Betrayal

I knew it would end this way, but the bitter taste remains inescapable. The question now is: Do we take out our fury by refusing any further support for the Democrats who betrayed us? Or do we hold to the proposition that changing the make-up of both houses of Congress trumps all other considerations?

And what about Joke Lieberman? No surprise there. He's being challenged by a guy named Ned Lamont, who -- word has it -- is the real deal. If you're in CT, do what you can to retire Joke during the primaries.

Filibuster: Who ya gonna call?

So what, exactly, should you do in the great filibuster fight?

Reader Bob Boldt suggests leaving a message for your senator with the Capitol switchboard: 888-355-3588 or 888-818-6641. There are quite a few new options listed here.

I would suggest calling or faxing offices directly. Yes, this job can be a hassle; right now, those lines are busier than Satan in Vegas. But look at it this way: Making the attempt cannot hurt, and may well help.

At Daily Kos, a contributor named judibrowni compiled a terrific list of "swinger" senators and their contact info. If all else fails, contac the DNC -- see the final entry below. I'm sure Judi won't mind if I repeat her data here:

Senator Blanche Lambert Lincoln [AR] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-4843 (phone), 202-228-1371 (fax)
Dumas, 870-382-1023 (phone), 870-382-1026 (fax)
Texarkana, 870-774-3106 (phone), 870-774-7627 (fax)
Little Rock, 501-375-2993 (phone), 501-375-7064 (fax)
Fayetteville, 479-251-1224 (phone), 479-251-1410 (fax)
Jonesboro, 870-910-6896 (phone), 870-910-6898 (fax)

Senator Mark Pryor [AR] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER
Washington, 202-224-2353 (phone), 202-228-0908 (fax)
Little Rock, 501-324-6336 (phone), 501-324-5320 (fax)

Senator Ken Salazar [CO] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER
Washington, 202-224-5852 (phone), 202-228-5036 (fax)
Alamosa, 719-587-0096 (phone), 719-587-0098 (fax)
Fort Morgan, 970-542-9446 (phone), 970-542-3088 (fax)
Colorado Springs, 719-328-1100 (phone), 719-328-1129 (fax)
Fort Collins, 970-224-2200 (phone), 970-224-2205 (fax)
Pueblo, 719-542-7550 (phone), 719-542-7555 (fax)
Durango, 970-259-1710 (phone), 970-259-9789 (fax)
Grand Junction, 970-241-6631 (phone), 970-241-8313 (fax)
Denver, 303-455-7600 (phone), 303-455-8851 (fax)

Senator Joseph I Lieberman [CT] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-4041 (phone), 202-224-9750 (fax)
Hartford, 860-549-8463 (phone), 860-549-8478 (fax)

Senator Joseph R Biden Jr [DE] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER
Washington, 202-224-5042 (phone), 202-224-0139 (fax)
Wilmington, 302-573-6345 (phone), 302-573-6351 (fax)
Milford, 302-424-8090 (phone), 302-424-8098 (fax)

Senator Thomas R Carper [DE] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-2441 (phone), 202-228-2190 (fax)
Georgetown, 302-856-7690 (phone)
Dover, 302-674-3308 (phone)
Wilmington, 302-573-6291 (phone)

Senator Bill Nelson [FL] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER
Washington, 202-224-5274 (phone), 202-228-2183 (fax)
Tallahassee, 850-942-8415 (phone), 850-942-8450 (fax)
West Palm Beach, 561-514-0189 (phone), 561-514-4078 (fax)
Tampa, 813-225-7040 (phone), 813-225-7050 (fax)
Jacksonville, 904-346-4500 (phone), 904-346-4506 (fax)
Coral Gables, 305-536-5999 (phone), 305-536-5991 (fax)
Ft. Myers, 239-334-7760 (phone), 239-334-7710 (fax)
Davie, 954-693-4851 (phone), 954-693-4862 (fax)
Orlando, 888-671-4091 (phone), 407-872-7165 (fax)

Senator Daniel K Inouye [HI] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-3934 (phone), 202-224-6747 (fax)
Wailuku Maui, 808-242-9702 (phone), 808-242-7233 (fax)
Lihue Kauai, 808-245-4611 (phone), 808-246-9515 (fax)
Kaunakakai, 808-642-0203 (phone), 808-560-3385 (fax)
Honolulu, 808-541-2542 (phone), 808-541-2549 (fax)
Hilo, 808-935-0844 (phone), 808-961-5163 (fax)
Kealakekua, 808-935-0844 (phone), 808-961-5163 (fax)

