Obama's Election Was a Sign That We Were in a Post Racial America? - Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck Prove Otherwise

Obama's Election Was a Sign That We Were in a Post Racial America? - Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck Prove Otherwise

• Above all others, the real celebrity here has been Rush Limbaugh. He's done this kind of thing before -- remember the "Barack, The Magic Negro" song? But in the wake of the Gates incident, he's managed to become even more hard-edged about it. "Here you have a black president trying to destroy a white policeman," Limbaugh declared this past Friday. Yesterday, he shared a dream he's had about the dangers to capitalism: "I had a dream that I was a slave building a sphinx in a desert that looked like Obama." And he joked that food-safety advocates will go after all the unhealthy foods people like to eat, one by one -- but they'll have to wait until Obama is out of office to ban Oreos.

• Glenn Beck said this today on Fox News: "This president, I think, has exposed himself as a guy, over and over and over again, who has a deep-seated hatred for white people, or the white culture. I don't what it is. You can't sit in a pew with Jeremiah Wright for 20 years and not hear some of that stuff, and not have it wash over."

• During his new crusade of Birtherism, Lou Dobbs suggested on his radio show this past Wednesday, right before the Gates flare-up, that Obama could be an illegal immigrant, tying this into his usual preoccupation. "I'm starting to think we have a document issue," Dobbs said. "You suppose he's un-- no, I won't even use the word 'undocumented,' it wouldn't be right."

Report Confirms Poor Electrical Work by KBR Endangers US Troops in Iraq and Afghanistan - Or Bush and Cheney's No Bid Contracts Were Their Gift to the Troops.

Sex, Power, Republicans and Religion

Sex, Power, Republicans and Religion

I can't say I was impressed when I met Sen. John Ensign at the C Street House, the secretive religious enclave on Capitol Hill thrust into the news by its links to three political sex scandals, those of Gov. Mark Sanford; former Rep. Chip Pickering, R-Miss., who allegedly rendezvoused at the C Street House with his mistress, an executive in the industry for which he then became a lobbyist; and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. Although Sanford declared today that his scandal will actually turn out to be good for the people of South Carolina because he's now more firmly in God's control, the once-favored GOP presidential prospect will finish out his term and fade away. And Ensign's residence at the C Street House during his own extramarital affair now threatens to end a career that he and other Republicans hoped would lead him to the White House.

When I met Ensign, he was just back from a run, sweaty and bouncing in place, boasting about the time he'd clocked and teasing a young woman from his office. She seemed annoyed that the senator wouldn't get himself into a shower and back on the job. When I wrote about Sen. Ensign in my book about the evangelical political organization that runs the C Street House, "The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power," I described him as a "conservative casino heir elected to the Senate from Nevada, a brightly tanned, hapless figure who uses his Family connections to graft holiness to his gambling-fortune name."

Now, of course, I know I was wrong: John Ensign is a brightly tanned, hapless figure who used his Family connections to cover up the fruits of his flirtations, to make moral decisions for him, and to do his dirty work when his secret romance sputtered. Doug Hampton, the friend and former aide whom Ensign cuckolded, tells us that it was Family leader David Coe, along with Coe's brother Tim and Family "brother" Sen. Tom Coburn, who delivered the pink slip when it was time to put Cynthia Hampton out of Ensign's reach.

If sexual license was all the Family offered the C Street men, however, that would merely be seedy and self-serving. But Family men are more than hypocritical. They're followers of a political religion that embraces elitism, disdains democracy, and pursues power for its members the better to "advance the Kingdom." They say they're working for Jesus, but their Christ is a power-hungry, inside-the-Beltway savior not many churchgoers would recognize. Sexual peccadilloes aside, the Family acts today like the most powerful lobby in America that isn't registered as a lobby -- and is thus immune from the scrutiny attending the other powerful organizations like Big Pharma and Big Insurance that exert pressure on public policy.

The Family likes to call itself a "Christian Mafia," but it began 74 years ago as an anti-New Deal coalition of businessmen convinced that organized labor was under the sway of Satan. The Great Depression, they believed, was a punishment from God for what they viewed as FDR's socialism. The Family's goal was the "consecration" of America to God, first through the repeal of New Deal reforms, then through the aggressive expansion of American power during the Cold War. They called this a "Worldwide Spiritual Offensive," but in Washington, it amounted to the nation's first fundamentalist lobby. Early participants included Southern Sens. Strom Thurmond, Herman Talmadge and Absalom Willis Robertson -- Pat Robertson's father. Membership lists stored in the Family's archive at the Billy Graham Center at evangelical Wheaton College in Illinois show active participation at any given time over the years by dozens of congressmen.

Today's roll call is just as impressive: Men under the Family's religio-political counsel include, in addition to Ensign, Coburn and Pickering, Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham, both R-S.C.; James Inhofe, R-Okla., John Thune, R-S.D., and recent senators and high officials such as John Ashcroft, Ed Meese, Pete Domenici and Don Nickles. Over in the House there's Joe Pitts, R-Penn., Frank Wolf, R-Va., Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., Ander Crenshaw, R-Fla., Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., Jo Ann Emerson, R-Mo., and John R. Carter, R-Texas. Historically, the Family has been strongly Republican, but it includes Democrats, too. There's Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, for instance, a vocal defender of putting the Ten Commandments in public places, and Sen. Mark Pryor, the pro-war Arkansas Democrat responsible for scuttling Obama's labor agenda. Sen. Pryor explained to me the meaning of bipartisanship he'd learned through the Family: "Jesus didn't come to take sides. He came to take over." And by Jesus, the Family means the Family.

Family leaders consider their political network to be Christ's avant garde, an elite that transcends not just conventional morality but also earthly laws regulating lobbying. In the Family's early days, they debated registering as "a lobby for God's Kingdom." Instead, founder Abraham Vereide decided that the group could be more effective by working personally with politicians. "The more invisible you can make your organization," Vereide's successor, current leader Doug Coe preaches, "the more influence you can have." That's true -- which is why we have laws requiring lobbyists to identify themselves as such.

But David Coe, Doug Coe's son and heir apparent, calls himself simply a friend to men such as John Ensign, whom he guided through the coverup of his affair. I met the younger Coe when I lived for several weeks as a member of the Family. He's a surprising source of counsel, spiritual or otherwise. Attempting to explain what it means to be chosen for leadership like King David was -- or Mark Sanford, according to his own estimate -- he asked a young man who'd put himself, body and soul, under the Family's authority, "Let's say I hear you raped three little girls. What would I think of you?" The man guessed that Coe would probably think that he was a monster. "No," answered Coe, "I wouldn't." Why? Because, as a member of the Family, he's among what Family leaders refer to as the "new chosen." If you're chosen, the normal rules don't apply.

