And In The End...

Byrd

Conrad

Johnson

Nelson (NE)

Americans Prefer Democrats

Wingnuts throughout the land are gloating. They really believe Alito's America is theirs. However, in the real world we have:

"On Iraq, 55 percent say the war was not worth fighting and 60 percent disapprove of how Bush is handling it. On the deficit, 64 percent disapprove of his work; on health care 60 percent; on immigration 57 percent; on ethics 56 percent (see separate Jan. 27 analysis on ethics). Six in 10 say the economy's hurting. Six in 10 don't think Bush understands their problems. Fifty-three percent don't see him as honest and trustworthy.

OPPOSITION — Bush's problems clearly benefit the opposition: Americans — by a 16-point margin, 51 percent to 35 percent — now say the country should go in the direction in which the Democrats want to lead, rather than follow Bush. That's a 10-point drop for the president from a year ago, and the Democrats' first head-to-head majority of his presidency."

Moving Right Along...

There are a lot of really invigorating and uplifting posts out there. Obviously as disappointed as we are with the votes of our representatives we know what to do next: Fire them. Hire those who WILL represent core liberal prinicples and core liberal goals. To that end I am liking this diary at dKos:

We should look for inspiration from our heroes. But tonight, we should also look beyond the examples of our heroes, and the difficulties they had to face to prevail. Tonight, also look at the example of our adversaries.

And we should remember, the conservatives NEVER give up.

Most of you will know this answer, but it's still important to ask the question:

What is generally considered the most important galvanizing event for the modern conservative movement?

The crushing defeat, in 1964, of Barry Goldwater.

...but with one reservation. IF in fact it is the base influencing the Republican party the above link is meaningful. However if it is as I fear, the corporate billionaires in control of the party, then it is the base that has been played. If that is true then we're all fucked.

Just Saying...

"It is unbelievable,
to what extent one must betray a people
in order to rule it."

--Hitler

OPEN THREAD--Monday January 30, 2006

I'm tired, I have the flu, I need to eat. Here's a subject: betrayal. Talk amongst yourselves...

The Alito 19: Vengeance is Mine, Sayeth the Netroots

These are the 19 Senators you elected and who today, betrayed you. Do you want to fight for them in 2006?

• Akaka (HI), 202-224-6361, fax: (202) 224-2126

• Baucus (MT), 202-224-2651, fax: (202) 224-0515

• Bingaman (NM), 202-224-5521, fax: (202) 224-2852

• Byrd (WV), 202-224-3954, fax: (202) 228-0002

• Cantwell (WA), 202-224-3441, fax: (202) 228-0514

• Carper (DE), 202-224-2441, fax: (202) 228-2190

• Conrad (D-ND), 202-224-2043, fax: (202) 224-7776
  

• Dorgan (ND, 202-224-2551, fax: (202) 224-1193

• Inouye (HI) 202-224-3934

• Johnson (SD), 202-224-5842, fax: (202) 228-5765

• Kohl (WI), 202-224-5653

• Landrieu (LA), 202-224-5824, fax: (202) 224-9735

• Lieberman (CT), 202-224-4041, fax: (202) 224-9750

• Lincoln (AR), 202-224-4843, fax: (202) 228-1371

• Nelson (FL), 202-224-5274, fax: (202) 228-2183

• Nelson (NE), 202-224-6551, fax: (202) 228-0012

• Pryor (D-AR), 202-224-2353, fax: (202) 228-0908

• Rockefeller (WV), 202-224-6472, fax: (202) 224-7665

• Salazar (CO, 202-224-5852, fax: (202) 228-5036
  

(UPDATE 6:20 PM MST) Wow--are we P-I-S-S-E-D or WHAT?

From Bob Fertik, dKos here and here, Vichy Dems, firedoglake, Brad Blog...you get the picture.

BTW, weren't there also 19 WTC (9/11) hijackers? Just saying...

NOTE: Due to it's incredible length, my Alito Filibuster Blog post has been "moved" back to the date it began (01-27-06).

And Now For the Nightly Flu Report...

This would almost seem funny:

"The United Nations is considering using 'flu-casters', modelled on television weather forecasters, to publicise vital information if a global flu pandemic strikes.

They could broadcast latest developments from emergency-response facilities at the UN's World Health Organisation (WHO) in Geneva, according to David Nabarro, the UN's top influenza coordinator."

were it not for this:

A man showing symptoms of bird flu died in Iraqi Kurdistan and his samples have been sent to Jordan for testing, a Kurdish official said yesterday.

Wouldn't it be ironic if a country with which we would ordinarily have little contact, be the one from which bird flu reaches the USA? And even more ironically--by way of our soldiers?

Afghans See Mixed Results Post-Taliban

WMD's In Syria?

Well, if the administration would actually turn this stuff up it would be much easier to believe--so why don't they?

"General who served as no. 2 official in Iraq's air force reveals in new book how he personally convinced former president not to bombard Israeli population centers, claims weapons of mass destruction were moved into Syria before U.S. invasion "

ENVIRONMENT: Debate Shifts to Irreparable Change

Nothing can anger me more than the impending environmental destruction of our gorgeous, rare ecosphere (without which life will be a harsh hell in ways unimagineable) except the fact that IT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED!

And nothing is a more clear indicator of the dangerous self-interests of corporate power--and the need to regulate and control that soul-less quest for power--than their owners concerted, long-term attack on and smearing of, the scientists and activists who have worked slavishly for the good of all in the name of the environment's preservation.

Debate on Climate Shifts to Issue of Irreparable Change: "'It's not something you can adapt to,' Hansen said in an interview. 'We can't let it go on another 10 years like this. We've got to do something.'

Princeton University geosciences and international affairs professor Michael Oppenheimer, who also advises the advocacy group Environmental Defense, said one of the greatest dangers lies in the disintegration of the Greenland or West Antarctic ice sheets, which together hold about 20 percent of the fresh water on the planet. If either of the two sheets disintegrates, sea level could rise nearly 20 feet in the course of a couple of centuries, swamping the southern third of Florida and Manhattan up to the middle of Greenwich Village.

While both the Greenland and the Antarctic ice sheets as a whole are gaining some mass in their cold interiors because of increasing snowfall, they are losing ice along their peripheries. That indicates that scientists may have underestimated the rate of disintegration they face in the future, Oppenheimer said. Greenland's current net ice loss is equivalent to an annual 0.008 inch sea level rise.

The effects of the collapse of either ice sheet would be 'huge,' Oppenheimer said. 'Once you lost one of these ice sheets, there's really no putting it back for thousands of years, if ever.'

Last year, the British government sponsored a scientific symposium on 'Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change,' which examined a number of possible tipping points. A book based on that conference, due to be published Tuesday, suggests that disintegration of the two ice sheets becomes more likely if average temperatures rise by more than 5 degrees Fahrenheit, a prospect 'well within the range of climate change projections for this century.'"

(UPDATE--hat tip to AMERICABlog) :

The top climate scientist at NASA says the Bush administration has tried to stop him from speaking out since he gave a lecture last month calling for prompt reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases linked to global warming.

The scientist, James E. Hansen, longtime director of the agency's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said in an interview that officials at NASA headquarters had ordered the public affairs staff to review his coming lectures, papers, postings on the Goddard Web site and requests for interviews from journalists.

Dr. Hansen said he would ignore the restrictions. "They feel their job is to be this censor of information going out to the public," he said.

Dean Acosta, deputy assistant administrator for public affairs at the space agency, said there was no effort to silence Dr. Hansen. "That's not the way we operate here at NASA," Mr. Acosta said. "We promote openness and we speak with the facts."

He said the restrictions on Dr. Hansen applied to all National Aeronautics and Space Administration personnel. He added that government scientists were free to discuss scientific findings, but that policy statements should be left to policy makers and appointed spokesmen.

Mr. Acosta said other reasons for requiring press officers to review interview requests were to have an orderly flow of information out of a sprawling agency and to avoid surprises. "This is not about any individual or any issue like global warming," he said. "It's about coordination."

Dr. Hansen strongly disagreed with this characterization, saying such procedures had already prevented the public from fully grasping recent findings about climate change that point to risks ahead.

Crunching Abramoff's Numbers

"Although Abramoff hasn’t personally given to any Democrats, Republicans, including officials with the GOP campaign to hold on to the Senate, have seized on the donations of his tribal clients as proof that the saga is a bipartisan scandal. And the controversy recently spread to the media when the ombudsman for The Washington Post, Deborah Howell, ignited a firestorm by wrongly asserting that Abramoff had given to both. She eventually amended her assessment, writing that Abramoff “directed his client Indian tribes to make campaign contributions to members of Congress from both parties.”