Senator Daniel K Akaka [HI] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER
Washington, 202-224-6361 (phone), 202-224-2126 (fax)
Honolulu, 808-522-8970 (phone), 808-545-4683 (fax)
Hilo, 808-935-1114 (phone), 808-935-9064 (fax)

Senator Tom Harkin [IA] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-3254 (phone), 202-224-9369 (fax)
Des Moines, 515-284-4574 (phone), 515-284-4937 (fax)
Cedar Rapids, 319-365-4504 (phone), 319-365-4683 (fax)
Davenport, 563-322-1338 (phone), 563-322-0417 (fax)
Dubuque, 563-582-2130 (phone), 563-582-2342 (fax)
Sioux City, 712-252-1550 (phone), 712-252-1638 (fax)

Senator Barack Obama [IL] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-2854 (phone), 202-228-4260 (fax)
Springfield, 217-492-5089 (phone), 217-492-5099 (fax)
Chicago, 312-886-3506 (phone), 312-886-3514 (fax)
Marion, 618-997-2402 (phone), 618-997-2850 (fax)

Senator Evan Bayh [IN] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-5623 (phone), 202-228-1377 (fax)
South Bend, 574-236-8302 (phone)
Hammond, 219-852-2763 (phone)
Evansville, 812-465-6500 (phone)
Jeffersonville, 812-218-2317 (phone)
Indianapolis, 317-554-0750 (phone), 317-554-0760 (fax)
Fort Wayne, 260-426-3151 (phone)

Senator Mary Landrieu [LA] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER
Washington, 202-224-5824 (phone), 202-224-9735 (fax)
Lake Charles, 337-436-6650 (phone), 337-439-3762 (fax)
New Orleans, 504-589-2427 (phone), 504-589-4023 (fax)
Shreveport, 318-676-3085 (phone), 318-676-3100 (fax)
Baton Rouge, 225-389-0395 (phone), 225-389-0660 (fax)

Senator Paul S Sarbanes [MD] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-4524 (phone), 202-224-1651 (fax)
Salisbury, 410-860-2131 (phone), 410-860-2134 (fax)
Cumberland, 301-724-0695 (phone), 301-724-4660 (fax)
Silver Spring, 301-589-0797 (phone), 301-589-0598 (fax)
Baltimore, 410-962-4436 (phone), 410-962-4156 (fax)
Bryans Road, 301-283-0947 (phone), 301-375-8914 (fax)

Senator Barbara A Mikulski [MD] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-4654 (phone), 202-224-8858 (fax)
Salisbury, 410-546-7711 (phone), 410-546-9324 (fax)
Greenbelt, 301-345-5517 (phone), 301-345-7573 (fax)
Annapolis, 410-263-1805 (phone), 410-263-5949 (fax)
Hagerstown, 301-797-2826 (phone), 301-797-2241 (fax)
Baltimore, 410-962-4510 (phone), 410-962-4760 (fax)

Senator Carl Levin [MI] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-6221 (phone), 202-224-1388 (fax)
Grand Rapids, 616-456-2531 (phone), 616-456-5147 (fax)
Saginaw, 989-754-2494 (phone), 989-754-2920 (fax)
Escanaba, 906-789-0052 (phone), 906-789-0015 (fax)
Traverse City, 231-947-9569 (phone), 231-947-9518 (fax)
Lansing, 517-377-1508 (phone), 517-377-1506 (fax)
Warren, 586-573-9145 (phone), 586-573-8260 (fax)
Detroit, 313-226-6020 (phone), 313-226-6948 (fax)

Senator Mark Dayton [MN] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-3244 (phone), 202-228-2186 (fax)
Fort Snelling, 888-224-9043 (phone), 612-727-5223 (fax)
Biwabik, 218-865-4480 (phone), 218-865-4667 (fax)
Renville, 320-905 (phone)
East Grand Forks, 218-773-1110 (phone), 218-773-1993 (fax)

Senator Max Baucus [MT] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-2651 (phone), 202-224-0515 (fax)
Billings, 406-657-6790 (phone)
Helena, 406-449-5480 (phone)
Great Falls, 406-761-1574 (phone)
Missoula, 406-329-3123 (phone)
Butte, 406-782-8700 (phone)
Kalispell, 406-756-1150 (phone)
Bozeman, 406-586-6104 (phone)

Senator Kent Conrad [ND] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER
Washington, 202-224-2043 (phone), 202-224-7776 (fax)
Minot, 701-852-0703 (phone), 701-838-8196 (fax)
Grand Forks, 701-775-9601 (phone), 701-746-1990 (fax)
Fargo, 701-232-8030 (phone), 701-232-6449 (fax)
Bismarck, 701-258-4648 (phone), 701-258-1254 (fax)