Conservatives Have a History of Betraying America

Vietnam - How Nixon and Kissinger Betrayed America
Among all the controversies provoked by the Vietnam War, few have been more heated than that which has raged about the January 1973 peace agreements. Richard M. Nixon and Henry Kissinger have stoutly maintained that they established a foundation for peace with honor, only to be undercut by a vindictive Congress that bound their hands militarily and ruthlessly slashed U.S. military aid, leaving South Vietnam defenseless in the face of North Vietnamese aggression. Critics have claimed that Nixon and Kissinger sought nothing more than a cynical "decent interval" between U.S. withdrawal and the inevitable collapse of South Vietnam—and barely attained that. 1
The truth is much worse, Larry Berman argues in this stinging indictment of the secret negotiations that ended the war. However much they talked of peace, Nixon and Kissinger in fact viewed the January agreements as a means to continue the war. They were certain North Vietnam would violate the agreements, and they planned to retaliate with U.S. airpower. Nor did they have illusions of honor. They recognized that by leaving North Vietnamese troops in the South while withdrawing U.S. forces, they were signing South Vietnam's death warrant. Indeed, in a variant of Daniel Ellsberg's "stalemate machine" thesis, Berman concludes that Nixon sought to perpetuate an indefinite stalemate that would keep South Vietnam afloat until the end of his presidency, after which he could no longer be held responsible for what happened.

Bush's Bloody Flip-Flop
A flip-flop by George W. Bush worsened the military-political debacle in Fallujah last April when the Bush administration overruled the Marine commanding general twice, first ordering him to undertake a retaliatory assault against the rebellious Iraqi city and then abruptly reversing direction three days later.

Marine Lt. Gen. James T. Conway, who commanded U.S. forces in western Iraq, told reporters that he opposed the decision to attack Fallujah in April and then – after committing Marines to the battle – he objected to the follow-up order to cease offensive operations and pull back, a decision that effectively ceded the city to insurgents as a “no-go” zone for American troops.

“We follow our orders,” Conway said in the interview on Sept. 12 after relinquishing his command.

The order to attack Fallujah in early April followed tough talk in Washington about punishing those responsible for the gruesome deaths of four armed U.S. contractors whose vehicles were ambushed in Fallujah on March 31.

Senior U.S. officials in Iraq say the order overruling the Marine commander, who favored a more measured response, originated from Bush's White House, the Washington Post reported. Conway said he and other Marine officers had a more deliberative plan for bringing the city under control.

Revenge

“We felt we had a method that we wanted to apply to Fallujah; that we ought to probably let the situation settle before we appeared to be attacking out of revenge,” Conway said in the interview. Conway said he favored using targeted operations against armed enemy forces while collaborating with local officials to rebuild the city and ease tensions.

Instead, Bush administration officials in Washington second-guessed the commander and demanded a full-scale assault on Fallujah. “We had our say, and we understood the rationale, and we saluted smartly, and we went about the attack,” Conway said.

The assault proved disastrous, however. Six Marines were killed along with hundreds of people in Fallujah, many of them civilians who died under a U.S. bombardment including 500-pound bombs dropped on the city and cannon fire that raked the city's streets. There were so many dead that the soccer field was turned into a mass grave.

The Fallujah attack enflamed anti-Americanism throughout the Middle East and made the city’s name a rallying cry for Iraqi insurgents. Though Fallujah is located in the Sunni Triangle, rival Shiite communities to the south joined in collecting and delivering relief supplies.

The civilian deaths in Fallujah also brought a new round of international condemnation of the United States for allegedly engaging in a collective punishment of a population, a violation of international law. The negative publicity appears to have given Bush’s White House second thoughts.

Three days into the attack, the Marines were suddenly ordered to cease offensive operations and to negotiate a withdrawal of U.S. forces. Gen. Conway said he opposed this reversal but was overruled again.

Vacillation

“When you order elements of a Marine division to attack a city, you really need to understand what the consequences of that are going to be and not perhaps vacillate in the middle of something like that,” Conway said. “Once you commit, you got to stay committed.” [Washington Post, Sept. 13, 2004]

The embarrassment of the Marines' sudden withdrawal was covered by a public relations fig leaf called the Fallujah Brigade, a new Iraqi force that was supposed to police the city. It was touted as a model for how the Bush administration planned to pacify other rebellious cities in Iraq.

But the Fallujah Brigade turned out to be another failure. The U.S. military later discovered that the brigade was collaborating with the insurgents, even supplying them with U.S. weapons and joining in attacks on U.S. forces outside the city. The Fallujah Brigade was quietly disbanded in early September.

In April, however, Bush’s bloody flip-flopping escaped much critical attention. At a nationally televised news conference on April 13, Bush tried to spin the situation as a success.

“In Fallujah, coalition forces have suspended offensive operations, allowing members of the Iraqi Governing Council and local leaders to work on the restoration of central authority in that city,” Bush said. “These leaders are communicating with the insurgents to ensure an orderly turnover of that city to Iraqi forces, so that the resumption of military action does not become necessary. They’re also insisting that those who killed and mutilated four American contract workers be handed over for trial and punishment.”

Two weeks later on April 28, Bush declared that “our military commanders will take whatever action is necessary to secure Fallujah on behalf of the Iraqi people.” Bush added, “There are pockets of resistance and our military along with Iraqis will make sure it’s secure.” Neither promise has been fulfilled. The killers of the four contractors have not been caught nor has Fallujah been secured by pro-U.S. forces.

Four months after the April assault, Fallujah has been joined by a growing number of Iraqi cities effectively under the control of insurgents, where American ground forces stay away and U.S. attacks are largely limited to air operations. Inside those cities, Iraqi officials have been executed for collaborating with U.S. forces.

Broken Pledge

While a military-political catastrophe on one level, the aborted assault on Fallujah also represents another case of politicians in the White House second-guessing military commanders on the ground, a violation of a repeated Bush campaign pledge from Election 2000 that he would not micromanage military operations.

