Helping rich people

Josh Marshall linked to this video of former Texas Lt. Governor Ben Barnes, taken at a Kerry rally recently, in which Barnes talks about how he got George Bush into the Texas National Guard.

Let’s talk a minute about John Kerry and George Bush and I know them both. And I’m not name dropping to say I know ‘em both. I got a young man named George W. Bush in the National Guard when I was Lt. Gov. of Texas and I’m not necessarily proud of that. But I did it. And I got a lot of other people into the National Guard because I thought that was what people should do, when you're in office you helped a lot of rich people. And I walked through the Vietnam Memorial the other day and I looked at the names of the people that died in Vietnam and I became more ashamed of myself than I have ever been because it was the worst thing that I did was that I helped a lot of wealthy supporters and a lot of people who had family names of importance get into the National Guard and I’m very sorry about that and I’m very ashamed and I apologize to you as voters of Texas.

Oh my. One of the sponsors of the Federal Marriage Amendment has resigned, after being outed by a website called BlogActive, which claims to have multiple tapes of him calling a gay phone-sex line. (It looks like the tapes are on the website to listen to; naturally I have no idea about whether this all is for real other than the fact that the man has actually resigned over it. Which sort of speaks for itself, doesn't it?)

Slimed!

Bob Herbert in The NY Times wonders, Where is the shame? (I'm going to start using the phrase "GOP slime machine" at every opportunity.) And here is another op-ed piece, by author Larry Heinemann:

When I came back from Vietnam, I always thought that the next argument was going to be between those who went overseas and those who stayed at home. But it turns out that the big argument now is between those veterans who thought the war was right and those who didn't. And further, it is amazing to me that the argument should revolve around medals and Purple Hearts and honorable service.

I can't believe there's even a question about how to cover the Swift Boat Veterans group. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I'm astonished that anybody even agreed to air these ads in the first place. It crossed my mind that maybe stations were required to air them, but then I realized that I already know that that's not true - CBS refused to air MoveOn's ad during the Super Bowl. So what is their excuse here?

Also, I keep forgetting to mention that factcheck.org has really good, definitive answers up to all the Swift Boat nonsense. And they are pretty definitely nonpartisan - if you don't believe me, scroll down to where they blasted Kerry about his attendance record on some committee meetings a couple of weeks ago. And I just found an article there that answers some of my questions about campaign ads - it's called False Ads: There Oughtta Be A Law! Or -- Maybe Not.

Stations can reject ads for any reason from political groups other than candidates. And they may reject ads from all candidates for a given office. But if they take ads from one candidate they can't legally refuse ads from opponents, except for technical reasons (such as being too long or short to fit standard commercial breaks, or if the recording quality is poor) or if they are "obscene." Rejecting a candidate's ad because it's false is simply not allowed.

True Lies

He is a man of his word as the Taliban were the first to find out

--Dick Cheney, speaking about Bush in New York City.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands protest elsewhere in the city, carrying signs that say "Liar" and shouting "No more years!"

John & Jon

(Does "John & Jon" sound like a porn movie, or am I just a pervert?)

Anyway, John Kerry was on the Daily Show last night, in case you haven't heard. I saw it - Kerry is no Bill Clinton as far as personality, but he didn't do badly. I thought Jon Stewart was pretty easy on him, really.

-----------------------------------------------

This guy's a lawyer and he doesn't see the conflict of interest? Was he asleep in that part of ethics class or something? However, I think Mary Beth Cahill might be a little overboard with some of this:

Now we know why George Bush refuses to specifically condemn these false ads. People deeply involved in his own campaign are behind them, from paying for them, to appearing in them, to providing legal advice, to coordinating a negative strategy to divert the public away from issues like jobs, health care and the mess in Iraq, the real concerns of the American people. It's time for George Bush to take responsibility himself and condemn these false attacks

Not that I completely disagree with any of that, I'm just not sure that this proves anything.

-----------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, Cheney is getting flack from all sides, which always amuses me.

And did you know that Olympic athletes are barred from blogging? Weird.

-----------------------------------------------

And... the protestant majority is vanishing. I had no idea. (Here's the scholarly piece that article was based on, in pdf.) So maybe I shouldn't worry so much about the "moral majority" taking over the country - hell, they're not even a majority!

Stuff not related to elections

Now there's a concept... Actually this first one does have an indirect connection, but at least it's not about swift boats.

