Goose and Fenster pick the Senate

Each of us predicts a +4 Democrat gain in the Senate.
Goose predicts +23 Dem in the House, Fenster picks +28.

• Arizona: both pick Kyl (R) over Pederson (D)
  
• Maryland: Goose picks Steele (R), Fenster picks Cardin (D)
  
• Michigan: both pick Stabenow (D) over Bouchard (R)
  
• Minnesota: Both pick Klobuchar (D) over Kennedy (R)
  
• Missouri: Goose picks McCaskill (D), Fenster picks Talent (R)
  
• Montana: Goose picks Tester (D), Fenster picks Burns (R)
  
• New Jersey: both pick Menendez (D) over Kean (R)
  
• Ohio: both pick Brown (D) over DeWine (R)
  
• Pennsylvania: both pick Casey (D) over Santorum (R)
  
• Rhode Island: Goose picks Chafee (R), Fenster picks Whitehouse (D)
  
• Tennessee: both pick Corker (R) over Ford (D)
  
• Virginia: both pick Webb (D) over Allen (R)
  
• Washington: both pick Cantwell (D) over McGavick (R)
  

On the Foley scandal, aka Masturgate...

I had a whole big long enraged post written up about the failure of leadership in the Republican party through this cover-up, and how this scandal has legs because while Americans don't grasp the nuances of Jack Abramoff and are tuning out Iraq, but everyone knows what underage boy-fucking is, and unless you're Debra LaFave, there really isn't any way to put a pretty face on it.

...but this damn faltering piece of shit content management system pretty much ate it.

So instead I leave you with a joke.

Q. Why don't Republican congressmen use bookmarks?

A. They just bend over the pages.

Donut holes.

If it's good enough for indigent senior citizens and flipper people, I suppose it's good enough for me?

So at the ol' jobby job today they revealed to us our benefit plan for 2007, and the biggest surprise was the fact that our health insurance offerings no longer include HMOs or PPOs but instead are Medicare Part D style donut-hole coverage.

For those of you not familiar with the bloated fiasco of a scandal that is Medicare Part D, here's how it works.

Medicare pays 75% of the cost of seniors' drugs for the first $2250 after a $250 deductible. Then, at $2500, coverage stops entirely.

Medicare doesn't pay a red cent of the next $2600, meaning that seniors have to pay 100% of their drug costs out of pocket. After the $5100 mark, coverage resumes at a higher rate.

That's pretty much how our 2007 coverage works, and this seems to be the trend in health insurance.

Basically, there's three different tiers of coverage, ranging from $9 to $50 a week. And basically you have to guesstimate the amount of money that you're going to spend on medical expenses the next year.

The only people for whom this kind of scheme would work are those with predictable chronic illnesses.

If you're healthy, one of two things can happen. Either you can guess too low and get slammed with a catastrophic illness or accident that slams you with your entire donut hole at once (and then makes you pay a stiff percentage of the subsequent coverage), tough luck, too bad, you lose. Or you guess too high, stay healthy, and the bastards at the health insurance company make money on your sorry overinsured ass.

This is just yet another degradation in the state of managed healthcare in this country. Exactly how bad do things need to get before the government stops letting patients be victimized by an avaricious and cruel industry where dishonesty, willful ignorance and exploitation are the standard operating procedure?

I know right-wingers like to claim that universal health coverage will lead to Soviet style bread lines, but really, let's get real for a second. Let's, for the sake of argument, grant the wingers their worst fear: the dreaded LINE. (Because god forbid, if you actually make healthcare accessible, people might want to use it.)

I wait 45 minutes to an hour past the time of my appointment to see my doctor anyway. Waiting is not the worst thing in the world.

Staying sick because you can't afford to get well is worse - for patients, for their employers due to lost productivity, and due to everybody who eventually winds up footing the bill when their conditions make medical treatment inevitable.

Going broke because you failed to anticipate that you'd be paralyzed or get cancer is worse. And the problem's not just with uninsured. Health insurance companies are so pigfuckingly merciless about denying claims that even being insured is no insurance. The fact is, health insurance companies have every financial incentive to deny and deny and deny claims as long as humanly possible, and the current regulatory environment allows them to do just that.

If you like watching your health coverage turn to shit, vote Republican this November.