The Cheney Plan To Undermine Fundamental Constitutional Protections

The Cheney Plan To Undermine Fundamental Constitutional Protections
This new report today from The New York Times' Mark Mazzetti and David Johnston reveals an entirely unsurprising though still important event: in 2002, Dick Cheney and David Addington urged that U.S. military troops be used to arrest and detain American citizens, inside the U.S., who were suspected of involvement with Al Qaeda. That was done pursuant to a previously released DOJ memo (.pdf) authored by John Yoo and Robert Delahunty, addressed to Alberto Gonzales, dated October 23, 2001, and chillingly entitled "Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the U.S." That Memo had concluded that the President had authority to deploy the U.S. military against American citizens on U.S. soil. Far worse, it asserted that in exercising that power, the President could not bound either by Congressional statutes prohibiting such use (such as the Posse Comitatus Act) or even by the Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which -- the Memo concluded -- was "inapplicable" to what it called "domestic military operations."

Though it received very little press attention, it is not hyperbole to observe that this October 23 Memo was one of the most significant events in American politics in the last several decades, because it explicitly declared the U.S. Constitution -- the Bill of Rights -- inoperative inside the U.S., as applied to U.S. citizens. Just read what it said in arguing that neither the Fourth Amendment -- nor even the First Amendment -- can constrain what the President can do when overseeing "domestic military operations" (I wrote about that Memo when it was released last March and excerpted the most revealing and tyrannical portions: here).

Lou Dobbs a Tool of Right-wing Extremists

CNN "conspiracy theorist" Lou Dobbs discredits his network -- one wild claim at a time

"North American Union"

Dobbs' has also promoted conspiracy theories regarding purported government plans for a "North American Union," while other CNN reporters appear to dismiss these theories out of hand. For example, on the August 21, 2007, edition of The Situation Room, White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux aired a video clip of then-President Bush's response to a question about the North American Union. In that response, Bush said, "It's quite comical, actually, when you realize the difference between reality and what some people are talking on TV about." Malveaux said Bush's denial followed "a lot of talk in the blogosphere and conspiracy theorists." According to a search of the Nexis database conducted at the time, the North American Union had been mentioned on 53 Lou Dobbs Tonight broadcasts prior to Malveaux's statement. Indeed, during a Malveaux report just the day before -- on the August 20, 2007, edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight -- on-screen text read: "Critics say SPP [Security & Prosperity Partnership] an Attempt to Create a N. Amer. Union."

Indeed, Dobbs has a long history of promoting this conspiracy theory. For instance, during the June 21, 2006, edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight, Dobbs stated that "the Bush administration is pushing ahead with a plan to create a North American union with Canada and Mexico" and later asked: "Do you think, our question is, maybe somebody should take a vote if we're going to merge Canada, Mexico and the United States as the leaders of the three countries are attempting to do with the security and prosperity partnership? Yes or no. Cast your vote at LouDobbs.com." Similarly, on the November 29, 2006, edition of his show, Dobbs asserted that "the Bush administration is determined to create a North American union without consultation or approval of the people of this country or our Congress." Following a report in which CNN correspondent Christine Romans stated, "[C]ritics say foreign policy elites are promoting a European-style union, erasing borders between the three countries and eventually moving to a single North American currency called the Amero" and cited a denial from the Commerce Department, Dobbs stated, "What they're doing is creating a brave new world, an Orwellian world, in which the will of the people is absolutely irrelevant."

"La Reconquista"

Dobbs has also repeatedly linked immigration to fears that some Mexicans plan to take over the American Southwest for Mexico. On the March 31, 2006, edition of his show, Dobbs introduced a report by Romans by stating, "There are some Mexican citizens and some Mexican-Americans who want to see California, New Mexico and other parts of the Southwestern United States given over to Mexico. These groups call it the reconquista, Spanish for reconquest. And they view the millions of Mexican illegal aliens in particular entering the United States as potentially an army of invaders to achieve that takeover." Romans stated, "Long downplayed as a theory of the radical ethnic fringe, the la reconquista, the reconquest, the reclamation, the return, it's resonating with some on the streets," and went on to say, "A lot of open borders groups disavow it completely. But the growing street protests in favor of illegal immigration, Lou, are increasingly taking on the tone of that very radicalism."

New Rule: Not Everything in America Has to Make a Profit

How about this for a New Rule: Not everything in America has to make a profit. It used to be that there were some services and institutions so vital to our nation that they were exempt from market pressures. Some things we just didn't do for money. The United States always defined capitalism, but it didn't used to define us. But now it's becoming all that we are.

Did you know, for example, that there was a time when being called a "war profiteer" was a bad thing? But now our war zones are dominated by private contractors and mercenaries who work for corporations. There are more private contractors in Iraq than American troops, and we pay them generous salaries to do jobs the troops used to do for themselves ­-- like laundry. War is not supposed to turn a profit, but our wars have become boondoggles for weapons manufacturers and connected civilian contractors.

Prisons used to be a non-profit business, too. And for good reason --­ who the hell wants to own a prison? By definition you're going to have trouble with the tenants. But now prisons are big business. A company called the Corrections Corporation of America is on the New York Stock Exchange, which is convenient since that's where all the real crime is happening anyway. The CCA and similar corporations actually lobby Congress for stiffer sentencing laws so they can lock more people up and make more money. That's why America has the world;s largest prison population ­-- because actually rehabilitating people would have a negative impact on the bottom line.

Television news is another area that used to be roped off from the profit motive. When Walter Cronkite died last week, it was odd to see news anchor after news anchor talking about how much better the news coverage was back in Cronkite's day. I thought, "Gee, if only you were in a position to do something about it."

But maybe they aren't. Because unlike in Cronkite's day, today's news has to make a profit like all the other divisions in a media conglomerate.

Current Health Care Costs Creates Job Losses

Current Health Care Costs Creates Job Losses

In a first-of-its-kind study, the non-profit Rand Corp linked the rapid growth in U.S. health care costs to job losses and lower output. The study, published online by the journal Health Services Research, gives weight to President Barack Obama’s dire warnings about the impact of rising costs if Congress does not enact health care reform.

The Rand researchers examined the economic performance of 38 industries from 1987 through 2005, in an attempt to assess the economic impact of “excess” growth in health care costs on U.S. industries. Excess growth is defined as the increase in health care costs that exceeds the overall growth of the nation’s GDP—a yearly occurrence in the U.S. The team compared changes in employment, economic output and the value added to the GDP product for industries that provide health benefits to most workers to those where few workers have job-based health insurance.