But the Morris and Associates analysis, which was done exclusively for The Prospect, clearly shows that it’s highly misleading to suggest that the tribes's giving to Dems was in any way comparable to their giving to the GOP. The analysis shows that when Abramoff took on his tribal clients, the majority of them dramatically ratcheted up donations to Republicans."

--snip--

• in total, the donations of Abramoff’s tribal clients to Democrats dropped by nine percent after they hired him, while their donations to Republicans more than doubled, increasing by 135 percent after they signed him up;

• five out of seven of Abramoff’s tribal clients vastly favored Republican candidates over Democratic ones;

• four of the seven began giving substantially more to Republicans than Democrats after he took them on;

• Abramoff’s clients gave well over twice as much to Republicans than Democrats, while tribes not affiliated with Abramoff gave well over twice as much to Democrats than the GOP -- exactly the reverse pattern.

Partisan Thought Is Unconscious

As an amateur enthusiast of neuroscience I have always known that brain chemistry--not moral values--was the kicker when it came to partisan politics:

A Shocker: Partisan Thought Is Unconscious : "Using M.R.I. scanners, neuroscientists have now tracked what happens in the politically partisan brain when it tries to digest damning facts about favored candidates or criticisms of them. The process is almost entirely emotional and unconscious, the researchers report, and there are flares of activity in the brain's pleasure centers when unwelcome information is being rejected.

'Everything we know about cognition suggests that, when faced with a contradiction, we use the rational regions of our brain to think about it, but that was not the case here,' said Dr. Drew Westen, a psychologist at Emory and lead author of the study, to be presented Saturday at meetings of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology in Palm Springs, Calif.

The results are the latest from brain imaging studies that provide a neural explanation for internal states, like infatuation or ambivalence, and a graphic trace of the brain's activity."

To finally have some science that goes to political thinking and "bias" is thrilling. However, what will be most funny (and sad) is that moralists, instead of questioning their religious bias will find in this evidence that God is wiring their brains so they think acoording to His Desires. The other "white meat" will come from wingers who dismiss the research because it was reported in the New York Times!

FILIBUSTER ALITO BLOG-IN

(UPDATE 3:31 MST) Although the vote could go entirely different tomorrow (the Dems could be planning a little surprise for the Feuhrer's party speech) I still have to say the following: I have never seen anything so ugly as the Republican attack on democracy through the bludgeoning of the Democratic Senators. How awful, how disgraceful, how obscene.

It is as if I were witness to the schoolyard bludgeoning of an animal that, every time it rose to defend itself, was ridiculed for having the audacity to even dare it's own defense and then beaten for being alive.

It is sad--it is beyond sad--it is pathetic, that a party that has such a clear majority degrades and lowers itself to the level of bullying, lying and stealing. I am no longer surprised by any act of corruption--regardless of how vile--to which its members will stoop. I have seen true evil today.

Watching this degrading, soulless beating has kindled in me a renewed fight--a rage to fight--with every fiber of my being--to overcome, destroy, smash, gut and disembowel every centilla of the policies of the current radical Republican party in power, and the efforts of those who support it. I pledge--here and now--to my fellow liberals, Democrats and patriots, to never, NEVER stop in this quest. So Help Me Flying Spaghetti Monster!!!!

(UPDATE 3:30MST) Cloture vote:

Yay--72
Nay--25

The Debate IS Over.

(UPDATE 3:12 MST) According to Vichy Dems these are the votes to target:

Mary Landrieu, Louisiana: might be weakening in her oppo to filibuster; push abstention HARD.
Main Senate switchboard no.: 888-355-3588
DC office direct line: 202-224-5824
New Orleans office phone: 504-589-2427
Baton Rouge office phone: 225-389-0395
Lake Charles office phone: 337-436-6650
Shreveport office phone: 318-676-3085

Daniel Inouye, Hawaii
Main Senate switchboard no.: 888-355-3588
DC office direct line: 202-224-3934

Mark Pryor, Arkansas: probably a lost cause but ask him to abstain.
Main Senate switchboard no.: 888-355-3588
DC office direct line: 202-224-2353
Little Rock office phone: 501-324-6336

Tim Johnson, SD
Main Senate switchboard no.: 888-355-3588
DC office direct line: 202-224-5842
Aberdeen office phone: 605-226-3440
Rapid City office phone: 605-341-3990
Sioux Falls office phone: 605-332-8896

Bill Nelson, Florida
Main Senate switchboard no.: 888-355-3588
DC office direct line: 202-224-5274
Miami office phone: 305-536-5999
Orlando office phone: 407-872-7161
Tampa office phone: 813-225-7040
Tallahassee office phone: 850-942-8415

Olympia Snowe, Maine (Republican)
Main Senate switchboard no.: 888-355-3588
DC office direct line: 202-224-5344
Auburn office phone: 207-786-2451
Bangor office phone: 207-945-0432
Portland office phone: 207-874-0883
Presque Isle office phone: 207-764-5124

Here's a link to the Senate Fax Numbers List.

(UPDATE 2:32 MST) AAARRRGGGHHHH!!!!!! What a distorter and liar!!!! FRIST!! HE blandly, self-righteously claims Democrats were obstructionist for partisan reasons in the years past!! AAAAA--maybe that's because the Republican party controls the entire government (which it gained by dirty tricks, corruption and voter fraud) and writes and passes legislation they don't even show Democrats--blocks them from votes--deny them access to sessions--what radical Democrats? NO DEMOCRAT gets a voice unless that Democrat is a Republican!!!!

I am now completely convinced JFK was murdered by the Republican sympathizers. It is the only explantion for people like Frist still being alive! And it completely is in line with their "scorched earth" practice of politics. May Frist live in a thousand year coma (hmmm, maybe he already is?)!

(UPDATE 2:15 MST) Fifteen minutes to the cloture vote...

(UPDATE 2:07 MST) Ted Kennedy: People in his state are worried about money, paying oil bills and education. That they haven't had a chance to focus on the meaning of the nomination of Alito. Now he's going on about judges who upheld civil rights legislation. The Supreme Court changes the country--now he's listing acts--as the march of progress. He's ranting now--that the SCOTUS is the only body to protect those advances. That too much seat and tears has been invested in those outcomes to be threatended. Wow. Ted is on a roll--he wants to know why we would put all that at risk by putting someone on the Supreme Court who threatens those accomplishments. He says there is nothing more important to discuss than this issue and it has only been on the floor since Wednesday.

He says if you (the Senate) is concerned about about appointing someone who will care about (a list of people, and acts) that it is not judge Alito. He's not going to be like Warren Berger. HE's the wrong judge, at the wrong time, at the wrong court.

(UPDATE 2:00MST) Kerry's discussing the shortcoming's of the ABA standards for analyzing the effect a judge has when he becomes a justice. He says the ABA does not ask what happens when a justice like Alito cuts off rights to access for the handicapped, rights to choose et al.

He wants to know what effect judge Alito will have on laws they have already passed?

Kerry says none of the rights we fought for should be taken lightly. Alito has stood alone against mainstream beliefs. The Republican glee wiht his nomination should tell you all you need to know about what they expect from judge Alito.

He's stating that he understands the vote against cloture is hard but that this is an extraordinary circumstance; a lifetime appointment is not something we can go back from--not when he deprives Americans of their rights. And the questions like this don't arise from speculation but from the decisions in Alito's record.

Now he is calling for extended debate--that 30 hours is not enough--and that it is the only to stop a confimraiton they can stop a nomination that will cause irrperable harm to American justice. Now he thanks those who have stood with him. SO DO I!!!!
(UPDATE 1:56 MST) Now Brownback (R- ) has flat out stated that he believes "...the Consitution does not protect a woman's right to abort her baby," ad that it is a decision that should be taken up by the Senate (huh?) and the state's, and that the states will not decide about it in an even matter! Everytime a Republican opens his mouth the same sentence comes out--ooh--here's Kerry again!