Everyone's clueless about immigration reform.

As Goose Doggy so helpfully likes to point out, I'm a bleeding heart liberal who wants to confiscate Bibles, burn the American flag, raise taxes, give plasma TVs to unwed mothers, make abortion mandatory, and smear feces on all the doorknobs at Walter Reed.

But I have to admit, on this immigration debate, I find myself more in agreement with wingnut Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Col.) than with the forces of compromise on the Senate floor. The much-ballyhooed, and eventually scuttled Kennedy-McCain "compromise" bill was completely unfeasible, a feelgood piece of legislation that essentially takes a mulligan on immigration rather than actually doing anything to solve the problem.

The biggest issue I have with the Senate compromise is that it's all carrot and no stick. I'm not opposed to a guest worker program, per se, but you can't make compliance voluntary, because then you still have a massive underground of undocumented immigrants who simply choose not to participate.

And why would they? There's no disincentive for staying off the books. Those immigrants who do not take advantage of earned citizenship are still undocumented, are still here illegally - nothing gets solved at all, other than encouraging more illegal immigration.

Frankly, I don't think that a lot of these immigrants care so much about citizenship, as they do about economic opportunity. They come to America so they can make money and support their families. Not because they crave the protections of the Bill of Rights. (And even if they did, that ten-amendment ship has sailed.)

The Balkanization of America is well underway, and these people aren't assimmilating. They aren't acclimating. They self-segregate and cling to their nation of origin like a security blanket, as evidenced by the paradoxical waving of Mexican and Salvadorean flags at these most recent immigration rallies. Ethnic pride is all well and good, and while a lot of pro-immigration forces counter with arguments about Irish flags getting flown at St. Patrick's Day parades, but the Irish don't walk around speaking Gaelic and expecting the rest of the country to accommodate them. If I moved to Japan, I would learn to speak Japanese. Sure, I'd speak English at home, but I wouldn't go out into the business world and expect the rest of the country to accommodate my ignorance.

Second, this idea that immigrants would have to pay a $2000 fine in order to earn their citizenship. Get real. What planet are these out-of-touch Senators living on? A lot of these people are working for minimum wage and supporting a family of four or more. How do they expect these people to scrape together $2000 for a fine? I have enough trouble saving up $2000 when I'm making five or six times that amount. This is a huge barrier that will put earned citizenship out of reach for the vast majority of people it's designed to help.

Third, the laws of supply and demand have a lot more to do with the current immigration crisis than the immigration laws. As long as big business interests can hire illegals with impunity, they'll keep coming - no matter what bills sit on Capitol Hill. The enforcement and penalties against employers who use illegal labor are ludicrous. Businesses must obey the law, and they should be punished harshly for failing to do so. Immigration isn't just the problem of the government. Big business ultimately is responsible for this mess. They are the ones who need to clean up their act, because until cheap immigrant labor stops being an attractive option, nothing whatsoever is going to change.

So what does comprehensive immigration reform actually need? Allow me to unveil my seven-point plan, guaranteed to offend and infuriate people on every corner of the political spectrum.

• Security. I don't know if building a fence will help, but in a post-911 world it is absolutely inexcusable to have such a porous border. If the guy washing dishes at the Olive Garden can figure out how to sneak into America, you think a terrorist mastermind can't?
  
• Enforcement on the business level. Make it cost prohibitive for employers to use illegal labor and they'll stop. Simple as that.
  
• Deport illegals who break the law. I don't care if it's a reckless driving misdemeanor. If you're here illegally, you deserve no second chances. No illegal immigrant with any criminal record should have any chance at citizenship, earned or otherwise. It's bad enough that the contempt for the law that our wink-wink nudge-nudge immigration policy spawns gangs like MS-13. The last thing we need are ordinariy illegals thinking it's OK to flee the scene of an accident, because that law doesn't need to be obeyed either.
  
• Give undocumented illegals a means towards citizenship, but make the alternative a criminal sanction or deportation. Making felons out of undocumented illegals is a bit draconian, but if citizenship is offered and not taken, they should be sent back to their country of origin. Either you're in or out.
  
• Make English the official language of the United States, and make English proficiency a prerequisite for citizenship.
  