Senator Byron L Dorgan [ND] DEMOCRAT NOT SUPPORTING FILIBUSTER
Washington, 202-224-2551 (phone), 202-224-1193 (fax)
Grand Forks, 701-746-8972 (phone), 701-746-9122 (fax)
Bismarck, 701-250-4618 (phone), 701-250-4484 (fax)
Minot, 701-852-0703 (phone), 701-838-8196 (fax)
Fargo, 701-239-5389 (phone), 701-239-5112 (fax)

Senator Ben Nelson [NE] DEMOCRAT SUPPORTING ALITO
Washington, 202-224-6551 (phone), 202-228-0012 (fax)
Lincoln, 402-441-4600 (phone), 402-476-8753 (fax)
Omaha, 402-391-3411 (phone), 402-391-4725 (fax)

Senator Robert Menendez [NJ] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-4744 (phone), 202-228-2197 (fax)
Newark, 973-645-3030 (phone)

Senator Frank Lautenberg [NJ] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-3224 (phone), 202-228-4054 (fax)
Camden, 856-338-8922 (phone), 856-338-8936 (fax)
Newark, 973-639-8700 (phone), 973-639-8723 (fax)

Senator Jeff Bingaman [NM] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-5521 (phone), 202-224-2852 (fax)
Santa Fe, 505-988-6647 (phone)
Las Vegas, 505-454-8824 (phone)
Albuquerque, 505-346-6601 (phone)
Las Cruces, 505-523-6561 (phone)
Roswell, 505-622-7113 (phone)

Senator Jack Reed [RI] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-4642 (phone), 202-224-4680 (fax)
Cranston, 800-284-4200 (phone), 401-464-6837 (fax)
Providence, 401-528-5200 (phone), 401-528-5242 (fax)

Senator Tim Johnson [SD] DEMOCRAT SUPPORTING ALITO DESPITE SAYING HE'S "TROUBLED"
Washington, 202-224-5842 (phone), 202-228-5765 (fax)
Aberdeen, 605-226-3440 (phone), 605-226-2439 (fax)
Sioux Falls, 605-332-8896 (phone), 605-332-2824 (fax)
Rapid City, 605-341-3990 (phone), 605-341-2207 (fax)

Senator Robert C Byrd [WV] DEMOCRAT SUPPORTING ALITO DESPITE THREAT TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL SEPARATION OF POWERS
Washington, 202-224-3954 (phone), 202-228-0002 (fax)
Charleston, 304-342-5855 (phone), 304-343-7144 (fax)

Senator John D Rockefeller IV [WV] DEMOCRAT SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-6472 (phone), 202-224-7665 (fax)
Fairmont, 304-367-0122 (phone), 304-367-0822 (fax)
Martinsburg, 304-262-9285 (phone), 304-262-9288 (fax)
Charleston, 304-347-5372 (phone), 304-347-5371 (fax)
Beckley, 304-253-9704 (phone), 304-253-2578 (fax)

Senator Lincoln D Chafee [RI] REPUBLICAN SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-2921 (phone), 202-228-2853 (fax)
Providence, 401-453-5294 (phone)
Newport, 401-845-0700 (phone)

Senator Olympia Snowe [ME] REPUBLICAN SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-5344 (phone), 202-224-1946 (fax)
Bangor, 207-945-0432 (phone), 207-941-9525 (fax)
Presque Isle, 207-764-5124 (phone), 207-764-6420 (fax)
Biddeford, 207-282-4144 (phone), 207-284-2358 (fax)
Auburn, 207-786-2451 (phone), 207-782-1438 (fax)
Augusta, 207-622-8292 (phone), 207-622-7295 (fax)
Portland, 207-874-0883 (phone), 207-874-7631 (fax)

Senator Susan Collins [ME] REPUBLICAN SWING VOTE
Washington, 202-224-2523 (phone), 202-224-2693 (fax)
Biddeford, 207-283-1101 (phone), 207-283-4054 (fax)
Portland, 207-780-3575 (phone), 207-828-0380 (fax)
Caribou, 207-493-7873 (phone), 207-493-7810 (fax)
Bangor, 207-945-0417 (phone), 207-990-4604 (fax)
Augusta, 207-622-8414 (phone), 207-622-5884 (fax)
Lewiston, 207-784-6969 (phone), 207-782-6475 (fax)

Fax the word to FILIBUSTER instantly to twelve wavering Senators

Washington, local phone and fax numbers for all Senators, with notes on which Dems need nudging toward filibuster: http://www.nocrony.com/...