(IMPORTANT UPDATE 1:55 MST) From Alito 48:

3:30 pm: The Gang of 14 went into closed-door meetings to stop our peasant uprising. Alito's personal trainer, Lindsay Graham, will lead the charge against a filibuster. How many of these media-adored "moderates" will vote to help Alito nuke the Constitution? (Alito opponents in italics) :

Republicans

• John S. McCain III, Arizona
• Lindsey O. Graham, South Carolina
• John Warner, Virginia
• Susan M. Collins, Maine
  
• R. Michael DeWine, Ohio
  
• Lincoln Chafee, Rhode Island 202-224-2921, fax: (202) 228-2853

Democrats

• Joseph I. Lieberman, Connecticut 202-224-4041, fax: (202) 224-9750
• E. Benjamin Nelson, Nebraska 202-224-6551, fax: (202) 228-0012
• Mary Landrieu, Louisiana 202-224-5824, fax: (202) 224-9735
  
• Daniel Inouye, Hawaii 202-224-3934, fax: (202) 224-6747
  
• Mark Pryor, Arkansas 202-224-2353, fax: (202) 228-0908
  
• Ken Salazar, Colorado 202-224-5852, fax: (202) 228-5036

Call the offices of all the anti-Alito Senators and tell them they must filibuster Alito or their vote against Alito is meaningless.

Now it is 1:20 MST...and watching these proceedings is like watching a close sports game...except it is all too serious. Cornyn--what a Spokes Beast--does Ann Coulter write his speeches?! And Hatch has just remarked that it doesn't suprise him Democrats are unhappy they will "lose" and Alito will be nominated. Lose?! I thought this was not a partisan battle Orin, that it was about fair judges and procedural issues, so how can Democrats "lose"? Orin is now stating that the ONLY reason what Cornyn called "the hard Left" wants to stop Alito is the 800 pound gorilla in the room: Roe v. Wade.

No, no, no, no, no, no, NO!!!!

We know Roe v. Wade is about rights--to privacy among others--and Alito will rule against ALL personal rights for everything that is not consitutionally set out and yes, were slavery still legal he would work HARD to keep it that way. Such literalists don't deserve to share oxygen with any other sentient being on the planet!

Now Hatch is bluntly stating that there is no reason that a law is a hard and fast rule (i.e. that Roe is "settled law"). In short he is stating that a vote for Alito is a vote to overturn Roe...who is he kidding? This is the pay-back for the HARD Right's base--the death of women's rights. Well girls if this happens--I will be spending the REST OF MY DAYS BOYCOTTING absolutely everything that touches or is touched by any element of that base (and that's just as a start)!

I'm really beginning to understand the forces and anger that set off the Civil War.

CONRAD SUCKS! From his statement regarding his decision to SUPPORT ALITO:

• "'Fifth, Judge Alito looked me in the eye and told me that he will not conduct himself based on an ideological agenda. He promised me that he would judge each case based on its merits and protect and defend the liberties set out in the Constitution."

This is the one point in his statement that I want to know something about. Senator Conrad, what does "...protect and defend the liberties set out in the Constitution," actually mean?

(UPDATE 12:45 MST) Robert Menendez (D-NJ) is speaking now--good speaker. Hitting all the right notes: Alito's activist decisions, signing statements, court-changing addition to the bench, not an equivalent replacement for O'Connor, other court's disagreements with his decisions.

No filler on this guy's time. Hit after hit after hit. Too bad my TIVO is still sitting in the box...!

Go Robert--"...will he take our nation back," and says our next justice must take the court forward not back. And he has no problem discussing the "A" word--abortion--as a woman's right to choose. Now he's citing cases in which Alito found against a women's rights in favor of a mans for notification. He states that on examination Alito refused to say Roe is settled law. He points out Alito used Rehnquist's language on Roe and how that leads him to believe Alito intends to take the nation (again) back. No doesn't say he thinks Alito will overturn (that would require mind reading) but he does worry Alito will not uphold it.

Now he's discussing Alito's decisions on employment law and discrimination law--damn--why didn't I set up that TIVO?! Email if you get this on audio (please).

He makes the point I think should always be made--Alito may be a good judge--but (as Kennedy says) he's the wrong judge, at the wrong time for the wrong court.

(UPDATE 11:55 MST) Pete Domenici is speaking now and I want to strangle him. He is stating that the process of the SCOTU nomination should only be about qualifications and that now party rancour is driving the process. Wouldn't it be nice if SOMEONE would point out that it is REPUBLICAN party rancour that is driving Democrats to defend ALL Americans from THE radical Republican's currently running the show. His accustions are baseless as he is not comparing apples and oranges--the Republicans and Democrats of 'the good old days'.

Great Link (Vichy Dems) loaded with contact info and "game plan"!

(UPDATE 11:15 MST) This is the Senator on which to concentrate now. Currently all his numbers are busy. Keep trying:

• Bill Nelson (D- FL), 202-224-5274, fax: (202) 228-2183

These are Nelson's Florida contact numbers:

Tallahassee, 850-942-8415 (phone), 850-942-8450 (fax)
West Palm Beach, 561-514-0189 (phone), 561-514-4078 (fax)
Tampa, 813-225-7040 (phone), 813-225-7050 (fax)
Jacksonville, 904-346-4500 (phone), 904-346-4506 (fax)
Coral Gables, 305-536-5999 (phone), 305-536-5991 (fax)
Ft. Myers, 239-334-7760 (phone), 239-334-7710 (fax)
Davie, 954-693-4851 (phone), 954-693-4862 (fax)
Orlando, 888-671-4091 (phone), 407-872-7165 (fax)

(UPDATE 10:45 MST) Kerry on the Senate floor is NAILING IT!! I paraphrase: he's pointing out the obvious--the Right's extremists, not Democrats, opposed Bush's first choice--Harriett Myers--until Bush capitulated and gave them Alito. Alito was greeted with "glee" by Republican spokespeople. They loved the idea that it woud PISS US OFF. Why? Because they were anticipating that Alito would further THEIR radical agenda! Therefore it is easy to see that Alito is NOT free from the tinge of partisan politics but squarely in the midst of it!

He asks why the Republicans weren't chastised for "obstructionism" when Harriett Myers was denied her "up or down" vote not by Democrats, but by extremist Republicans?!

Kerry states that there is no doubt in anyone's mind that Alito will have an extreme impact on the Supreme Court and acting as if that is not true is disengenuous.

He was on a roll--and just had his time cut off--in the middle of his speech! Was this an end run change on the time or bad timing on his team's part?

(UPDATE 10:05 MST) Chafee has just announced he will vote AGAINST CLOTURE! Way to GO!!!

Still THE BEST BLOG for updates:

SENATOR TALLY SHEET

(aka The Alito 48 via Democrats.com)

Poll: Majority would oppose Alito if he would overturn Roe

(UPDATE 9:20 MST) Via Alternet, these are the Undecided's. CALL THEM ALL. I have added fax numbers and will continue email and more fax numbers as I find them...

The running tally is still at 37 senators, with four more needed to filibuster. Here's the phone numbers, courtesy of Georgia10:

Blanche Lambert Lincoln (D- AR), 202-224-4843, fax: (202) 228-2853

Joseph I. Lieberman (D- CT), 202-224-4041, fax: (202) 224-9750

Thomas R. Carper (D- DE), 202-224-2441, fax: (202) 228-2190

Daniel K. Inouye (D- HI), 202-224-3934, fax: (202) 224-6747

Tom Harkin (D- IA), 202-224-3254, fax: (202) 224-9369

Evan Bayh (D- IN), 202-224-5623

Barbara A. Mikulski (D- MD), 202-224-4654, fax: (202) 224-8858

Carl Levin (D- MI), 202-224-6221, fax: (202) 224-1388

Mark Dayton (D- MN), 202-224-3244, fax: (202) 228-2186

Max Baucus (D- MT), 202-224-2651, fax: (202) 224-0515

Frank Lautenberg (D- NJ), 202-224-3224, fax: (202) 224-9707

Jeff Bingaman (D- NM), 202-224-5521, fax: (202) 224-2852

Jack Reed (D- RI), 202-224-4642

Patrick J. Leahy (D- VT), 202-224-4242

Maria Cantwell (D- WA), 202-224-3441, fax: (202) 228-0514

Patty Murray (D- WA), 202-224-2621, fax: (202) 224-0238

Herb Kohl (D- WI), 202-224-5653

John D. Rockefeller, IV (D- WV), 202-224-6472, fax: (202) 224-7665

James M. Jeffords (I- VT), 202-224-5141

Bill Nelson (D- FL), 202-224-5274, fax: (202) 228-2183

Daniel K. Akaka (D- HI), 202-224-6361, fax: (202) 224-2126

Mary Landrieu (D- LA), 202-224-5824, fax: (202) 224-9735

Byron L. Dorgan (D- ND), 202-224-2551, fax: (202) 224-1193

(UPDATE 01-30-2006) A comment I posted on The Huffington Post:

In 2000, no Senator stood with the Congressional Black Caucus to protest the Florida vote count. In the end recounts showed Gore had won that election. "We" were wrong--we should have fought--and it is a mistake we could not 'take back'.