• This "eat your vegetables and do your chores" approach to earned citizenship is, quite frankly, bullshit. Paying taxes and not getting arrested are things that these people need to be doing anyway. Why should we reward them for doing the bare minimum of what society asks of them? You want to talk about "earned citizenship?" Make them actually EARN IT. Institute a community service requirement. Even though pro-immigration forces belabor the point that they don't draw social security, the bottom line is that illegal aliens are a drain on the resources of every community. Make them give something back, locally, so they make a positive impact in their community. And helping some agribiz post record profits does not count as a "positive impact."
  
• Institute compulsory military service for able-bodied men (whether active, reserve, or National Guard). 5% of troops fighting in Iraq now are illegal aliens, and they are proving their devotion to the United States with their blood. If these immigrants want to be a part of this country, let them fight for it. Put up or shut up.

I'm sure that this plan sounds fairly extreme to some people, but it covers all the bases. It ensures enforcement against lawbreaking employers or immigrants. It gives illegals a chance to become citizens in such a way that preserves the cultural fabric of the nation. It actually makes them EARN "earned citizenship" in such a way that benefits the community and the country. It is certainly not the most compassionate option on the table, but it would go a much longer way towards actually controlling illegal immigration than the nasty House bill or the toothless Senate version.

And really, has anyone got a better idea?

Did Roy Blunt try to steal the Majority Leader position?

"Vote early, vote often." - Al Capone

From the bomb-throwing liberals at Roll Call:

House Republicans are taking a mulligan on the first ballot for Majority Leader. The first count showed more votes cast than Republicans present at the Conference meeting.

Oopsie.

How does something like that happen? Seriously. I know Republicans suffer amnesia every time a grand jury or Congressional oversight is involved, but is this really something that can be shrugged offf as an honest mistake? Are people really going to forget that they already voted? Ockham's Razor states that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

Q. Why would there be more ballots cast in an election than people to cast them?
A. Somebody's cheating!

Could it be that Abramoff-tainted Tom Delay protege Roy Blunt was rigging the vote?

Prior to the GOP leadership elections, Blunt proclaimed that he had the support of 117 Congressmen - the majority he would need to win the post. After they realized the ballot box had been stuffed, they redid the first round. Blunt had 110 votes. John Boehner had 79, John Shadegg had 40, and Jim Ryun had 2. Shadegg and Ryan dropped out and were eliminated, respectively. In the second round, Blunt's support dropped to 109 votes. Boehner won with 122.

Who would have the motivation to stuff the ballot box? Well, let's look at it rationally for a second. If you think you've got 80 votes, you'd need an awful lot of fake votes to get to 117. If you know you've got 110 votes - it'd be much easier to slip an extra handful in there.

Put another way: in 2000, it wasn't Ralph Nader trying to nibble around the margins of the Florida vote. It was the guy who knew he would lose any statewide recount. It doesn't make sense to game the system if you're already winning, or if you're getting blown out of the water. It only makes sense to cheat when it means the difference between victory and defeat. And which of the candidates was on the cusp?

Roy Fucking Blunt and his eyebrows of doom. Seriously. If there's a War on Terror, how come those horrifying face wraiths are still allowed in public? It's like an Edvard Munch painting threw up on the guy's forehead.

And just in case you think I'm implying that Boehner - legendary for handing out tobacco lobbyist checks on the House floor - is any kind of hope for reform or clean government - just Google K Street Cabinet.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. At least this way we get to make 2 years worth of erect penis jokes at the Majority Leader's expense.

Hehehe. Boehner.

The state of our union is fucked.

Fenster and Liebs live-blog the State of the Union Address...

[21:03] fenster: joe lieberman and sam alito have the two most smug grins of the evening thus far

[21:03] fenster: you're not missing much.

[21:03] liebs: 16.1 seconds left, 62-62, Tech ball

[21:03] fenster: it's kind of like the banter that goes on on talk shows underneath the theme music into and out of commercial stopsets.

[21:04] fenster: i bet alito's not wearing any pants under the robe.

[21:04] liebs: NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

[21:04] fenster: what are they gonna do - fire him?

[21:04] liebs: they take Tech's tip-in away, call a foul, VPI shoots 2 free throws for the game with 0.5 seconds left

[21:04] liebs: motherfucker

[21:05] fenster: so it'll set the perfect mood for you to watch the agenda for the next year worth of american decay.