From the Wall Street Journal:

New employment data show that most election "battleground" states gained jobs in July, but three-quarters have fewer jobs than they did when Bush took office. In all, nonagricultural employers in 28 states and Washington, D.C., added jobs in July. The U.S. as a whole added only 32,000 nonfarm jobs.

(I have a new subscription to the WSJ but I'm sure I won't be able to link much from there, since everything is paid. I'll just have to do a lot of quoting.)


And also from the WSJ:

A simple blood test can predict how long a woman may survive with metastatic breast cancer, giving doctors a powerful new tool which some scientists believe can be used to customize treatments for individual patients.

The test, by Immunicon Corp., of Huntingdon Valley, Pa., measures the number of tumor cells circulating in the blood stream. That number offers a remarkably precise predictor of a patient's survival, according to a study published today in the New England Journal of Medicine. In the study, which was funded by Immunicon, researchers found that women with five or more tumor cells in a small test tube of blood died in an average of 10 months. That compares with more than 18 months for those with fewer than five tumor cells in their blood.

That's pretty impressive.

On the offensive

Kerry on the offensive
The Boston Globe has weighed in as well.


On the president's, well, lack of intellectualism. (You gotta love an article that uses the phrase "Mayberry Machiavellis".)

More on swift boats and the National Guard

Josh Marshall has been taking on the notorious "swift boat" ads. (Do people really believe that baloney? Amazing.) He also references
this Slate article, which is worth taking a look at. And keep reading down Marshall's columns; there are at least three articles on this subject. I didn't even know until I read this that Kerry has finally decided to respond. (I got busy yesterday and now I'm seriously behind on reading - weblogs, e-mail, you name it.)

Of course, the President keeps telling people he would never question my service to our country. Instead, he watches as a Republican-funded attack group does just that. Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam, here is my answer: “Bring it on.”

More on this subject: the NYTimes tackles it today, as does MSNBC, and Charles Fincher's take on it is also interesting.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch (I don't think that phrase has ever come out of my mouth before), the Bushes are at Crawford working on their speeches, and so-called "Democratic" senator Zell Miller - he calls himself a Democrat but he votes Republican - is to give the keynote speech at the convention.

The Note's news summary for today:

President Bush: rest, write, read, plan, listen, meet, practice, watch, clear, ride.

Senator Kerry: travel, listen, seethe, plan, read, strum, ignore, shake, unpack, hire.

(The part about seething is what amuses me.)

The dangers of religion

Somebody finally said the stuff I've been thinking lately about religion.

There are now more people in our country who believe that the universe was created in six solar days than there were in Europe in the 14th century. In the eyes of most of the civilized world, the United States is now a rogue power — imperialist, inarticulate and retrograde in its religiosity. Our erstwhile allies are right not to trust our judgment. We elect leaders who squander time and money on issues like gay marriage, Janet Jackson's anatomy, Howard Stern's obscenities, marijuana use and a dozen other trifles lying at the heart of the Christian social agenda, while potentially catastrophic problems like nuclear proliferation and climate change go unresolved.

Disclaimer: yes, I'm perfectly aware that all Christians don't behave like George Bush and his cronies. Or believe exactly the same things that they do. I know that many Christians believe that even if Jesus does come back tomorrow, it's still up to them to be good stewards of the planet.

But it seems to me that these people are the minority.

I'm sorry, I really am. I wish I didn't feel this way, but I do. I'd much rather not be anti-religion but the events of this year have forced my thinking that way. It's dangerous to have people running the country who think that their god talks to them personally. (Of course, not only do I believe as an agnostic that they're wrong, I also believe that if you're listening to the voices in your brain you're inclined to hear exactly what you want to hear.) And probably it's even more dangerous that as evangelical Christians, they think that Christ is going to come back any minute and take them away. Because if you think that's true, then why worry about the environment? Why worry about the future of the Middle East, other than to help Israel because of course they're pivotal in the coming apocalypse?

A lot of the problems lie at the very root of Christianity, in my mind. Most Christians I know do believe that god talks to them personally, even if many of them think it's in a much more indirect way. And the teachings of Revelations - the "rapture" and all its trappings - however controversial, are widely believed as well. I don't know exactly where I'm going with this - I didn't even start out to write a rant here, but it did sort of turn into one, didn't it? And I certainly don't have any answers, except to agree with Mr. Harris that this is no way to run a country.

Sunday miscellany

Since I live in a so-called "red state" I don't normally get to set the ads the candidates are running. But earlier on ESPN I got treated to what is presumably the one that CPF was referring to the other day (see the "Last Refuge" entry below). Oh, the joy.