After adjusting for other factors, industries that provide insurance had significantly less employment growth than industries where health benefits were not common. Industries with a larger percentage of workers receiving employer-sponsored health insurance also showed lower growth in their contribution to the GDP.

For example, the study estimated that a 10% increase in excess health care costs would reduce employment by about 0.24 percent in the motor vehicles industry, where 80% of workers are covered by employers. The retail industry, however, where only one third of workers are covered, saw only a 0.13% percent drop in employment. Economy-wide, a 10% increase in excess health care costs growth would result in about 120,800 fewer jobs, $28 billion in lost revenues, and $14 billion in lost GDP value.

GOP Can't be Bothered With Drafting Own Health-Care Reform

Leader Of GOP Health Care “Solutions Group” Says GOP Won’t Offer Health Care Bill

The gaffe in question: GOP Rep. Roy Blunt has now said Republicans won’t offer a health care bill of their own, breaking a previous promise. Worse, it turns out Blunt is chair of something called the “House GOP Health Care Solutions Group.”

Congressional Investigations of CIA Move Ahead, Republicans Flipflop to Score Political Points

In the wake of revelations that CIA had failed to disclose to Congress a planned terrorist assassination program for seven years, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Reyes announced Friday that his committee has launched a formal investigation into CIA's failure to disclose its activities to Congress. Congressional Republicans, who in the past have been vociferous critics of CIA and especially its communications with Congress, complain that the investigation would be unfair to CIA and is a smokescreen to protect Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Reyes issued a statement Friday afternoon announcing the investigation:

After careful consideration and consultation with the Ranking Minority Member and other members of the Committee, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence will conduct an investigation into possible violations of federal law, including the National Security Act of 1947.


This investigation will focus on the core issue of how the congressional intelligence committees and Congress are kept fully and currently informed. To this end, the investigation will examine several issues, including the program discussed during Director Panetta's June 24th notification and whether there was any past decision or direction to withhold information from the Committee.

The House Intelligence Committee's investigation will cover a range of issues related to CIA's relations with Congress, such as:

-- Allegations leveled by former CIA official Mary McCarthy in 2006 that senior CIA officers lied to Congress when they claimed that agency interrogation methods complied with treaties barring torture and inhumane treatment.

-- Former ranking Democratic committee member Bob Graham's assertion in 2005 that Vice President Cheney and Bush administration intelligence officials lied to him about domestic eavesdropping,

-- Ranking Republican Intelligence Committee member Pete Hoekstra's accusation that CIA lied to Congress about the shootdown of an American missionary airplane over Peru in 2001.

Hoekstra, who has flipflopped from excoriating CIA to becoming its impassioned defender, illustrates how the GOP is less interested in intelligence policy governance than in scoring political points against Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. A few short years ago, Republicans were openly distrustful of CIA for its supposed 'disloyalty' to Bush administration views on a variety of national security issues.

Conservatives Live in Their Own Little Fact Free World

Out Of Touch Hannity Thinks Ham Costs 79 Cents "In Most Grocery Stores"
When was the last time multimillionaire Sean Hannity actually shopped in a grocery store - 1985? On last night's (7/20/09) Hannity, he attacked the Obama administration for purchasing ham for food banks and soup kitchens at a cost of about $1.50 per pound. "By the way," Hannity sneered, "the ham (the government has paid) $1.50 for? It actually costs only 79 cents in most grocery stores." Oh, really? Either Hannity hasn't set foot in a grocery store for a good 20+ years or we'd love to know where he shops.

....I also checked Kroger in La Porte, Indiana. They have Oscar Mayer chopped ham on sale this week at $2.49, for a pound, with a purchase of 10 qualifying items. Otherwise, the sales price is $2.99 with a shopper's card.

Maddow Demolishes Buchanan's Surreal Facts About America's Racial Past (VIDEO)
Several days ago, Rachel Maddow and Pat Buchanan had a heated debate about the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court and the fairness an necessity of affirmative action.

While Maddow said it would not be fair to re-litigate issues without the guest with whom they were discussed, and that it's "not cool" to talk about guests after their segment is over, she did feel the need to correct several things Buchanan stated as fact that simply were not true.

A sampling of the "facts" of Buchanan that Maddow corrected:

* Buchanan: "She's never written anything in terms of a law review article or major book or something like that on the law." False. Maddow's staff tracked down at least five such articles, proving that just because Buchanan hasn't read something does not mean it has melted from existence.

* Buchanan: "How did she get on Yale Law Review? Affirmative action." False. Maddow contacted Yale Law School and confirmed that the students themselves choose who makes the Law Review, and a spokesperson said this about Buchanan's affirmative action statement: "That is a statement of opinion by Mr. Buchanan."

and, A Layman Attempts To Understand Wing-Nut Psychology

We've all been there. In a debate on one blog or another with some right-wing ideologue, who seemingly lives in an alternate universe. Facts presented to him or her are rejected out of hand, in favor of debunked, fact-free ideologically-based nonsense. How could they believe 'x' when I already proved without a shadow of a doubt how 'x' is an impossibility, you gasp to yourself.

It's exasperating to say the least. What goes on in the brain of an right-wing ideologue? How is it that they can convince themselves that 2+2=5 over and over again, with utter conviction?

....full post at link

Are Cons detached from reality

Flashback: Cronkite Warned In Lead-Up To Iraq War — ‘We Are Going To Be In Such A Fix’



Conservative Pat Buchanan apparently doesn't read much history, claiming only white folks built America.

On Fox, Rove, Hannity spread falsehood that Summers promised jobs right away

Echoing his Wall Street Journal editorial, Karl Rove, along with Sean Hannity, falsely suggested that White House adviser Larry Summers promised that the economic recovery plan would "create jobs right away."


On the July 16 edition of Fox News' Hannity, host Sean Hannity and Fox News contributor Karl Rove advanced the falsehood that White House chief economic adviser Larry Summers promised that the economic recovery plan would "create jobs right away." In fact, during a February 14 appearance on CNN's The Situation Room, after saying that "[y]ou'll see the effects [of the economic plan] begin almost immediately," Summers specified that the immediate effects would include prevented layoffs, tax cuts, "orders" for infrastructure projects, and "better maintenance of schools." Summers added that "the effect will build over time."

Program Cheney Hid From Congressional Oversight to be Investigated

Program Cheney Hid From Congressional Oversight to be Investigated
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), chair of the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, told the Huffington Post that the 9/11 secret counterterror program that is being characterized as "non-operational" was much more than it's being made out to be.