In 2004, upon the prodding of the grassroots, one Senator--Barbara Boxer--stood with the Congressional Black Caucus to protest the count. Thanks to her commitment to her duty to the people, voter issues were given the necessary creedence to keep them in the news as well as send a message that Democrats could show spine.

Today we are at another water-shed in political and American history. Two Senators, Kennedy and Kerry, along with the grassroots, are agitating for a filibuster of Samuel Alito. We are again on the side of "right" for our democracy. This is a time that we CAN NOT look back upon and say that we 'should' have done something different--that we 'should' have fought--because we can not "take back" the mistake of putting Alito on the bench.

I support my Senators and say to them, 'Fight for me now. Fight for all of us and when it's your turn I will fight for you. I will get your back.'

(UPDATE 9 PM) From a piece that nails it:

The move, led by Massachusetts Senators John Kerry and Edward Kennedy, to block the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court with a filibuster is already being dismissed by White House aides, Republican operatives and their echo chamber in the media as a mad misadventure that exposes the Democrats as legislative anarchists bent on wrecking the smooth-functioning processes of the Senate. The Republican National Committee's Tracey Schmitt summed up the sentiment when she peddled the official line of the man who would be monarch, arguing that in George W. Bush's America the Senate's advice and consent responsibilities are no longer required.

"The judicial confirmation process, particularly one for the nation's highest court, should be insulated from such thoughtless bomb throwing..." Schmitt growled.

Bomb throwing?

Samuel Alito has established himself, through his record as an appellate court judge and his testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, as the consumate judicial activist. He seeks a place on the Supreme Court in order to advance his vision of an imperial presidency that does not obey the laws of the land or answer to the Congress. Alito is, by his own admission, intellectually and politically at odds with the intents of the founders, and with the Constitutional system of checks and balances that they established. He has gone so far as to advise past presidents on strategies for expanding executive power and, as a judge, he has erred on the side of even the most reckless abuses of executive authority.

(UPDATE) Download Alito factsheets (PDF) here.

For those who are not listening to or reading the mounting online materials regarding the Alito filibuster, let me state the core arguments FOR filibuster being advanced:

• Alito will interpret the doctrine or theory of unitary power, in EXTREME terms.
• He will be on the court for DECADES. His appointment reaches HISTORICAL proportions.
• He is an arch-conservative and will replace a moderate swing-judge. His presence will undoubtedly drive the court to the right.
  
• He is an advocate of strict-constitutionalism. The court already has one such advocate. The court needs to represent the plurality of the country not one segment.
• He refuses to agree that abortion is "settled law". For many this reflects a potential assault on privacy rights.
• He has consistently found in favor of business and corporations, not citizens.
• He appears to have lied under oath regarding his own background and behaviors.
  

For my part, I am most concerned about how Alito will influence decisions affecting corporate and presidential power. For example Bush, with the use of "signing statements" (a concept codified by Alito in 1985) is signing legislation and adding signing statements that declare his right to IGNORE the legislation at his OWN DISCRETION. This appears to be a right granted to him under the unitary powers doctrine. Yet the action for that right to be invoked--the declaration of war by congress--has not occurred.

Further, Bush is declaring that his right to use the NSA to spy on Americans is within his rights (again) during a time of war, another invocation of the unitary powers. Yet none of the legislative powers that should have been notified (Congress and the FISA court) received that notification. Bush is declaring his rights under the unitary powers also allows him to decide who he needs to notify--if anyone at all! The legislative body that could find against his decisions--the justice department-- already packed by his appointments has (what a surprise) found in his favor. So what would be the next body he could be forced to face? SCOTUS. Who, by the time such actions reach the court, could be on board? The man who has written the decisions that already support Bush's actions every step of the way...Samuel Alito.

What about the checks and balances our framers put in place? They are already few and weak and being weakened with every pro-business (read: pro-Republican) appointment. Radical conservatives throughout the government feel empowered to attack advances in rights that regularly affect Americans daily lives.

The above are only two examples of Bush invoking IN ADVANCE, any rights he believes he may have under the guise of "unitary powers". What does his behavior so far remind you of? How about the old 'saw' "It is easier to do what you want and then ask permission than get permission to do what you want?" What was the last glaring example of Bush at that game? Florida, 2000.

In Florida 2000, the SCOTUS, in a never-before and self-proclaimed never-to-be-repeated act of incredible reach APPOINTED George Bush President of the United States. We know now that every recount of the Florida ballots resulted in a win by Gore. We know now what we should have done then--fight--but we can't take that 'mistake' back. Neither will we be able to take back the mistake of putting Alito on the bench.

Since that critical week in 2000, the President (whose legitimacy is still under question thanks to voting rights activists and Senator Barbara Boxer) is simply doing what he's already proven he can: reaching past his powers and then going to the bodies whose permission he needs to argue that he already had the right to over-reach, thus setting a precedent for another over-reach that will of course, set another precedent.

How long does it take for tired Americans worrying about their diminishing status-quo, already out of touch thanks to a Republican-favoring press, to get used to a president who always gets what he wants? Why NOT simply give in and let him take it without a fight? Is that who we are already--a beaten people?

Alito will be the enabler of decades of presidential over-reach, government and legislative weakening, corporate-power grabs and the losses of average Americans' political influence, financial stability and privacy rights.

Unless we do something now--push our elected representatives to filibuster and then EXPLAIN WHY LATER--as our president continually, succesfully has --Alito will be on our highest court for the office terms of at least SEVEN presidents! And yes, we can win by explaining ourselves later--Bush has his party and his judges to make his arguments for him and we have our facts, our commitment and our futures. Let him pick another judge! MAKE him understand that he WORKS FOR US!!!!!!!

Finally let me ask, do you really think you know enough about Alito's controversial stands--that are not those of ANY OTHER SCOTUS Judge--to see him appointed to the court within the next TWO DAYS? A filibuster will force the Republicans to invoke another radical notion--the "nuclear option"--or not. Who cares? I'm tired of being threatened by the people who are supposed to be on my side, who are supposed to be working for ALL Americans!

What IS necessary is at least further investigation of a judge who is clearly outside the current mainstream of American jurisprudence or at most, selection of a different more moderate judge who can and will sit for ALL Americans. What the hell is so "obstructionist" about that?

(UPDATE 01-29-06) Still the best link for updates:

Senator Tally Sheet

and the best online broadcast is

The Young Turks

(UPDATE 8:30 PM) From boston.com news just in:

Under Senate rules, 60 votes are needed to end a filibuster and allow a final vote on a nominee. Most of the Senate's 55 Republicans have closed ranks and will vote for Alito, and three Democrats from heavily Republican states said they'll also vote yes to confirmation. At least five other Democrats have said they may vote no but don't want the party to use procedural tactics to block him.

Senator Charles Schumer of New York, one of the Senate Judiciary Committee's leading liberals, hadn't made up his mind yesterday. As leader of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Schumer could be worried that voters might reject the party's 2006 Senate candidates because of the actions of two liberal senators and their losing cause.

Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the Senate Judiciary Committee's top Democrat, was also undecided yesterday. Representative Harold E. Ford Jr. of Tennessee, a Democratic candidate for Senate who was one of Kerry's national campaign cochairmen in 2004, came out against a filibuster.

Another Alito foe, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, told CNN he won't side with Kennedy and Kerry because, ''I see no reasonable prospect that a filibuster could work or function." Biden, who is mulling a 2008 run for president, said the vote on Alito is inevitable, therefore, ''we might as well, after we've had our say, get on with the vote.'"

(UPDATE) From Bill Moyers:

My feeling about Alito's confirmation is that, like nearly every other action of the Bush administration, his nomination and potential appointment is not so much a huge travesty of justice as another chip in a bureaucratic, systematic chipping-away at the integrity of our democracy. Sam Alito is not Satan, but he is a justice who will almost certainly weaken Congress in favor of the Executive branch. The balance of powers is already in extreme jeopardy and a "Unitary Executive" is exactly the WRONG next step for our democracy right now. That's why Alito should be passionately opposed through filibuster.

(UPDATE) More than once I have bemoaned (on-air) the dKos community's lackluster support of the Alito filibuster. Finally, a few "leaders" have joined the phalanx of diarists forming around the cause: here, here, here and here. Remember, dKos is a community. If you want its considerable heft to reflect your concerns you must DO something...post or comment on how you feel about the filibuster yourself!

