisis is.

(voice-over): Now here’s a real crisis in the making. October, 1973: President Nixon fires Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in the midst of his investigation into Watergate. The attorney general and his top deputy leave rather than fire Cox. Federal agents seal off the special prosecutor’s office. Could a president shut off an inquiry into his own behavior? It didn’t happen.

A firestorm of public pressure forced Nixon to name a successor, Leon Jaworski, who demanded of Nixon those famous secret tape recordings. And that could have triggered a real constitutional crisis when a unanimous Supreme Court ordered Nixon to turn over the tapes. Suppose he had refused. One branch of government defying the order of another. But it didn’t happen. Nixon turned the tapes over. The smoking gun of a cover-up was disclosed and the president resigned.

But this? Not even close, yet. What you have so far is the messy, inefficient business of vote counts. Instead of troops in the capitol, you’ve got lawyers in the courts. Instead of mobs in the street, street theater, and folks with a little too much time on their hands.

(on camera): So, could this turn into a crisis? Of course we’re not talking about anyone seizing political power or some adversary from abroad sailing up the Potomac, but we could be talking about a transfer of power tainted by charges of foul play.

An angry challenge to the electoral vote when the new Congress convenes in January; a bitter refusal of the losing side to acknowledge the victor’s right to govern; a new Congress that, for all the talk of cooperation, is frozen into inaction by a sense of icy bitterness that’s grown over the past 20 years.

A crisis? Maybe not. But as an unhappy ending to the end of all of this, that will do.

Oh my God! Finally this:

SIMON: But back to this question about frenzy and orgy. I think really the one phrase that is overused and seriously overused by the media is constitutional crisis.

EDWARDS: Yes.

SIMON: We do not have a constitutional crisis. A constitutional crisis…

KURTZ: We could have one by Tuesday.

SIMON: … No we won’t. A constitutional crisis is that one of these guys, Bush or Gore, says, “I’m not listening to the Supreme Court. I’m showing up on January 20. And everyone who believes in me show up with me.”

KURTZ: Right.

SIMON: If Nixon hadn’t turned over the tapes, that’s a constitutional crisis. Everybody here is following the rule of law. It is the opposite of a crisis.

KURTZ: Well…

EDWARDS: Well, I’d like to disagree a little bit…

KURTZ: … go ahead, Tamala.

EDWARDS: … first of all to your point about television and do we have a medium that’s fast enough? To pick up Wayne’s point about “Pulp Fiction.” I’ll just take the soundtrack. I think if we had some great music, that would make this better.

But in terms of constitutional crisis, I agree. I think that was overused and was used very quickly. But I do think that we’re starting to get to that point. What happens if we have a court sanctioned set of Gore electors and a legislative set of Bush electors? What do we do? That’s a crisis.

It became an article of faith that if this “went on too long” the country would fall apart and blood would run in the streets as the rabble completely lost its collective mind and stormed the castle. The wisemen had to END THIS NOW. We just couldn’t take a chance on counting all the votes. It was much too dangerous.

The Supreme Court took exactly that tack with one of the most egregious decisions in the nation’s history. Judge Gerald Posner even said that they were right to do it because if Gore had won the recount Tom Delay would have refused to acknowledge his electors and we would have had … a constitutional crisis.

The elites are always protecting us against the rabble, but they never quite say who that rabble is, exactly. Nowadays, it’s pretty clear, isn’t it? There were Freepers standing outside the vice presidential residence screaming “get out of Cheney’s house” throughout the recount. Roger Stone was down there in Florida getting ready to call in the Cuban Community and unleash the dirty tricks squad. The “bourgoeis riot” was just a little taste of what was to come. So, it’s pretty clear what the crisis was that the pundits and the political establishment were so keen to save us from — the crisis that would ensue if the impeaching, undemocratic, rabid Republican thugs were denied their victory. Don’t make trouble. Everything will be fine. We know these people. They’re the grown-ups.

The political and media establishment does not trust the constitution or the people, it’s that simple.

After all was said and done, Jon Stewart said it best:

LARRY KING: OK, what happens if the meddlesome “Miami Herald,” say in January brings forth its own vote and then tabulates it and shows you here’s what the dimples were, here’s what the chads were, and in one of them, Gore won? Would that cause a crisis then?

STEWART: Absolutely a crisis.

KING: And what would happen?

STEWART: The same crisis — nothing would happen. He’d be the president in the same way that Clinton got impeached, he was still the president. We’re not a nation on the precipice of any constitutional disaster other than — you know what we have? We have a pundit disaster. We’re out of pundits. They’ve been used up now, and they have nothing left to say.