The House intelligence committee's investigation of the Central Intelligence Agency, announced on Friday by Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas), will include probes by subcommittee chairs to penetrate deeper into CIA behavior.

Schakowsky's subcommittee has been given the green light to investigate its legality and is already preparing a major document request.

"The program has been mischaracterized, in my view, as something that's barely come off the drawing board and that, you know, it was a little bit of planning, a little bit of training," Schakowsky said. "I don't know a whole lot more about it, and that's why we want to do an investigation, other than to say: It was more."

The secret program was started shortly after Sept. 11, 2001. When he learned about it last week, CIA Director Leon Panetta killed the program almost immediately and briefed Congress the next day, explaining that the CIA had failed to inform Congress of its existence.

The investigation will go beyond the program Schakowsky refers to, about which Vice President Dick Cheney reportedly ordered the CIA not to inform Congress.

"The investigation is going to focus, in the full committee, on the business of proper notification of the committee -- not just of this particular program but of so many others where the Congress has not been adequately notified," said Schakowsky. "We want to answer questions about what was the process for deciding to begin this program, what was the exact nature of it, how far did it get in terms of implementation, how'd it change over the eight years of the program, who was involved within the intelligence community and outside the intelligence community, that kind of very important information."

The subcommittee will also looking into the "Peruvian shoot-down in 2001," Schakowsky said. "This is a case where the CIA actually lied to the committee," she said, referring to the mistaken shooting down of a plane carrying missionaries. The CIA thought it was a drug plane -- and told the Peruvian Air Force as much. Ranking committee Republican Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) has long been a critic of CIA behavior in that incident and has called on its report to be declassified.

Crimes may have been committed by the CIA, Reyes said when announcing the investigation. "After careful consideration and consultation with the Ranking Minority Member and other members of the Committee, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence will conduct an investigation into possible violations of federal law, including the National Security Act of 1947," he said.

Glenn Beck has A Meltdown Arguing Against National Health Insurance

Glenn Beck has A Meltdown Arguing Against National Health Insurance
Glenn "I love my country so much I'd cry for it" Beck proved that he also loves it enough to have a major meltdown defending our health care system. After sarcastically mocking a caller to his radio show, "Cathy," for arguing that we're the only industrialized country in the world that doesn't have health care," Beck finally lost it when Cathy refused to be intimidated. "What would you do to change this health care system for the better?" she pressed. Instead of answering, Beck screamed, "Get off my phone! Get off my phone you little pin head!"

audio at link

Media jostled for access to Gov. Mark Sanford

Media jostled for access to Gov. Mark Sanford

National media blitzed Gov. Mark Sanford’s staff, offering big ratings and, possibly, a sympathetic venue in an effort to land the first interview with the governor after his six-day trip to Argentina.

In addition, a blogger and state leaders reached out to Sanford’s office to try to coordinate a way to “push back” on the growing mystery surrounding Sanford’s absence.

The behind-the-scenes maneuvering is detailed in e-mails released by the governor’s office this week in response to The State’s request under the freedom of information act.

The e-mails show some outlets promised Sanford “friendly ground,” while others objected to early reports that questioned his disappearance.

“If you all want to speak on this publicly, you’re welcome to Washington Times Radio,” wrote staffer Joseph Deoudes to Sanford spokesman Joel Sawyer on June 23. “You know that you will be on friendly ground here!”

....“If he wants something more personal for the blog to push back, I’m happy to help,” wrote Erick Erickson, a writer for RedState.com. On June 23, Erickson ripped “media speculation” about Sanford’s whereabouts.

“I wasn’t trying to be a reporter. I wanted to curtail the story,” Erickson said by e-mail. “Well that didn’t work.”

After Sanford admitted an affair with an Argentine woman, Erickson struck and amended the original post, meditating that “we live in a fallen world.”

Obama's Polices Will Create Green Jobs

Cap-and-trade bill creates green jobs
The economic meltdown, energy crisis and global warming are interconnected, and so are the solutions. By implementing the right policies, we can create jobs, secure our energy independence and power capacity, and protect natural resources for our future.

But we need a long-term strategy that provides better energy choices by driving investments to build, deliver and install clean energy solutions. We need energy policies that will support both a U.S. auto industry and other manufacturing and that are vibrant, competitive, technologically advanced and an integral part of the solution to global warming.

The cap-and-trade legislation will help take a balanced approach toward an economy-wide program that prevents foreign competitors from getting advantages over America companies. The nation should maintain a diverse energy portfolio that includes renewable energy, fossil fuels, nuclear and hydro electric. And solutions must protect individual industries and geographical regions from being disproportionably or adversely affected.

Such a strategy is the American Clean Energy & Security Act, which is in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which will help to create millions of new clean-energy jobs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, encourage the development of cleaner, cheaper sources of energy, and dramatically cut the carbon pollution that causes global warming.



The historic changes in the legislation -- also known as the Waxman-Markey bill -- come with risks, and we must work to balance bettering the environment with job creation.

The Michigan congressional delegation has been working hard to protect and promote the auto industry, including garnering $50 billion in low-interest loans for automakers to retool their production facilities. U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn, deserves credit for leading the fight to secure 3 percent of the revenue from the auctioning of carbon emission permits, worth an estimated $10 billion to $20 billion over the next 20 years, for the auto industry to develop advanced technology vehicles.

Two labor-environmental groups, the Blue Green Alliance and Apollo Alliance, support this legislation.

We have seen other examples of trade unions working to both protect jobs and better our environment. Recently, union leaders stood with President Barack Obama when he announced new fuel-economy and tailpipe emission standards. This was truly an historic achievement, bringing together labor, industry, environmentalists and government in support of a comprehensive and consistent national policy.

While the resulting standards are aggressive, calling for a 30 percent improvement in fuel efficiency by 2016, they are achievable within the time lines proposed. And they can help to spur a renaissance in the American auto industry, creating new jobs as manufacturers restructure to build the clean energy vehicles of the future.

Creating a clean energy economy will be good for Michigan with the potential of thousands of new, well-paying jobs. According to the Michigan Department of Energy, Labor and Economic Development's "green jobs" report, from 2005 to 2008, more than 2,500 green jobs were added to Michigan's economy, a growth rate of 7.7 percent.

Green jobs also pay well; 13 of the top 15 sectors of green employment have weekly wages above the overall private sector weekly average. The Steel Workers union reminds us that each wind turbine built contain 250 tons of steel and thousands of machined parts.