HRClinton's statement:

“As I explained earlier this week from the Senate floor, I believe the key to American progress has been the ever-expanding circle of freedom and opportunity. If you look at Judge Alito’s statements and his record, it is clear that Judge Alito would narrow that circle while endangering our nation’s fundamental system of checks and balances.

“This is a vote of tremendous significance. History will show that Judge Alito’s nomination is the tipping point against constitutionally-based freedoms and protections we cherish as individuals and as a nation. He would roll back decades of progress, and roll over when confronted with an administration too willing to play fast and loose with the rules. Because I do not think Judge Alito would advance the principles Americans hold most dear, I oppose his nomination and support efforts to block his confirmation.”

From Digby:

John Kerry stepped up today. Apparently, that isn't enough for some. He is still a "loser" in their eyes and is to be shunned. He didn't do it soon enough. Or he didn't do it right. Or he is nothing but a political opportunist. I'm beginning to think that some Democrats have gotten attached to their vision of Democrats as losers so they won't be emotionally shattered anymore. That's understandable. It's painful to get beaten. But, the rank and file need to step up too and be willing to lose and not hate ourselves or our leaders for it. How we lose on issues like this makes the difference for the future.

(UPDATE)--Thanks Rez Dog) Link to savethecourt.org from where you can fax key senators.
If you already have the fax# you can send a free fax from here.

(UPDATE) Here are email addresses of the major news outlets. Email them. Tell them you are tired of their defeatist anti-Democratic pro-Alito coverage (or whatever else you want to say...)!

360@cnn.com, 48hours@cbsnews.com, am@cnn.com, Colmes@foxnews.com, comments@foxnews.com, crossfire@cnn.com, dateline@nbc.com, daybreak@cnn.com, earlyshow@cbs.com, evening@cbsnews.com, insidepolitics@cnn.com, live@cnn.com, livefrom@cnn.com, newsnight@cnn.com, nightline@abcnews.com, nightly@nbc.com, rrhodes@airamericaradio.com, today@nbc.com, wam@cnn.com, wolf@cnn.com, wsj.ltrs@wsj.com, netaudr@abc.com, public@NYT.com, connected@msnbc.com, hardball@msnbc.com, countdown@msnbc.com

Via cho at ePluribus Media: I think that so far, these are the best GO-TO pages to take action:

WE CAN STOP ALITO THIS WEEKEND

and

Senator Tally Sheet

(UPDATE 01-28-06) from Democrats.com) : Regarding the "Alito 8"

Reid would not name the "Alito 8" who are blocking a Democratic filibuster - so we need to identify them and tell them not to betray the Democrats who funded them and voted for them.

The most likely suspects are the "Red State" Democrats:
Tom Carper (DE)
Kent Conrad (ND)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Tim Johnson (SD)
Mary Landrieu (LA)
Blanche Lincoln (AR)
Mark Pryor (AR)

Also call these "Blue State" and pro-choice Republicans:
Lincoln Chafee (RI)
Susan Collins (ME)
Lisa Murkowsky (AK)
Bob Smith (OR)
Olympia Snowe (ME)
Ted Stevens (AK)

For extra credit, call all the 2008 Presidential candidates who are sitting Senators - Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, and John Kerry - and tell them to either LEAD THE FILIBUSTER or FORGET ABOUT YOUR SUPPORT.

You can also send that message to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (202-224-2447) and the Democratic National Committee (202-863-8000).

"Judge Alito's confirmation would be an ideological coup on the Supreme Court."

--John Kerry

(UPDATE 01-27-06) The "Alito 48" needed to filibuster Alito...

(UPDATE 10:50 PM) John Kerry's new filibuster petition...

(UPDATE 10:45 PM) NoCrony.com is sponsoring Filibuster Friday...this is an excellent action page with local Senate numbers and a LTE fill-in form.

The Young Turks are 'filibustering' already. They will be nonstop 'netcasting' (video/audio) until the filibuster does (or does not) occur. (01-28--these guys are still going strong--hoarse as hell and tired--tune into them and give them a call of support!!)

• John Kerry's statement as of today (1/26):

  "Here's the bottom line though and I'll just be blunt and direct about it. It takes more than one or two people to filibuster. It's not 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.' I'm doing what I can, Senator Kennedy is doing what he can, but if, like me, you want to stop Judge Alito from becoming Justice Alito, we can't just preach to our own choir. We need even more of your advocacy."

Keep an eye on Bob Fertik's blog as it is updated with developments as they come in...

The image above links to backbonecampaign.org. From there you can download a PDF of the same image. I have dropped it onto fax sheets with the word FILIBUSTER written large and bold, and sent them to all the relevant fax numbers. It is effective visual short-hand for getting the message across!

This Post Will Be Kept On Top Until...?

(Daily posts are continuing below this one--
bloggers: trackback Alito filibuster posts and build our voices!)

As an act of solidarity this blog is joining The Young Turks and other citizen and activist sites to raise awareness and support for a Democratic filibuster of Samuel Alito. I will continue to add links to sites and news of interest as this critical time unfolds...

No Lie, MRI?

Helluva way to get the truth don'cha think?

"Picture this: Your boss is threatening to fire you because he thinks you stole company property. He doesn't believe your denials. Your lawyer suggests you deny it one more time - in a brain scanner that will show you're telling the truth."

Walgreen's vs Moralists, Round One

Conundrum brewing on the legislative horizon:

Four Illinois pharmacists have sued U.S. drugstore chain Walgreen Co., saying they were wrongly fired for refusing to dispense the "morning-after" emergency contraceptive pill.

--snip--

The suit, filed on Friday in Madison County, Illinois, charges that the company violated the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act, which allows health care providers to opt out of procedures they object to on moral grounds.

"It couldn't be any clearer," ACLJ attorney Francis Manion said in a statement. "In punishing these pharmacists for asserting a right protected by the Conscience Act, Walgreens broke the law."

--snip--

Polzin said Walgreen had all of its Illinois pharmacists file an electronic, online statement saying they would follow Illinois pharmacy regulations including Plan B. The four pharmacists refused to agree by a set deadline, he said.

"We have to follow the law. We don't have a choice in this matter," Polzin said.

Walgreen's policy allows pharmacists to decline to fill a prescription if they have a moral objection. However, they must refer the prescription to another employee who can arrange to fill the order swiftly.

Polzin said the four pharmacists worked the overnight shift at 24-hour facilities, and as the only ones on duty, they could not have the prescriptions filled without delay, as state law requires.

INCOMING: EPA To Pass Regulation Allowing Pesticide Testing on Children WITHOUT Consent

This is completely and entirely unacceptable and unconscionable.

Regardless of your partisan positions PLEASE immediately circulate and take action on this information!

"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is just days away from publishing a new federal regulation that will allow the testing of chemicals and pesticides on human subjects. On August 2, 2005, Congress had mandated the EPA create a rule that permanently bans chemical testing on pregnant women and children, without exception. But the EPA's newly proposed rule, is ridden with exceptions where chemical studies may be performed on children in certain situations like the following:

• Children who 'cannot be reasonably consulted,' such as those that are mentally handicapped or orphaned newborns, may be tested on. With permission from the institution or guardian in charge of the individual, the child may be exposed to chemicals for the sake of research.

• Parental consent forms are not necessary for testing on children who have been neglected or abused.

• Chemical studies on any children outside of the U.S. are acceptable.

Despite receiving over 50,000 letters from citizens, congress, and EPA's own scientists opposing the proposed rule, on January 24, the EPA notified the Associated Press, saying they are on the threshold of approving the proposal and allowing chemical testing on children.

'The fact that EPA allows pesticide testing of any kind on the most vulnerable, including abused and neglected children, is simply astonishing,' said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. Even EPA's own scientists are speaking out against the agency's proposed rule. 'I am somewhat dismayed that this rule was presented in such a complex -- and I would have to say, tricky -- way,' said Suzanne Wuerthele, a regional toxicologist for the EPA."

POLL: Most Think Bush is Failing Second Term

"A majority of Americans are more likely to vote for a candidate in November's congressional elections who opposes President Bush, and 58 percent consider his second term a failure so far, according to a poll released Thursday.

Fewer people consider Bush to be honest and trustworthy now than did a year ago, and 53 percent said they believe his administration deliberately misled the public about Iraq's purported weapons program before the U.S. invasion in 2003, the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll found.