[21:05] liebs: good thing I don't own a gun

[21:05] liebs: fuck

[21:05] fenster: what kind of georgian are you, leibs?

[21:05] fenster: what would jesus do?

[21:05] fenster: he would own at least three guns!

[21:05] liebs: I've been sports blue balled

[21:06] fenster: your years as a ranger fan should have prepared you for that.



[21:06] liebs: bleh

[21:06] fenster: sam alito's bald spot looks like the number 9.

[21:07] liebs: dammit, 63-62, that's 6 losses in a row

[21:07] liebs: what channel are we watching this on?

[21:07] fenster: your years as a redskins fan should have prepared you for that.

[21:07] fenster: msnbc.

[21:07] liebs: because I'm not depressed enough already

[21:08] fenster: here come da bush.

[21:08] fenster: are people booing?

[21:08] liebs: bouche

[21:08] liebs: rhymes with douche

[21:08] fenster: that's incredibly ironic.

[21:09] fenster: bill frist looks like he's about to shit his pants just about every time he's in front of a camera

[21:09] liebs: "hey Tiny. Sweet Tits. Shooter. Cha Cha, how ya doin!"

[21:09] fenster: which one is sweet tits?

[21:09] liebs: your guess is as good as mine

[21:09] fenster: i wonder if he calls the house minority leader nanny-poo.

[21:10] fenster: "hey, token! nice robe!"

[21:10] liebs: I wonder how often Laura stands between two black people

[21:10] liebs: hell, 2 non-Christian white people

[21:10] liebs: non-Christian, non-white people

[21:10] fenster: probably only in her wank fantasies. HEYOOOOO!

[21:10] liebs: because I'm not nauseated enough from the basketball, obrigado

[21:10] fenster: she dreams of being the cream in a michael steele-clarence thomas oreo.

[21:11] fenster: oooh, poor taste.

[21:11] liebs: where's that rogue Japan Airlines flight when you need it?

[21:11] fenster: my god dennis hastert is fat.

[21:11] fenster: be careful, you'll get both of us on the watchlist

[21:11] fenster: i'm a travel writer. i need to be able to get on planes

[21:12] liebs: I only read Debt of Honor, I didn't write it

[21:12] fenster: bush sounds a bit slurry

[21:12] fenster: i wonder if he needed a nip or two to get through this thing

[21:13] liebs: it's tough to force out nice words about Coretta King

[21:13] liebs: for him

[21:13] fenster: yikes, hearing him pronounce "rostrum" was hard.

[21:13] liebs: think he has any idea what "rostrum" means?

[21:13] fenster: i wouldn't guess he cares

[21:13] fenster: scolding the democrats already.

[21:14] fenster: the state of our union is always strong. someone buy the man a thesaurus.

[21:14] fenster: of course, bible beaters like bush believe that the thesaurus is a tool of satan to disprove the events of the book of genesis.

[21:15] liebs: that doesn't make any fucking sense

[21:15] fenster: september 11!

[21:15] liebs: 9/11

[21:15] fenster: everybody drink!

[21:15] liebs: drink!!!

[21:15] fenster: terrists.

[21:16] fenster: weapons of mass destruction!

[21:16] fenster: this all sounds very familiar

[21:16] fenster: act boldly in freedom's cause ... except when it's the freedom to elect hamas

[21:16] liebs: McCain's thinking, "what a douche"

[21:16] fenster: 3/4 of the room is.

[21:17] liebs: purple ink this, asshat

[21:17] fenster: wow, the axis of evil got a few pledges huh?

[21:17] fenster: i'm surprised venezuela was off the list.

[21:17] liebs: they had hot rush workers

[21:18] fenster: did he say "vin laden?"

[21:18] liebs: just like radical Christianism!

[21:18] fenster: he's the arab vin diesel!

[21:18] liebs: weapons of mass murder?

[21:18] fenster: the terrorists have chosen the weapon of fear.

[21:18] fenster: if all they have is the weapon of fear, bush should be able to cast a magic missile or something

[21:19] fenster: he sounds testy already

[21:19] liebs: "we love our freedom" to drive 5 mpg Fuck-You-Mobile SUVs

[21:20] fenster: "we no longer believe in our own ideals" - nice of you to notice, abu george.