We have an opportunity to rebuild our economy with millions of clean energy jobs, retool manufacturing, increase our energy independence and preserve the planet for future generations. It is time for the leaders in Washington to take the bold, forward-looking action that we need by passing the Waxman-Markey bill.

Fox Distorts Legacy of Bush Jobs Legacy

Fox's Scott misled on Bush's "job gains" while suggesting media unfairly saying "this is the Bush economy"

Jon Scott misleadingly asserted that "there were month after month after month of job gains in the Bush administration. And yet ... this is the Bush economy as portrayed in the media." However, in the final year of the Bush administration, the economy lost more than 4 million jobs, and the unemployment rate rose nearly three percentage points.



On the July 11 edition of Fox News' Fox News Watch, host Jon Scott misleadingly asserted that "there were month after month after month of job gains in the Bush administration. And yet, you know, these days, this is the Bush economy as portrayed in the media." However, over the final year of George W. Bush's presidency, the economy lost more than 4 million jobs, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In addition, the unemployment rate rose from 4.9 percent in January 2008 to 7.6 percent in January 2009, and the employment-population ratio dropped from 62.9 percent in January 2008 to 60.5 percent in January 2009.

Media Matters for America has previously documented other media figures misrepresenting employment numbers under the Bush administration or suggesting that President Obama is to blame for job losses that occurred under Bush or within weeks of Obama taking office.

The GOP's Young Hatemonger

The GOP's Young Hatemonger by John Avlon
Avlon Audra Shay Part II Audra Shay, accused of endorsing racism on Facebook, is favored to become the head of the Young Republicans tomorrow. John Avlon uncovers new details about her disturbing online comments.

Thirty-eight-year-old Audra Shay’s campaign to become the next chairman of the Young Republicans went from obscure to infamous over the past week, after The Daily Beast revealed details of posts of her Facebook account. Specifically, a thread where one of her friends posts that ““Obama Bin Lauden [sic] is the new terrorist… Muslim is on there side [sic]… need to take this country back from all of these mad coons… and illegals,” and Shay responds eight minutes later with: “You tell em Eric! lol.”

“This is an outrage and I CAN NOT believe this nation has him as our leader! It makes me sick!” She posted a few minutes later: “My disdain for Obama is directly proportionate for his disdain of this country.”

Basis of Domestic Surveillance Was ‘Flawed,’ Report Finds

Basis of Domestic Surveillance Was ‘Flawed,’ Report Finds
Former President Bush’s infamous warrant-free domestic surveillance plan, instituted after 9/11 to monitor potentially suspicious communication between parties within and outside of the U.S., has deservedly gotten a bad rap—and it’s about to get worse, thanks to a congressionally mandated report released Friday.

CNN:

The report, though not critical of the program’s objectives, sharply criticizes the legal advice provided to the White House by the Justice Department.

Among other things, the report cites a Justice Department conclusion that “it was extraordinary and inappropriate that a single DOJ attorney, John Yoo, was relied upon to conduct the initial legal assessment” of the surveillance program.

“The lack of oversight and review of Yoo’s work ... contributed to a legal analysis of the [program] that at a minimum was factually flawed,” it says.

The report says Yoo largely circumvented both his boss, Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, and Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Texas Governor Rick Perry May Appoint Education Hater to State School Board

Texas Governor Rick Perry May Appoint Education Hater to State School Board

The latest of these is Cynthia Dunbar of Texas, whom I learned about thanks to an e-mail from Matt D.

Gov. Rick Perry is reportedly considering appointing the chair of that state's school board. Dunbar wants to destroy public schools, which she regards as "tyrannical" and a "tool of perversion."

Let me repeat that: Gov. Rick Perry of Texas wants to put in charge of his state's public schools a woman who wants to destroy those schools.

Perry doesn't just want to hire the giggling firebug, he wants to make her the fire chief. This makes Gov. Perry the second craziest person in this story.

The craziest, of course, is Cynthia Dunbar who is -- even by Texas Republican standards -- barking mad.
In a book published last year, Dunbar argued the country’s founding fathers created “an emphatically Christian government” and that government should be guided by a “biblical litmus test.” She endorses a belief system that requires “any person desiring to govern have a sincere knowledge and appreciation for the Word of God in order to rightly govern.”

Dunbar -- who is, astonishingly, an attorney -- takes as her first principle of government an illegal and flagrantly unconstitutional religious test. "Unconstitutional" isn't strong enough a description of Dunbar's views on this point, actually, she's anti-constitutional. Her idea of "an emphatically Christian government" ruled by a "biblical litmus test" douses the Constitution in kerosene and sets it ablaze, then pisses on its ashes.

...story continues at link.

Poor Pitiful Palin

Poor Pitiful Palin by digby

So it isn't just Jonah Goldberg. Sarah Palin also believes that she has been more persecuted by her enemies and the press than Hillary Clinton --- which is completely absurd.

Time’s Jay Newton-Small asked Palin about this contradiction in a new interview. Palin replied that she’s totally different than Clinton because the accusations she’s facing are way worse:

What I said was, it doesn’t do her or anybody else any good to whine about the criticism. And that’s why I’m trying to make it clear that the criticism, I invite that. But freedom of speech and that invitation to constructively criticize a public servant is a lot different than the allowance to lie, to continually falsely accuse a public servant when they have proven over and over again that they have not done what the accuser is saying they did. It doesn’t cost them a dime to continue to accuse. That’s a whole different situation. But that’s why when I talk about the political potshots that I take or my family takes, we can handle that. I can handle that. I expect it. But there has to be opportunity provided for truth to get out there, and truth isn’t getting out there when the political game that’s being played right now is going to continue, and it is.



Honest to Gawd...

Independent counsel Kenneth Starr has concluded that presidential aide Vincent Foster was not murdered and that President Bill Clinton and the first lady were not involved in a coverup, the Los Angeles Times reported Sunday.

The Times quotes anonymous sources as saying Starr's report covers more than 100 pages and is due to be released soon.

The report refutes claims by conservative political organizations that Foster was the victim of a murder plot and coverup, the newspaper said.

"It puts the lie to that bunch of nuts out there spinning conspiracy theories and talking about murder and coverups," one source told the paper.

Starr's probe marks the third investigation into Foster's July 1993 death. The earlier examinations -- carried out by a coroner and Robert Fiske Jr., Starr's predecessor as independent counsel -- also determined Foster's death was a suicide.

However, despite those findings, right-wing political groups have continued to allege that there was more to the death and that the president and first lady tried to cover it up.