Amen

Oh, one more thing. Let’s not forget that there was one Democratic moron who decided to further the GOP and media “crisis” meme in the lamest way possible:

LIEBERMAN: This action by the Florida legislature really threatens the credibility and legitimacy of the ultimate choice of electors in Florida. It threatens to put us into a constitutional crisis, which we are not in now by any stretch of the word.

With candidates like these…

.

Hang ‘Em High

by digby

I’m not going to lose any sleep over Saddam Hussein’s death but I can’t help but wonder what would have happened if the US had behaved like a world leader and sent him to be tried in the International Criminal Court instead of having the “Iraqi government” (which clearly has no real legal system) stage a show trial and now execute him in the middle of a civil war.

Call me crazy but it just seems to me that would have shown that we care about the rule of law and removed the festering wound of Saddam from the workings of the current government which was bound to exacerbate the sectarian hatreds. Of course, that would have meant that the Iraqi government was a paper tiger and it was very important to the Republicans that they be able to wave their purple fingers in everyone’s faces.

But I’m sure Bush will have a very serious press conference in which he will state that “the tyrant has been brought to justice” (mark my words) which is what’s important.

And hey, they just got to put out a terror alert. The Baathists are coming! Run for your lives!

.

Sordid Truth

by digby

During those horrible early days after hurricane Katrina hit, I’m sure you remember the endless stories of looters and thugs and criminal gangs roaming the streets terrorizing the population. The right wing blogs had a lot to say on the subject.

There was one incident in particular that seemed to grab the imagination of the rightwingers. It was reported on all the cable news networks and inspired many blog posts like this one:

Did New Orleans police shoot and kill contractors who were walking across a bridge to inspect and seek to fix the broken levee, or did they kill those who had fired on the contractors? A few hours ago, news services and networks reported that five or six contractors had been shot and killed by the NOPD. Shortly thereafter, news services reported that the NOPD had actually shot “thugs” as a (Fox News host described them) who had fired on the contractors.

I do not know what happened, and am not assuming that the revised story is the true one. This is the first time I have heard of police or National Guard soldiers shooting anyone. For days, I have heard stories of black criminals firing on rescue crews in helicopters and boats, on police, and shooting and bludgeoning National Guard troops. One National Guardette ran away from the armed criminal who had hit her over the head with a pipe, and had shot her comrade. Did the Guardette even have a loaded weapon?

My expectation was that the police or soldiers would shoot a non-violent white or Asian, before they would shoot an ultraviolent black, but I was beaten to the punch by blogger Zach at Our Way of Life, who predicted Friday,

“If anybody gets shot for looting, they will be white or asian. Just remember you heard it here first.”

The current report on the bridge shooting at Fox News is only 14 words long.

“Hurricane relief efforts turn toward the gathering of bodies; police report shooting eight armed men on New Orleans bridge, killing at least five.”

In what sort of hellholes do people try to murder rescue crews, and people trying to fix broken levees? In America’s third world cities, that’s where. In the South Bronx in New York City, twenty years ago, Hispanic thugs used to attack fire engines speeding to put out fires with Molotov cocktails. Of course, it was white men putting their lives on the line to save Hispanics and blacks. Just like in New Orleans these days, apparently.

Considering how the mainstream media are doing their best to suppress the stories from coming out of New Orleans, I wonder if we’ll ever find out anything approaching the whole sordid truth.

It was my opinion at the time that this kind of hysterical, racist talk contributed greatly to the delayed response. (The beasts were taking over!)

I don’t know if the “sordid truth” of this incident will ever fully be known either. But a New Orleans grand jury believed there was enough evidence to indict several policemen for murder yesterday:

Four New Orleans police officers have been charged with murder in connection with two fatal shootings in the wake of Hurricane Katrina last year.

Three more officers were charged with attempted murder for the shootings, which also left four people wounded.

The incident on the Danziger Bridge, linking two mainly black, flooded neighbourhoods, came six days after the hurricane left New Orleans in chaos.

Defence lawyers say their clients are innocent of the charges

It was a mess in New Orleans those first few days. I’m sure there was plenty of violence and mayhem. But the media and particularly the fevered right wing media were all too willing to believe even the most ridiculous tales and they spread them with a glee usually reserved for presidential sexual indiscretions. They bear some responsibility for what happened.

And I’m still waiting to hear the whole sordid explanation behind the other infamous Katrina “bridge” story.

Update: NPR did a story recently on the Danziger bridge incident. Perhaps the trial will shed more light on the subject.

.