[21:20] fenster: aw, come on. can we surrender to evil?

[21:20] fenster: the democrats do it almost every day.

[21:20] liebs: isn't that what his daughters do every Saturday in Adams-Morgan?

[21:20] fenster: no, i believe that's called "catching chlamydia."

[21:21] fenster: we have a clear plan to victory!

[21:21] fenster: i'm so glad to hear taht

[21:21] fenster: this is all the exact same shit nobody bought the last 8000 times he said it.

[21:21] liebs: anything specific yet? no?

[21:22] fenster: he's hitting all his catchphrases,

[21:22] fenster: it's like watching steve austin do a promo

[21:22] fenster: predictable and half drunk

[21:22] liebs: is shoving maglites up dudes' assholes brutal?

[21:22] fenster: it depends on the lube.

[21:23] fenster: KY? good. WD40? not as good as you'd think. chunky peanut butter? nuh huh.

[21:23] liebs: riiiiiiiiight

[21:23] fenster: one of those navy chicks clapping uncomfortably looks like christopher walken.

[21:23] liebs: not by politicians in Washington, DC - I'll believe that when I see it

[21:23] fenster: he really sounds like he's tripping over his tongue

[21:24] fenster: it's amazing if you compare video of him speaking now with video of him speaking in 1998 or so

[21:24] fenster: something's obviously different

[21:24] liebs: bourbon's a mean wine

[21:24] liebs: did he just say "hindsightism"?

[21:24] fenster: a duty to speak with candor?

[21:24] fenster: i bet he doesn't know "candor" any better than he does "rostrum"

[21:25] fenster: we should have kept a list of words bush used in the speech that he likely didn't know the meaning of

[21:25] fenster: did i see elton john in the gallery?

[21:25] fenster: whoever it is looks emaciated.

[21:25] fenster: maybe elton got the aids as a wedding present

[21:26] liebs: using a dead marine, classy

[21:26] fenster: how dare you denigrate the sacrifice of the military

[21:26] liebs: "Congratulations, your son is dead!!!!"

[21:27] fenster: go join the national guard, you hippie scum.

[21:27] fenster: that looks like donna from that 70s show.

[21:27] fenster: hey dead marine, your sister's pretty hot.

[21:27] fenster: at least i hope it's his sister and not his wife

[21:27] liebs: you're being used, ginger

[21:27] fenster: because this would be an awkward moment otherwise

[21:28] fenster: this is all the same shit all over again

[21:28] fenster: jesus christ

[21:28] fenster: get some new material

[21:28] liebs: elections that elect Hamas, dummy?!!!

[21:28] fenster: did he say strong cannibal institiutions?

[21:29] liebs: is he serious about the Egyptian elections?

[21:29] fenster: nobody watches the fact check afterwards.

[21:29] fenster: saudi arabian reform!

[21:29] fenster: riiiiiight

[21:30] fenster: his description of iraq again sounds like the religious right

[21:30] fenster: this is useless saber rattling. iran doesn

[21:30] fenster: 't care how loud and peevish bush gets

[21:30] fenster: dude i think his eyes just went cross for a minute

[21:31] fenster: rumsfeld looks vicious

[21:31] fenster: like he just ate a baby covered in lemon pulp

[21:31] fenster: spreading hope in hopeless lands

[21:31] fenster: i wonder if he'll mention new orleans?

[21:32] fenster: villerger?

[21:32] liebs: but not for a knocked-up American chick!

[21:32] fenster: the jug trade?

[21:32] fenster: he's drunk.

[21:32] fenster: that's a freudian slip if ever there was

[21:34] fenster: would it be racist for me to say that alberto gonzales looks like a shifty little bastard?

[21:34] liebs: September the 11th!!!

[21:34] fenster: or would i have to add a few adjectives, like refrito-smeared?

[21:34] fenster: shit. drink!

[21:34] liebs: "we did not know of their plans" - YES YOU DID, DUMMY!!!!

[21:35] liebs: not true

[21:35] fenster: he's pulling this out of his ass

[21:35] fenster: this whole thing is a pack of lies

[21:35] fenster: hillary has a new and improved joker products grin

[21:35] fenster: and bush looks like he's about to deliver a suckerpunch

[21:36] liebs: tera networks?