Foster, who served as deputy White House counsel, was a close friend of the Clintons and a former law partner of the first lady. Among his other duties, Foster helped prepare the tax returns of the Whitewater Development Corp., the controversial Arkansas real estate venture involving the Clintons.

According to the Times, the independent counsel's office had signaled that a report in the case would be forthcoming, first by the end of 1995, then the summer of 1996, then by the end of 1996.

Starr has not indicated when he might release the report.



Has Palin been accused of murder? Have the charges been conclusively proven false by three separate special prosecutors to the tune of many millions of taxpayer dollars in investigations that last for years and personally cost her millions of dollars in legal fees? No? Then I think she needs to rethink her claims.

There are zero well funded liberal hit groups trying to get Sarah Palin. The ethics complaints that have been filed against her are coming from her own constituents and local officials who are fed up with her. And she's lying about the extent of the complaints remaining and calculating the costs in the most ridiculous way possible. Her endless hyperbole on the subject indicates that she can't do her job if people are criticizing her, which disqualifying in a politician.

Let's put it this way; if she can't handle this, there's no way she can handle higher office.

State Senator Sylvia Allen (R) claims earth is 6000 years old

State Senator Sylvia Allen (R) claims earth is 6000 years old
On June 25, the Arizona Senate’s Retirement and Rural Development Committee discussed the prospects for uranium mining in the state. During the hearing, State Senator Sylvia Allen (R), the vice chairman of the committee, argued in favor of mining by saying that the earth “has been here 6,000 years, long before anybody had environmental laws, and somehow it hasn’t been done away with.” “We need to get the uranium here in Arizona, so this state can get the money from it,” argued Allen. Watch it:

Phil Plait of BadAstronomy notes that the irony of Allen’s claim “is that she’s talking about uranium mining, and it’s through the radioactive decay of uranium that we know the Earth is billions of years old.”

Chris Hitchens is Not An Iran Expert, but He Plays One on the Internet

Chris Hitchens and The Weekly Standard Celebrate Everything They Do Not Know About Iran
Christopher Hitchens writes in Did the Toppling of Saddam Hussein Lead to Recent Events in Iran?

Which brings me to a question that I think deserves to be asked: Did the overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime, and the subsequent holding of competitive elections in which many rival Iraqi Shiite parties took part, have any germinal influence on the astonishing events in Iran? Certainly when I interviewed Sayeed Khomeini in Qum some years ago, where he spoke openly about “the liberation of Iraq,” he seemed to hope and believe that the example would spread. One swallow does not make a summer. But consider this: Many Iranians go as religious pilgrims to the holy sites of Najaf and Kerbala in southern Iraq. They have seen the way in which national and local elections have been held, more or less fairly and openly, with different Iraqi Shiite parties having to bid for votes (and with those parties aligned with Iran’s regime doing less and less well).

Hitchens is proof that one can have a lot of knowledge about something, yet practically no insight. Win Sayeed Khomeini was talking about the “liberation” of Iraq he meant freed from a despot who while a Muslim was a secularist in comparison to both Iran’s hardliners (”Supreme Leader” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Ahmadinejad) and to Sayeed Khomeini. Thus they would have an Iraq that more closely followed Islamic traditions of governance. Hitchens and the Republican blogs that have linked to him would have us believe that Sayeed Khomeini and the moderates in Iran lead by Mousavi, are a few degrees away from being a liberal Republican from the 60s. Matt Duss goes deeper in to the events in Iran that seem to be so perplexing to Hitchens and The Weakly Standard, The Growing Iranian Clerical Critique Mousavi

As other have noted, Friday’s news that the Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qom, a prominent Iranian clerical group, have declared Iran’s recent elections illegitimate is pretty significant, though by no means decisive. Even though Khamenei has spent the last years cultivating a stronger and deeper relationship with Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), maintaining a genuine sense of religious legitimacy is obviously important for a regime that bills itself as “Islamic,” and the clerics’ statement took a big whack at that already battered legitimacy.

[ ]….It goes without saying, though, that whatever criticisms Qom’s clerics may have of Khamenei, they are not secular democrats seeking to join with the West. Nor have we seen any evidence that Iran’s demonstrators are seeking to eject religion from their political life.

The dynamic in Iran is not all that complicated for anyone that is up to a half hour of reading something other then drivel from the Weakly. Remember Bush did not know the difference between Sunni and Shiite before he decided to occupy Iraq – a glaring lack of knowledge that is responsible for quite a few America deaths – would there have been quite as much sectarian violence if the neocons had understood anything about about the religious and tribal divisions within Iraq.

Palin, Myths and the Media

The Myth of How the Media Destroyed Palin
In fact, in the months after the November election, we heard from pundits and disgruntled GOPers that the media helped elect Obama by attacking, or mocking, Sarah Palin. These critics still allege that she had given John McCain a big boost in the polls when first named and that she would have help drive him to victory--if not for the allegeldy unfair treatment by Katie and Tina Fey and those mean bloggers and all the rest.

But this is not true. The myth should be put to bed once and for all.

In fact, Palin never really helped him except with his "base," which he would have won over anyway. She never had broad based appeal and, as I have written here previously (and in my book, "Why Obama Won"), McCain had been fooled by false media coverage of the purported huge number of Hillary Clinton fans -- women and the working class -- who were eager to bolt Obama for the GOP. This never came to pass.

In reality, the undermining of Palin happened well before the networks and SNL got to her. The polls proved it. Her home state paper, the Anchorage Daily News was quick to expose elements of her past that raised questions and just days after she was named the Fairbanks, Alaska daily called her choice by McCain a silly one. And the evidence mounted from there, within days.

More than anything McCain was hurt by shattering his strongest calling card -- "experience" -- by picking a neophyte to serve one heartbeat away.

This is not Monday morning (literally) quarterbacking. Here is an excerpt from a column I wrote here last September 1, 2008, on the surprising poll results just as Palin was gaining the GOP nod -- and well before the negative stories in the national press appeared.
*


A new CNN/Opinion Research poll released today shows that he contest between Barack Obama and John McCain -- after the twin "bounces" of the past few days -- remains essentially tied, with Obama leading at 49% to 48%. But what's most intriguing are the results regarding McCain's choice for veep, who was expected to draw more women to the GOP ticket.

