Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
Welcome back to the weekly roundup of the good, the bad, and the ugly, and (as always) my humble suggestions of things Democrats should say in media interviews this weekend.
Because I've been away for a few weeks, I have to apologize in advance if I've missed something obvious this week (I'm still getting back up to speed on the American political scene). Hopefully I won't have missed too much!
When some Americans travel to Europe these days, they are shocked at the anti-American (or more precisely, anti-Bush) attitudes expressed by the Europeans. Me, I'm used to that sort of thing, so when I heard such sentiments on my recent vacation, they didn't surprise me much. But what did shock me was the airport currency exchange counter. To buy one Euro on the day I arrived, it cost me $1.56.
"The place was awash with Paddies," said one attendee. "You were left wondering where were all the Yanks."
. . .
Although only US citizens and Green Card holders are allowed to contribute to election campaign funds, Hillary Clinton's Irish supporters could attend the Dublin event if US citizens bought tickets on their behalf.
...For all of you interested in showing Dianne Feinstein what the voters of California think of her recent actions, there is a drive for the California Democratic Party to officially censure Senator Feinstein at its upcoming executive board meeting. I have no contact information for them, but if I were thinking of letting them know how I felt, I'd start at the California Democratic Party website.
For this week, the award goes to that brave Democratic Senator who stood up and filibustered Michael Mukasey's confirmation in the Senate. With the backing of 39 other stalwart Senators, this maneuver has scuttled for now the confirmation vote. The White House and the Republicans in general howled over this tactic, ignoring the fact that they've been doing the same thing on virtually every bill this year. One lone Democrat in the Senate deserves the MIDOTW award this week for successfully killing Mukasey's nomination.
Oh, wait.
That didn't happen.
I have believed for a long time now that whenever you see dismal poll numbers for Congress' approval ratings, there is one simple reason for them: Iraq. Democrats swept both houses of Congress last year, and the reason why the people who voted them in do not approve of the job they've been doing is because they haven't done more to end the war in Iraq.
When, in the future, you retire from the Senate and sit down to write your memoirs, I predict that this week's vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee in favor of Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey will not rank as one of "the votes I'm proudest of in the Senate" for either of you.
You both knew that voting for Mukasey was the wrong thing to do, and yet you did it anyway for reasons that can only be described as "political expediency." Not exactly a profile in courage for either one of you.
So here we are, with a year and a day to go before the 2008 presidential election. But what will we be talking about next November as we head to the polls?
I know it is supposed to be my job to prognosticate the future by throwing a dart at the wall and loudly proclaiming "This is where we will be!" -- but today I am turning over the prediction business to you instead. Because I am interested in what other people think the momentous issues of next year's election will be, no matter who is left running. So let me know what you think.
So, according to Bush, you're a Nazi appeaser if you refuse to confirm someone as our highest law enforcement officer who will use Nazi tactics against our prisoners. Or something. Let me try again -- you're not against Nazis strongly enough if you don't allow me to behave like a Nazi and torture anyone I want. Boggles the mind, doesn't it? Like I said, it's hard to tell what he's thinking these days.
Anyway, remember you heard it here first: the Bush Doublethink Corollary to Godwin's Law.
The Bush administration is pushing a narrative on national security issues (and has been for some time now) which can be summed up as: "Trust us, we know what we're doing -- and we're doing it to keep you safe." Two facets of this issue are on the front burner this week: warrantless wiretapping and torture (or as they put it "extraordinary interrogation techniques," one of many euphemisms they've trotted out). But what seems to be lost in the debate are two data points that just don't fit in with their pre-packaged narrative. And, once again, the mainstream media are largely ignoring these points since they'd have to... you know... commit an act of journalism to confront them squarely.