Pollsters interviewed 1,006 American adults Friday through Sunday. Most questions in the survey had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. (Poll)"

(More) Election Theft Reading

I like the idea of bringing reality back to American politics 'one book at a time' but at this rate, by the time enough books are read (Gawd knows enough are already published), humans will be extinct:

Election Theft Emergency: "For GOP voters, the 2004 presidential election was little short of miraculous: Behind in the Electoral College even on the afternoon of the vote, the Bush-Cheney ticket staged a stunning comeback. Usually reliable exit polls turned out to be wrong by an unprecedented 5 percent in swing states. Conservatives argued, and the media agreed, that 'moral values' had made the difference.

In his latest book, Fooled Again: How The Right Stole The 2004 Election, And Why They'll Steal The Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them), Mark Crispin Miller argues that it wasn't moral values which swung the election -- it was theft."

INCOMING: Internet Freedom Under Fire: Act Now

It was only a matter of time before The Corporation would get around to this:

Internet Freedom Under Fire : "The CEOs of the largest cable and telephone companies are hatching a scheme that would give them control over what content you can view and what services you can use on the Internet.

Their plan would do away with the principle of 'network neutrality' and shut down the open roadway we've come to expect on the Internet.

If big media companies are allowed to limit the fastest services to those who can pay their toll, upstart Web services, consumers, bloggers and new media makers alike all could be cut off from digital revolution.

When large media companies are left to their own devices, the result is always content and services that serve no one but themselves. An open and independent Internet is the antidote to these predatory practices.

Join tens of thousands of activists who are standing up to protect our Net freedoms. Tell the CEO's to stop treating our Internet as their fiefdom."

NEW AFFILIATE: The Ribbon Revolution

There are a variety of ways for blogs and other websites to create income. One of them is joining affiliate programs. With an affiliate, when a reader clicks on a link from a website and makes a purchase of the product at the link target, the website from which the "click-through" originates makes a percentage.

Except for my Google banner I have only joined the affiliate programs of products I feel are unique or politically powerful. If you've ever looked at my affiliates you'll notice that I have only one. Well, now I have two! And there's a story with this new one.

I read the winger blogs regularly, especially the most radical. On such a site, The Musuem of Left Wing Lunacy (that I consider satirical although I think they take themselves quite seriously) I found a post slamming a little company making alternatives to the pro-war magnetic ribbons: The Ribbon Revolution. I searched their website, loved their humor and variety and called them to ask about their affiliate program; they didn't have one! After a great phone conversation with the owner and a few emails, The Ribbon Revolution set up an affiliate program and I was invited to be among the first!

How cool is that? I took the information from a winger site dedicated to crushing the liberal cause and created an opportunity to spread the liberal word AND increase political power (a portion of The Ribbon Revolution's profits go to progressive causes)!! Who says liberals don't have ideas?!

Wash Times: Bush Expects Impeachment

Extremely interesting piece via dKos:

Bush Expects Impeachment: "the unabashedly pro-Administration Washington Times concludes just the opposite? Their magazine section, Insight, which repeatedly has scooped inside-the-White House stories, today tells us that the White House expects that impeachment proceedings will be brought, potentially as early as next month, and expects, as things stand now, that Bush will fail in the all-important Judiciary Committee. They believe if they work flat out, they can block impeachment by pursuing a tie. What they write here is the same as I have heard from numerous Republicans in Washington - if Bush continues with his Divine Right presidency, and thumbs his nose at Congress by disobeying the FISA rules and the McCain Amendment, there are a number of Republican senators who are prepared to support his impeachment. "

Hence the early push for Alito. In the upcoming power struggle it may be necessary for the Supreme Court to find a way to make sure The Corporation keeps its Bush pawn in play...

Feingold: Alito Would Be "Dangerous Addition" to Court

It can't be said any better:

Feingold: Alito Would Be "Dangerous Addition" to Court: "Not to be lost in the reporting on Tuesday's Senate Judiciary Committee vote to endorse the nomination of Judge
Samuel Alito to serve on the Supreme Court is the fact that U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold (news, bio, voting record), D-Wisconsin, has voted for the first time in his Senate career against a Supreme Court nominee.

More than any other vote by a member of the committee -- which split 10-8 along partisan lines, with all Republicans backing Alito and all Democrats opposing his nomination -- Feingold's vote stands out.

While the seven other Democrats on the Judiciary Committee had all voted against one or more Republican nominees for the high court, Feingold had, until Tuesday, voted to confirm every Supreme Court nominee, Republican or Democrat, to come before the panel.

This break in pattern by the man who is arguably the Senate's most adventurous thinker and independent player ought to serve as a basis for rethinking strategies with regard to blocking the nomination as it now moves to the full Senate -- up to and including the prospect of a filibuster.

Simply put, if Alito is unacceptable to Feingold, then he should be unacceptable to a good many other senators -- including moderate Republicans with whom Feingold has worked closely on campaign finance reform and a host of other issues over the years, such as Maine Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins and Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chafee."

But I will add that unlike many liberals who think this is a done deal--I DON'T! No fight is over until YOU stop fighting. I called Dem senators (here)--again--today. So can you.

The NSA Wants to Monitor Your PB&J (Sandwiches)

You knew this was coming:

"A Pentagon memo obtained by NEWSWEEK shows that the deputy Defense secretary now acknowledges that some TALON reports may have contained information on U.S. citizens and groups that never should have been retained. The number of reports with names of U.S. persons could be in the thousands, says a senior Pentagon official who asked not be named because of the sensitivity of the subject."

Hack the Vote? Redux

Your vote is your voice. Was yours properly recorded? Counted? Can you prove it?

How?

The Justice Department's voting section, a small and usually obscure unit that enforces the Voting Rights Act and other federal election laws, has been thrust into the center of a growing debate over recent departures and controversial decisions in the Civil Rights Division as a whole.

Many current and former lawyers in the section charge that senior officials have exerted undue political influence in many of the sensitive voting-rights cases the unit handles. Most of the department's major voting-related actions over the past five years have been beneficial to the GOP, they say, including two in Georgia, one in Mississippi and a Texas redistricting plan orchestrated by Rep. Tom DeLay (R) in 2003.

The section also has lost about a third of its three dozen lawyers over the past nine months. Those who remain have been barred from offering recommendations in major voting-rights cases and have little input in the section's decisions on hiring and policy.

"If the Department of Justice and the Civil Rights Division is viewed as political, there is no doubt that credibility is lost," former voting-section chief Joe Rich said at a recent panel discussion in Washington. He added: "The voting section is always subject to political pressure and tension. But I never thought it would come to this."

Where is the outrage?

(UPDATE 1-27-06)

AlterNet: Election Theft Emergency: "For GOP voters, the 2004 presidential election was little short of miraculous: Behind in the Electoral College even on the afternoon of the vote, the Bush-Cheney ticket staged a stunning comeback. Usually reliable exit polls turned out to be wrong by an unprecedented 5 percent in swing states. Conservatives argued, and the media agreed, that 'moral values' had made the difference.

In his latest book, Fooled Again: How The Right Stole The 2004 Election, And Why They'll Steal The Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them), Mark Crispin Miller argues that it wasn't moral values which swung the election -- it was theft."

Happy Anniversary Pro-Choice Advocates!

It may be the last:

"Among the states getting F’s in NARAL’s report are Indiana and Ohio, where conservative lawmakers are introducing bills to ban abortion outright. They hope their measures become law and then face legal challenges that lead to a Supreme Court reconsideration of the 1973 Roe ruling that established abortion rights nationwide."

What can those of us do, who understand that the battle to over-turn choice is a war against womens' freedom? Will those who've had abortions be considered criminals?

By the age of 45, three out of ten American women will have had an abortion. That means every one of those women has had the protection of the Constitution to defend her right to chose whether to terminate her pregnancy. Now Catholic men whose dogma demand they see the world through Rome-colored glasses can dictate to a country of religious plurality the majority of which are women? What is worse, the warping of constitutional interpretation or that it is just part of an over-all attack on a variety of issues such as a thirty year-old law the majority of the country's citizens support?

You would think that given the millions of dollars invested and endless emotion-laden advertising efforts pro-life activists have launched, far more Americans would support their extremist anti-abortion position, but that has not happened. So why do courts and legislatures persist in maneuvering case after case, challenge after challenge, into position for an obvious hoped-for crush of a simple, safe medical procedure that not one American woman is forced to undergo?

There can only be one answer: religious politics.