[21:36] fenster: the pursed lips and droopy eyes

[21:36] liebs: "when freedom is on the march" - do you think he realizes the paradox there?

[21:37] fenster: of course not

[21:37] fenster: i don't think he knows the meaning of the word paradox either.

[21:38] liebs: that's because Japan and the EU are in severe recession, dumbass

[21:39] liebs: "I need my gardeners on the ranch in Crawford, people!"

[21:40] fenster: i feel another round of explosive diarrhea coming on.

[21:40] fenster: give rich people more tax cuts!

[21:40] fenster: and the republicans go crazy

[21:40] liebs: "I urge the Congree to act responsibly" and put us even further in debt to the Chinese

[21:41] fenster: i thought congress spending was out of control? which is it?

[21:41] fenster: "cut the deficit in half by 2009"

[21:41] fenster: Liar!

[21:42] fenster: wow, mccain nearly had a stroke clapping for the earmark reform

[21:43] fenster: hillary looks really uncomfortable. i wonder if her disgust is real or if she spent an hour in front of the mirror practicing it

[21:43] fenster: a moment of levity for the democrats.

[21:44] liebs: let's create a commission to examine!!!!

[21:44] liebs: because we need more bureaucracy, that always solves problems

[21:44] fenster: so we can ignore its recommendations and do whatever we wanted to in the first place!

[21:44] liebs: we still make and grow stuff?

[21:46] liebs: uh oh, Boosh don't like the Democrats taking the piss

[21:47] fenster: health savings accounts, another lovely crock o' merde.

[21:47] fenster: i wonder how long it'll take to blow this one out of the water

[21:47] liebs: Wall Street loves it, it must be good!

[21:47] fenster: there's no way any of that's moving forward

[21:48] liebs: tort reform has NOTHING to do with doctors' insurance rates

[21:48] fenster: nope.

[21:48] fenster: just another giveaway to the insurance companies

[21:48] liebs: they've spent 10 billion, a fraction of what we need

[21:48] liebs: 22% more is STILL NOT ENOUGH

[21:48] fenster: he said nukeular. drirnk

[21:49] liebs: funding for hybrid cars, only 6 years too late

[21:49] fenster: yeah, too bad nobody will be left at ford or gm to build them

[21:50] liebs: by 2025, there won't be any OIL LEFT

[21:50] fenster: by 2030 we all better have mr. fusion on our delorean

[21:50] liebs: 1.21 JIGGAWATTS!!!!

[21:51] fenster: give our children a firm grounding in math and science.

[21:51] fenster: what would jesus engineer?

[21:51] liebs: that girl's thinking, "shit, I've got to take more math and science now?"

[21:51] fenster: you hear that science man? bush give you money!

[21:51] liebs: nano nano

[21:52] liebs: you know where that nanotechnology money goes to? Defense projects

[21:52] fenster: of cours.e

[21:52] liebs: "Center for Soldier Nanotechnologies"

[21:52] liebs: stain resistant uniforms, hooray!!!

[21:53] liebs: sorry Dubya, research universities prefer foreign students whose governments pay for their tuition

[21:54] liebs: thank you, Trojan Man

[21:54] fenster: now he pays the piper

[21:54] fenster: red meat for the mouth breathers

[21:54] fenster: abstinence is for fuckers.

[21:54] fenster: i think i'm going to make that a t-shirt.

[21:55] liebs: does he realize all these societal improvements are due to Clinton initiatives that Bush just ignored since 2000?

[21:55] fenster: well, it stands to reason

[21:55] fenster: that if everything wrong in bush's term is clinton's fault

[21:55] fenster: everything clinton did right, bush gets the credit for

[21:55] fenster: dipso, facto.

[21:56] liebs: Chief Justice John Roberts - bleh

[21:56] liebs: I miss Thurgood Marshall

[21:56] liebs: "legislate from the bench" - you fucktard

[21:57] fenster: roberts at least looks like the kind of guy who'll look you in the eye as he slides in the knife.

[21:57] liebs: and by knife you mean cock into other gay man's anus?

[21:57] fenster: human-animal hybrids? WTF?!

[21:58] fenster: i'm glad to see bush addressing the big issues of the day

[21:59] fenster: my tivo wants to change this and put on invader zim.

[21:59] fenster: i figure, what's the difference?