Also? This makes me feel somewhat better about what's going on - or not going on - with Kerry lately.

Gratuitous Rick Perry reference

Wonkette on McGreevey:

No word on with he and Rick Perry will form some sort of support group.

The last refuge of a scoundrel

Reminds me of the old saying that wrapping oneself in the flag is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

--Charles Pugsley Fincher, on Bush's latest round of 9/11-themed ads

Whoa. Ten retired military officials - including two admirals and three full generals - have gone on record as being pissed off about the attacks on Kerry's military record. Cool. (via Available Light)

Anybody else tired of hearing about swift boats already?

So apparently the worst thing any relatively reputable publication (I suppose you can call the National Review "reputable") can find to say about Kerry's service in Vietnam is that he didn't serve long enough to suit them. And mostly that they're pissed off because he made allegations about war crimes. War crimes in Vietnam? Why would anybody think such a thing? Honestly!

Aargh. The Bush administration is withholding disproportionate share money unless hospitals agree to ask patients their immigration status. (from the NYTimes and Rivka)

That's what I'm worked up about today. Col, on the other hand, is worked up about the whole swift boat business. I said that I got worked up about that last week and I wasn't going there all over again; still, check out his links, especially the Democratic Underground one.

A Nation in Danger

Bush: "A 'nation in danger' takes steps to secure its safety"
(Never mind that I didn't want to create a national intelligence director at all. We're takin' steps.)

He also wants to partially privatize Social Security.

But Donald Rumsfeld doesn't think we should have an intelligence czar.

Rumsfeld said he agreed with President George W. Bush's decision to name a cabinet-level director of national intelligence.

"But what's he going to do? Who is he going to report to? Who is going to report to him, What are his functions?

"The president's proposal was that there be one. I agree. I think that's a good idea. And then the question is, 'One what?'" he told reporters as he flew here from Washington for a trip to the region.

Huh? He thinks there should be one, he just shouldn't be allowed to do anything?


Kerry clarifies his position on the Iraq war - although I don't know if that clarification is any help to me, personally. He still would have voted to give the president the authority to proceed? Mph.


And in the Well, Duh! department: Fear shapes voters' views - I don't think that's any news to the Bush administration.

Wow.

The business of (unsuccessfully) discrediting Kerry goes back a long, long time. You know, in my mind, that's pretty impressive, that Nixon, of all people, bothered to assign somebody to discredit Kerry. That's, like, some serious antiwar street cred. (Said in my best Old-Hippie-speak, even though I was eleven in 1971 and thus am not really quite old enough to be an old hippie.)

And speaking of hippies, The Nation has some stuff to say on the subject of liberals and values:

"Values" is one of those bland, spongy, good-for-you words that are the verbal equivalent of tofu: It means whatever you want it to mean. As for "conservative," in certain key states that's a synonym for "not a crazy hippie," and by that definition Kerry undoubtedly qualifies.

And that's the thing - Kerry may have been a war protestor, but he was the straightest of war protestors, a genuine decorated vet. A crazy hippie he's definitely not.

Bush has been on a roll the last couple of days:

We actually misnamed the War on Terror. It ought to be the Struggle Against Ideological Extremists Who Do Not Believe in Free Societies Who Happen to Use Terror as a Weapon To Try To Shape The Conscience Of The Free World.

to which Wonkette replies:

And this lengthy sound bite also reveals a real rift between Bush and some of his supporters. Apparently, 9/11 is sort of incidental to his foreign policy -- the hijackers just "happen to use terror as a weapon." Like they picked up some airplane tickets at the checkout stand or something. Whether or not they use terror, it's the "ideological extremists who hate free societies" that Bush has a problem with, and in that case, we look forward to his upcoming invasion of the Justice Department.

I kind of love Wonkette.

A couple of things

Ads for (and at No Cost to) Kerry Keep Flowing

President Bush offered up a new entry for his catalog of "Bushisms" on Thursday, declaring that his administration will "never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people."

from here (and thanks to Columbine for pointing me there)

Link city, here we come!

Democrats hope young voters will tip election

Goldman bosses are top political donors (why is it you never see stuff like this in the US media? seems like it's always from the UK)

On Kerry's 1971 testimony

The End of Republican Rule (from the Village Voice)

Was there a bounce?

The latest WP/ABC poll gives Kerry a slight lead over Bush (here's the raw data - with some trend info, too).

(The answer? According to this poll, yes, there was a bounce. A small one.)