If Alito is confirmed, a majority of the bench judges will be conservative male Catholics whose commitment to their brand of religious doctrinal interpretation clearly overshadows their commitment to the law of a secular land populated by people of multiple doctrinal beliefs.

It will be the poor who will bear the unfair brunt of laws the privileged will circumvent merely by the application of some well-placed dollars--exactly as was done in the bad old days.

Women this time will have to take sides and make hard choices. Women of independent means and mind will simply have to ensure that by whatever methods available women seeking reproductive freedom will find it.

A ban on abortion will be the next "prohibition" and like the last one, underground resistance as well as black market forces will drive its course. We will have to enable one while fighting the other until more sane minds step in to settle the matter--again--on the side of medical science rather than relgious zealotry.

Who'd have thought that at the turn of the millenium one of the world's most illuminated democracies would be plumetting back into its own dark ages?

Hack the Vote?

The potential perils of electronic voting systems are bedeviling state officials as a Jan. 1 deadline approaches for complying with standards for the machines' reliability.

Across the country, officials are trying multiple methods to ensure that touch-screen voting machines can record and count votes without falling prey to software bugs, hackers, malicious insiders or other ills.

These are not theoretical problems -- in some states they have led to lost or miscounted votes.

One of the biggest concerns -- the frequent inability of computerized ballots to produce a written receipt of a vote -- has been addressed or is being tackled in most states.

--snip--

In North Carolina, more stringent requirements -- which include placing the machines' software code in escrow for examination in case of a problem -- have led one supplier, Diebold Inc., to say it will withdraw from the state, where about 20 counties use Diebold voting machines.

A different type of showdown is brewing in California, where Secretary of State Bruce McPherson says he might force makers of the machines to prove their systems can withstand attacks from a hacker. One such test on a Diebold system -- Diebold machines were blamed for voting disruptions in a 2004 California primary -- is planned.

--snip--

Similarly, elections officials in Franklin County, Ohio -- where older voting machines gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in a preliminary count in 2004 -- recently asked computer experts to test newly purchased touch-screen voting machines from Election Systems and Software Inc.

Such designated hack attempts might be a flawed approach, because a failure proves only that a particular hacker could not break into a machine under certain conditions. That is not the same as opening things up to a broader group of researchers, as software developers sometimes do. Many critics of touch-screen election computers argue that the software should be publicly examined to make sure vote tampering could not occur.

--snip--

Since then, largely because of warnings from computer security experts and grass-roots activism, many states have began requiring the machines to produce paper receipts that voters can examine. At least 25 states have such rules and 14 more have requirements pending, according to the Verified Voting Foundation.

"There's a long way to go -- making our elections truly trustworthy in this country is a multifaceted problem," said David L. Dill, a Stanford University computer scientist and founder of the foundation. But he added that he expected a "much better situation in 2006" and noted that improving electronic voting has become "a delightfully nonpartisan issue."

Imagine that, the "sore losers" of past elections as the preservers of the most basic American 'right': one person, one vote.

Just one question. Why not paper trails?

ENVIRONMENT: 'Blue' States Tackling Energy On Their Own

Now, for you supporters of states' rights (which in theory I also support) here is your example of the problem inherent in DE-regulation AND states' rights:

'Blue' States Tackling Energy On Their Own: Democratic-leaning states increasingly are regulating energy use and emissions, working around a GOP-controlled federal government that state officials say has not done enough.

The states are creating energy efficiency requirements for light bulbs and household appliances, limiting power plant and automobile output linked to global warming, and requiring the use of renewable energy, such as wind and solar.

Leading the effort are "blue" states that voted Democratic in the 2004 presidential election. Even some of those states that have Republican governors, such as California and Connecticut, are making their own rules.

Oh yes..sounds better than good--sounds great--the state stepping in to do what's best for the state's citizenry.

And then there's this:

Building a Better Light Bulb -- at a Cost: For now, Osram Sylvania Inc. can ship its bulbs to all 50 states. But in 2007, the lighting giant will face a manufacturing and distribution headache: It will be forced to stop sending two types of common household flood lights to stores in Oregon and Washington state because the bulbs do not meet new state energy-efficiency requirements.

Even though the move affects only a couple of bulbs that sell for less than $6, it represents a trend: More states are setting their own energy policies for residential and commercial appliances in an effort to reduce electricity demand and power plant pollution.

Huh.

I remember a conversation I had with a very bright friend of mine, a Libertarian, about the same issue. In my example of the problem to him, I described pollution drift i.e. mercury from electric facilities killing lakes in adjacent downwind states. I was surprised--really surprised-- when I realized he had not considered that possibility before. Such fishbowl reasoning permeates too many individuals' opinions about issues regarding all aspects of the environment and is glaringly obvious in typical myopic views of truly important issues like global warming.

"When George Met Jack"...With Pictures

"White House aides deny the President knew lobbyist Abramoff, but unpublished photos shown to TIME suggest there's more to the story..."

As details poured out about the illegal and unseemly activities of Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, White House officials sought to portray the scandal as a Capitol Hill affair with little relevance to them. Peppered for days with questions about Abramoff's visits to the White House, press secretary Scott McClellan said the now disgraced lobbyist had attended two huge holiday receptions and a few 'staff-level meetings' that were not worth describing further. 'The President does not know him, nor does the President recall ever meeting him,' McClellan said.

The President's memory may soon be unhappily refreshed. TIME has seen five photographs of Abramoff and the President that suggest a level of contact between them that Bush's aides have downplayed. While TIME's source refused to provide the pictures for publication, they are likely to see the light of day eventually because celebrity tabloids are on the prowl for them. And that has been a fear of the Bush team's for the past several months: that a picture of the President with the admitted felon could become the iconic image of direct presidential involvement in a burgeoning corruption scandal "

(UPDATE 01-27-06) Bush defends Abramoff photos

Just Tell Us Which Side You're On, PLEASE.

Months ago my good friend, sometime blogger and international citizen David Chorlton made an observation in regard to the ongoing argument between American conservatives and liberals bickering over whose news outlets were more "fair and balanced". He noted that on a typical British newstand there are a variey of publications: socialist, Catholic, conservative and so on. He said that the British (and this extended to many other European nations) know what they read is biased by the nature of the publication. They accept and EXPECT the bias, and they discuss national politics from the position that all positions are biased, none has the "truth" and that government is a matter of striking balance among many factions' interests.

How sane. How reasonable. How unAmerican?

Finally though, American media bias severely skewed to conservative opinion (reflecting conservative media ownership interests) may force a paradigm shift. The relentless downward pressure to obfuscate negative political information combined with the increasing upward pressure of those who feel their day-to-day lives threatened by disinformation, will cause an eruption. If we're lucky, it will be an outpouring of intelligence, self-confidence, commitment and RESPECT for unapologetic liberal (and other) media sources.

Daily Kos: Read It and Weep: "We've been over it all again and again here in blogotopia. Using the Oval Office to having extramarital, consensual sex trumps using the Oval Office to falsify intelligence to take the country to war. It trumps using the Oval Office to engineer the outing of CIA operatives. And now we also know it trumps using the Oval Office to orchestrate the illegal, warrantless wiretapping of thousands of American citizens. Well, gee. I think we just really need to work on getting our priorities straight.

I'm just wondering when the traditional media is finally going to give up the pretense that it is objective in reporting the news. From Chris Matthew's (and the entire Fox gang's) hate speech to Deborah Howell's non-correction 'correction,' it's time they just admit the truth. They are Republican party organs. Most of the rest of the developed world doesn't operate on the false assumption that their media is unbiased. Why should we? Let's just get that out in the open, recognize who is on which side, and go on our merry way."

Justice Department Declares Warrantless Wiretaps Legal

Guys please, you're just going to have to get used to it; Bush WILL get a pass on everything he does--legal or not--ethical or not--"American" or not--you name it, until the day he's out of office (and of course I think there's a fifty percent chance he'll never leave office, well, on his own two feet that is). The Corporation is using him to set precedent to overturn laws so far down the pike you don't even know they exist. NSA taps for "terrorist" activity? Please. NSA taps for counter-Bush (read: counter corporate) activity.

Bush does NOT work for you. He never did. You didn't plant him in office, The Corporation did. He works for them. You (we) are on our own.

"'The NSA activities are supported by the President’s well-recognized inherent constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and sole organ for the Nation in foreign affairs to conduct warrantless surveillance of enemy forces for intelligence purposes to detect and disrupt armed attacks on the United States,' Justice Department lawyers write, referring to the President's order to wiretap Americans' calls overseas.