[21:59] liebs: at 9 my tivo wanted to change to Chappelle's Show

[22:00] fenster: more opportunities that the people most affected by katrina won't be able to get within a mile of

[22:01] fenster: i thought for a second there he was going to say that half of all AIDS cases were caused by HIV

[22:01] liebs: ah, faith-based groups, awesome

[22:01] liebs: which faith, you think?

[22:01] fenster: isn't turning the department of defense into a faith-based initiative enough?

[22:02] fenster: we sounds like he's on the home stretch

[22:03] fenster: he definitely sounds a bit castrated since last year

[22:03] fenster: and why aren't we going to mars anymore?

[22:03] liebs: bleh

Al Gore vs. Abu Gonzales

This Gore-Gonzales feud is getting interesting. Republicans somehow think that by keeping Gore in the spotlight it helps their cause. Like Gore elicits the same revulsion that enables them to demonize MoveOn.org and Michael Moore. When in reality, every time he pops up more than half of America sighs heavily under the weight of a pile of buyer's remorse.

As much as they try to paint Al Gore as an unhinged, out of touch, and crazy, the man speaks the truth. Just like they continue to insist that opposition to the Iraq war is the realm of the far left fringe even though only 34% of Americans approve of Bush's handling. While the most vocal and strident opposition has often come from liberal Democrats, the vaunted great American middle has for the most part cringed silently as Bush's lofty nation-building goals crumble one by one.

The Bush strategerists think that they can get away with the same tactic here and stifle dissent by marginalizing the opposition. But this is not a partisan issue, and not only are the American people overwhelmingly opposed to warrantless wiretaps (and with only a bare majority supporting them at all, which is kind of surprising and calls into question the general level of trust the American public has for the Bush administration), but some of the Administration's most vocal critics on this issue have been its biggest supporters - like former uber-conservative Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), who introduced Gore's speech; "drown the government in the bathtub" archconservative Grover Norquist, and crusty limey drunk and relentless Iraq cheerleader Christopher Hitchens (a plaintiff in the ACLU's lawsuit over the wiretaps). There is simply no way for a Republican to disavow Grover Norquist without his head exploding.

In his Monday speech, Gore laid out in stark terms what is at stake in the NSA scandal. The GOP is running scared because they know that if the debate gets framed on Gore's simple, clear-as-day terms instead of on their panicky, fearmongering arguments, there is no way they can win. McClellan responds with a desperate and nasty bluff:

"If Al Gore is going to be the voice of the Democrats on national security matters, we welcome it ... his hypocrisy knows no bounds."

So then they trot out Gonzales to insist that "Clinton did it too," the Bush apologists' answer to everything (that is, everything they don't answer by invoking 9/11). Too bad it's totally false. Gore responds, and the AP confirms:

Both before and after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was amended in 1995, the Clinton/Gore Administration complied fully and completely with the terms of the law.

Gore then adds:

[T]he Attorney General's attempt to cite a previous administration's activity as precedent for theirs - even though factually wrong - ironically demonstrates another reason why we must be so vigilant about their brazen disregard for the law. If unchecked, their behavior would serve as a precedent to encourage future presidents to claim these same powers, which many legal experts in both parties believe are clearly illegal.

The Bush administration has absolutely no answer for why it used illegal channels to do something that would have been easily achievable within the limits of the law. So for as often as the GOP likes to consider itself victimized by "the politics of personal destruction" or "blind hatred" on the left, how about responding to the specifics of the case rather than by simply smearing those who expose them?

The more energy Bush and his surrogates expend on discrediting Al Gore, the longer they keep this story atop the news - and the worse it looks for them. Alberto Gonzales can get as snitty, feral and defensive as he wants, it doesn't change or even conceal the fact that he has no satisfactory explanation for this. Gore has nothing to lose by continuing to hammer away. Gonzales and the rest of the Bushies simply dig the hole deeper with each passing day.

So if Karl Rove really wants to step to Gore - I have but three very familiar words for him:

Bring 'em on.

Democratic buckshot is a missed shot at NSAlito

So I have to say I've been fairly disappointed with the performance of Senate Democrats last week during Samuel Alito's SCOTUS confirmation hearings. With a little coordination and planning, they could have mounted a successful opposition of Alito that would have made obvious the necessity of the filibuster. But disorganization, poor message discipline, and ego rendered the Democrats' scattershot attacks ineffective and left the path clear for Alito's confirmation.