In fact, men seem to be more impressed with this move than women. Just now, this seems to be confirmed by a CBS poll, showing Obama with a 48% to 40% lead overall -- but with a wide lead among women, at 50% to 36%, which has only widened. Only 13% of women said they might be more likely to vote for McCain because of Palin, with 11% saying they are now less likely.

CBS also reports: "Before the Democratic convention, McCain enjoyed a 12-point advantage with independent voters, but now Obama leads among this group 43 percent to 37 percent....The poll shows an increase in the number of Obama voters who are enthusiastic about him."

As for the CNN poll: "Women now appear slightly more likely to vote for Obama than they did a week ago, 53 percent now, compared to 50 percent," reports Keating Holland, CNN's director of polling. "But McCain picked up a couple of points among men. More important, McCain solidified his party's base with the Palin selection, dropping Obama's share of the Republican vote six points to just 5 percent now. The Palin selection did not help among women -- that may come later -- but it did appeal to Republican loyalists."

Men have a slightly more favorable opinion of Palin than women -- 41 percent vs. 36 percent. "If McCain was hoping to boost his share of the women's vote, it didn't work," Holland said. And USA Today/Gallup has just released its post-Palin poll showing that Obama has widened his lead from four points to 50% - 43%.

Defining Torture and Other News

When Bush Did it, it was called "enhanced interrogation". When the Iranians Do it, Its called torture.

Virtually every tactic which the article describes the Iranians as using has been used by the U.S. during the War on Terror, while several tactics authorized by Bush officials (waterboarding, placing detainees in coffin-like boxes, hypothermia) aren't among those the article claims are used by the Iranians. Nonetheless, "torture" appears to be a perfectly fine term for The New York Times to use to describe what the Iranians do, but one that is explicitly banned to describe what the U.S. did.



What Is Sarah Palin Thinking? One Alaskan's Perspective

The time in front of the cameras was also used, many felt, to "play the victim card." Palin spent a considerable amount of time castigating the very media that was there covering the event, for being too critical. But the principle objects of Palin's venom were private citizens who had filed ethics complaints against her. She also referenced a photoshopped image on a local blog that showed her snuggling a baby with the head of a local radio shock jock that Palin and her lawyer favor with appearances. Palin said the photo was making fun of her son Trig. She seems unable, even when delivering a speech that is destined for national coverage, to rise above the fray, and refrain from sounding petty.

It is said that it's not the mountain ahead that wears you down, it's the grain of sand in your shoe. Was it one too many grains of sand that wore her down? And if so, how would she be able to handle the job as President of the United States? Most of the ethics complaints have been dismissed. But, Alaska has no Ethics Board. Ethics complaints are handled by a three-member governor appointed Personnel Board, whose jobs depend on the sitting governor who can fire them at will. Was the deck stacked? Many say yes. But despite the dismissal of the majority of complaints, there were ethics complaints that resulted in a finding by the Legislature that she had abused her power and violated the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act in the Troopergate fiasco, a directive for a high level staffer to undergo ethics training due to a string of "troubling emails" and a recent payment from Palin to the state for almost $10,000 to reimburse for her charging the state for her children's travel expenses. So, were all the ethics complaints "frivolous?" Even if we take the results of the Personnel Board at face value, the answer is no. But all this may not matter much soon. The rule of law still applies to private citizens, but there is no "Private Citizens' Ethics Act."

Then there is the other matter. In Alaska it's become known as "the iceberg." The iceburg is rumored to be a piece of news that's so damaging, and so big, it will sink the S.S. Palin. The rumors also exist that it's coming soon. Speculation about IRS problems, issues with other three-letter organizations, more ethics complaints, and embezzlement abound. Questions have been raised about the construction of Palin's house by a bunch of Todd's buddies, at the same time that a giant sports complex was being built in Wasilla, and right after building codes had been abolished by the then mayor of Wasilla, one Sarah Palin. Do we know anything for sure? No. But the recent claim that the breaking of this scandal is imminent seems coincidental to say the least. Alaskans hesitate to get too excited about rumored indictments, though. Despite the indictment and conviction of several state legislators, and the indictment-conviction and now un-conviction of former Senator Ted Stevens, the slow process has taught us patience. We still await rumored indictments of Congressman Don Young, and former State Senate President Ben Stevens (son of Ted Stevens.) Did I say, you can't make this stuff up?

Other breaking items in the news recently, include an unflattering 5000-word article in Vanity Fair, and a CBS News release of an email exchange between Palin and McCain strategist Steve Smith which gave a glimpse at "the real Sarah Palin," and how she thinks. The exchage involved Palin asking the McCain campaign to make a statement that her husband Todd had only accidentally been a member of a secessionist political party, because he checked the wrong box. And didn't notice it for seven years. Schmidt cut her request off by stating that the McCain campaign had no intention of making it more of an issue than the media was, a habit that Palin has had for a long time.

Fox's Glenn Beck Gives the Nod to Destroying America to Save It
It's not only neocons who desperately need enemies, like Ahmadinejad, to succeed so that they'll have an excuse to bomb bomb bomb Iran, or any place they damn well please. It's also the paleocons and the concons (conspiracy conservatives), or whatever Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA's bin Laden unit, could be called these days.

Hard to categorize and hard to completely dismiss, Scheuer is the thickly bearded guy who's been all over the media the last few years calling his cable hosts "Sir," speaking out against the Iraq war, and making the sensible case that one reason "they hate us" is because of our support of Israel--not unlike paleo Pat Buchanan. But Scheuer's getting so wigged-out lately (writing in his most recent book, Marching Toward Hell, that Americans are now in "a place worse than hell"), that he's been finding common ground with Fox News' brightest conspiracy star, Glenn Beck. On Beck's show the other night, the two got themselves into such a froth over lax security on the Mexican border that Scheuer let loose with this:

"The only chance we have as a country right now is for Osama bin Laden to deploy and detonate a major weapon in the United States."

Come again? "Only Osama can execute an attack which will force Americans to demand that their government will protect them effectively, consistently, andwith as much violence as necessary."

Beck bobblehead-nods his assent. This is the kind of doomsday scenario he's been predicting on his laughable "War Room" segment, in which Scheuer has served as one of the hysterics, saying that if "bubbas" take up arms against the government, "I don't think you want to defuse it."

Actually, Beck does have his standards when it comes to whackjob guests. Last week, he hustled Congresswoman Michele Bachmann off the air as soon as she likened the U.S. census to the U.S. internment of Japanese-American citizens during WWII. That was over the top for him, but Scheuer's bin Laden thesis, well, it's philosophically sound!