It adds, 'The President has the chief responsibility under the Constitution to protect America from attack, and the Constitution gives the President the authority necessary to fulfill that solemn responsibility.'"

Rove--War on Democrats, er, Terrorism--Central in 2006

Well du-uh! When's the last time a team abandoned it's Hail Mary play if it was effective? And hey, whaddaya-wanna bet he'll add Iran (if we've not already invaded) to his litany of Arabs to fear for the 2006 play-offs?!

Karlito, you just don't surprise us anymore:

War on terrorism central in elections : "Embattled White House adviser Karl Rove vowed Friday to make the war on terrorism a central campaign issue in November..."

I don't know. Maybe I'm being too hard on him. Maybe he's just too tired to come up with something new...

Osama bin ELF Finally Captured!

Now, why is bin Laden still sending us home-movies? Oh yeah, America's finest is chasing ELF's.

I find it remarkable that Gonzale's concern with "domestic terrorism" (...how Timothy McVeigh...I'm shaking in my fuzzy slippers) includes folks who want to stop something I completely agree SHOULD be stopped and because of corporate lobbying, won't be stopped unless someone gets the spine to make it an issue. Those things (just two of a likely thousand or so) are irresponsible logging (read: forest rape) and ghastly animal experiments. By the way--do you know what "death tests" are--the ones they routinely run on animals to see how much of a toxic chemical they can be force-fed until they die? Look on the label of anything under your sink. DT="x" is the number. Oh and did you know they destroy the vocal chords so the dying animals can't be heard screaming?...but I digress.

Honestly, this kind of domestic terrorism I support but I don't understand why this guy is out walking around...

"Director Robert S. Mueller III of the F.B.I., who appeared at the session with Mr. Gonzales, said one of the bureau's 'highest domestic terrorism priorities' is catching and prosecuting 'those who commit crime and terrorism in the name of animal rights or environmental issues.'

--snip--

Jerry Vlasak, a spokesman for the North American Animal Liberation Press Office, said none of the people named in the indictment had anything to do with the incidents cited, 'and we feel they will be exonerated.' The authorities 'simply have no idea' who belongs to the animal-rights groups, 'so they round up people they do know and squeeze them for information on other people,' he said."

Filibuster Alito

Daily Kos: There May Be Enough "No" Votes to Filibuster Alito!

John Kerry: Real Hardball

Via dKos (and I agree) John Kerry wants to see some real media Hardball:

"Here's what I'd like to see debated on Hardball.

President Bush's mouthpiece Scott McClellan can claim this administration puts terrorists out of business, but yesterday's tape reminds us that instead of being out of business, Osama is still out there.

If this administration had followed through on the opportunity to capture Osama Bin Laden at Tora Bora in 2001, the world would be a better place with Osama Bin Laden brought to justice -- and we wouldn't be having this discussion today.

And here's what the media should insist we discuss.

President Bush and his defenders continue to claim that Osama Bin Laden didn't escape at Tora Bora. But Gary Bernstein's book Jawbreaker documents what I said early in 2002 and during my debates with George Bush: that because Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon didn't use American troops to do the job and instead outsourced the job of killing the world's #1 terrorist to Afghan warlords, this cold blooded killer got away.

So what's the truth? There's a question that the full force of cable television should demand be answered. Press accounts over the last month have raised new concerns about the reliance on Afghan forces at Tora Bora in 2001. One account cited a Department of Defense document said to summarize the case against a suspected al Qaeda militant. The militant was believed to have helped Osama bin Laden escape from Tora Bora. More recently, August Hanning, the head of German intelligence, has said bin Laden bribed Afghan forces at Tora Bora to make his escape."

Clinton Covered Up (Thank Gawd He Actually Did Something For Which He's Accused)

Well, looks like I will finally have to agree when wingers bitch about Clinton cover-ups--at least as far as this ONE goes--though I had to chuckle when a winger blog's post title on the same makes a point I agree with: THE COVER-UP WORKED, GET OVER IT!

U.S. Rejects bin Laden Tape's 'Truce' Offer. No. Really?

It was a laughable try Osama, but thanks for giving it your best anyway.

So here are the unspoken scenarios:

• bin Laden is telling the truth and when "plans are complete" one or more American cities and/or targets' will be attacked. Sucessfully? Who knows...

• bin Laden is dying and he knows that without his leadership the resistance will fracture, dwindle and in the end, lose. He is trying to preserve his 'gains'.

• (UPDATE) bin Laden KNEW the States would reject (his offer). In fact, he was COUNTING on it. Why? Because it solidifies the image he wants Arabs to have of the US. Namely, that we're an invading infidel war machine that has no interest in peace. (from "Les")

Of course the spoken scenario is already gushing from the White House so I left it out of the list.

CNN.com - U.S. rejects�bin Laden tape's 'truce' offer - Jan 20, 2006: "Top U.S. officials responded by saying the United States would not be swayed in its fight against terrorists.

'Clearly the al Qaeda leaders and other terrorists are on the run. They're under a lot of pressure,' White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. 'We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business.'"

You'll Die When We Tell You To Die!

I gotta tell ya, those who love revenge sure know how to spare no charity, don't they? And these are generally the same folks who'd allow another human to suffer mindless pain until their last breath rather than support assisted suicide, correct? Jeez I'm proud to be a liberal!

Death row elder needed 2 injections: "With the help of four big prison guards, Clarence Ray Allen shuffled from his wheelchair to a gurney inside San Quentin's death chamber early Tuesday, a day after his 76th birthday.

Though legally blind, Allen raised his head to search among execution witnesses for relatives he had invited.

'Hoka hey, it's a good day to die,' Allen said in a nod to his Choctaw Indian heritage. 'Thank you very much, I love you all. Goodbye.'

Having suffered a heart attack back in September, Allen had asked prison authorities to let him die if he went into cardiac arrest before his execution, a request prison officials said they would not honor.

'At no point are we not going to value the sanctity of life,' said prison spokesman Vernell Crittendon. 'We would resuscitate him,' then execute him."

Democrats Unveil Lobbying Curbs

As much as I want the lobbying "culture of corruption" to end, what I really want is the end of the corporate culture of corruption to end. Were that accomplished the rest of this--which will only be sidestepped again--would be a moot point.

Democrats Unveil Lobbying Curbs: "Democratic leaders from the House and Senate endorsed proposals that closely mirror Republican plans unveiled this week to tighten regulations on lobbyists since the Jack Abramoff political corruption scandal broke. But in a sign that an ethical 'arms race' may be developing, the Democratic plans go further than the Republicans' proposals.

House and Senate Democrats gather at the Library of Congress to offer more restrictive measures to regulate lobbying than Republicans proposed.
House and Senate Democrats gather at the Library of Congress to offer more restrictive measures to regulate lobbying than Republicans proposed.

Rather than limiting the value of a gift to $20, as House Republicans are considering, Democrats would prohibit all gifts from lobbyists. Democrats also take direct aim at some of the legislative practices that have become established in the past 10 years of Republican rule in Congress. They vowed to end the K Street Project, under which Republicans in Congress pressure lobbying organizations to hire only Republican staff members and contribute only to Republican candidates.

Lawmakers would have to publicly disclose negotiations over private-sector jobs, a proposal inspired by then-House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman W.J. 'Billy' Tauzin's job talks in 2003 that led to his hiring as president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America in January 2005. Executive branch officials who are negotiating private-sector jobs would need approval from the independent Office of Governmental Ethics"

Medicare Part Debacle

Few wingers believe me when I claim to read winger blogs. Liberals scrunch up their noses and commend me. They tell me it's a job they can't bring themselves to do but are glad that for me, it is "fun" (well, it is)!

From such a blog comes the rare moment when a winger manages to find fault with just one of many bad programs: Medicare Part D.

Maybe if the legislators had written it instead of drug companies the people it is meant to serve (other than big pharma) could benefit.

The Plank: "So just how badly is President Bush's Medicare prescription drug program, known as 'Part D,' going? On Tuesday morning, I landed in Nashville, Tennessee, to find this bold headline atop the Tennessean front page: 'Pharmacists Decry Medicare Chaos.' As the article went on to explain, 'Area pharmacists are saying that the federal government's new drug plan for the elderly and disabled is a nightmare for druggists and an out-and-out catastrophe for the poor.'"

FYI, the current issue of Consumer Reports contains an illustrative article on how to BEGIN to think about identifying a Medicare Part D provider. In their test case that uses a real-life octegenarian buying her drugs from Canada they find that her best deal is, buying her drugs from Canada.

Huh, go figure.