The Democrats should have made a single, simple plan of attack: make Alito the face of the NSA spy scandal. Make him own it, make him embrace it. "Sam Alito thinks it's OK for George Bush to read your email and listen to your phone calls without a warrant." That should have been the narrative. That should have been the talking point, again and again, all week long.

It wouldn't be a hard point to make, seeing as how Alito's fingerprints are all over the theory of the unitary executive - which Al Gore "more accurately described as the unilateral executive." The Democrats should have repeatedly drawn, bolded, and underlined that ipso, ergo arrow between Bush's extralegal domestic surveillance and Alito's work on the unitary executive idea, a theory that conflates the implied powers clause of the constitution to mean supremacy of the President over Congress and the judiciary.

Democrats missed a golden opportunity. According to an AP-Ipsos poll, the majority of Americans oppose warrantless surveillance, even though many - myself included - are in favor of wiretaps of terror suspects conducted within the law. (The earlier Rasmussen poll cited by Michelle Malkin, RedState, et. al. as evidence for American support for NSA surveillance does not take into account the warrantless nature of the program.)

And unlike the Valerie Plame or Jack Abramoff cases, Americans are paying "very close" attention to this story - 68% according to Rasmussen. While you would never know it from the mainstream media or from the Democratic leadership, there is much more popular support for Bush's impeachment than there ever was for Clinton's. According to a Zogby poll released on 14 January, 52% of Americans support impeachment because of the NSA program. Only 36% supported Clinton's. So the American people understand the gravity of the situation, and the percentage favoring impeachment is greater than the percentage of the popular vote Bush received in either 2000 or 2004. Why did the Democrats miss this golden opportunity?

For a variety of different reasons. First, a failure to understand and explain the big picture to the American people. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) kept harping on Alito's refusal to recuse himself from cases involving Vanguard, the company holding his mutual funds, without ever explaining why that was relevant. It's relevant because it displays his willingness to say anything to get a job. Alito all but admitted as much responding to inquiries as to his boasts of Concerned Alumni of Princeton membership in 1985 and anti-abortion and anti-equality statments made when he was trying to get into Reagan's Justice Department. Alito, man of integrity, said "It was different then. I was an advocate seeking a job. It was a political job."

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) missed this relevance entirely, preferring instead to up the ante by trying to use CAP to paint Alito, personally, as a racist and sexist - allegations that fizzled out upon the release of the organization's records. This is symptomatic of the whole way politics go down in DC nowadays. Substantive policy debate has taken a backseat to "gotcha" moments - and the Democrats were obviously looking for one great big "GOTCHA" that they could use to derail Alito's nomination, instead of using the obvious opportunity presented to them. Finally, ego hampered the Democrats' approach - particularly presumptive 2008 hopeful Joe Biden (D-Del.), who mugged for the camera, bloviating endlessly and chewing scenery like a goat with the munchies. Sen. Biden needs to shut the fuck up and find a nice little concession speech to plagiarize, because he'll be the President the day I become the Secretary of Defense.

Another area where the Democrats shot themselves in the foot with Alito was abortion. Yes, Alito is overtly hostile to Roe vs. Wade. Yes, that's obviously why the rank-and-file religious right cares about him. But that's not why he was nominated, and it's incredibly short-sighted to make abortion the be-all, end-all of the American judicial system. Abortion is, if you'll forgive the pun, a short-term issue. It is an issue that divides Americans. Democrats won't change Alito supporters' minds by pointing out, egads, he's pro-life! No shit Sherlock, that's his appeal. But painting Alito as someone who will allow the destruction of American democracy makes stopping him imperative for anyone who cares more about whether they live under a dictatorship than whether someone they don't know makes a personal decision that has nothing to do with them.

The NSA scandal lapped in the Democrats' laps as a godsend, a bolt from the heavens with Sam Alito's pasty puckered ass written all over it. And they dropped the ball. This doesn't inspire a lot of hope for them making hay of the Jack Abramoff scandal either. Democratic lack of focus and message discipline keeps biting them in the ass, and Harry Reid needs to lay the smack down on his troops unless he wants the Democrats to fade into irrelevance entirely.