Let's not forget to hit the Senators where we might cynically think they really care - their campaign offices. Additionally, when we call the PACs it doesn't matter if we're non-residents!

Joseph I. Lieberman (D- CT), (860) 244-2006
Thomas R. Carper (D- DE), (302) 328-5774
Evan Bayh (D- IN), 202-326-0450
Robert Menendez (D-NJ), 201-271-1161
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D- DE) , 202-547-2221

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

For a dumb guy, W just made one smart move

If you can't toss an obstruction to the side, raise it up. That's just what George W. Bush did today when he nominated Noel Hillman to a federal judgeship. Hillman is the prosecutor in charge of the Abramoff investigation.

This clever ploy clears the way for Bush to put someone more malleable into that position. And Jack Abramoff isn't the only reason for the Hillman elevation.

Hillman also spearheaded the probe into the claim that a businessman named Peter Paul illegally gave Hillary Clinton a personal contribution disguised as a donation from his company, Stan Lee media. (Yes, we're talking about Stan the Man, True Believers. They were once partners. ) This falling out stems from a fundraising event back in 2000; the New York Times offers a good summary here. The allegation made some headlines in 2004, as Paul pled guilty to an unrelated charge of manipulating company stock. The right tried their damnedest to use this controversy as a cudgel against Hillary, although nothing really stuck:

In March of 2005, Paul had a falling out with his advocates at Judicial Watch. He accused them of using his name to raise more than $15 million from people who disliked the Clintons, while doing little to advance his case. He has threatened to sue them for $1 million, and announced his plan to replace them with a "dream team" of Republican lawyers...

For their part, Judicial Watch has filed papers seeking to formally sever all ties with Paul...

Side note: I find it of some interest that the SEC went after Paul when they allow so many business crooks to escape. Certainly, Ken Lay can be accused of misrepresenting Enron's finances to the stockholders. Why put Paul in the pokey and leave Lay on the loose?

At any rate, now Bush can appoint a new chief corruption "watchdog" who, like Starr, will refuse to let an old scandal die. Prediction: The New Guy will offer Paul a very sweet deal, and headlines will proclaim Clintonian perfidy at just the right moment in 2006. That moment will occur before the election, but after the point when someone else could run in Hillary's place.

Abramoff will be a mere rumor.

Support the Alito filibuster

A couple of readers have asked why I haven't mentioned the Alito filibuster. Truth is, others have already expressed my sentiments. So let me simply repeat some suggestions made on Democrats.com:

1. Ignore the media whores. Karl Rove is feeding them lies as he always does, and they are swallowing those lies as they always do. The only media that matters is the media we are creating right here by calling each Senator and getting a YES or NO statement from them.

2. Keep calling the Senators who are undecided or opposed to a filibuster. You can call their DC office all weekend and leave polite but firm voicemails urging the Senators to support Kerry's filibuster. When offices open on Monday 9 a.m. ET, make another round of calls. Let's shut down the Capitol switchboard on Monday!

3. Call the DNC (202-863-8000) and the DSCC (202-224-2447) and tell them your 2006 contributions will depend on the success of the Alito filibuster. Tell them they need to get every Democratic Senator on board.

4. Wake up the sleeping bloggers. Where are the biggest blogs, including DailyKos.com, TalkingPointsMemo.com, CrooksandLiars.com, and AmericaBlog.com?

I don't know whether this fight can be won, but we must fight nonetheless. Battle has more honor than cynicism.

I keed, I keed...

I think Ann Coulter should have her nipples scraped off with a potato peeler.

Just kidding!

Actually, I think Ann Coulter should be force-fed her own eyeballs while her toes are removed with a chain-saw.

Just kidding!

Actually, I think Ann Coulter should have lye injected into her stomach while a hammer slowly cracks open her skull.

Just kidding!

Actually, I think Ann Coulter should be the guest of honor in a scene similar to the infamous "fried cerebellum" finale of Hannibal.

Just kidding!

Actually, I think Ann Coulter has perfected a technique which the denizens of Munich's "Brown House" would have loved: First she issues death threats against anyone whose beliefs differ from hers, and then she justifies her barbarism with the words "Just kidding!" I think that if she is going to play on that filthy level, she had better be prepared to receive as she gives.

And on that score, I ain't kidding.

(P.S. Coulter says she is a Christian. Who the hell does she think she's kidding?)

Iris scans, part two

As noted not long ago, New Jersey's Freehold Borough School District will institute a new policy of recording iris scans of every visitor to three grade schools. This is a step toward the nightmarish goal of keeping a database on every citizen.

A reader who lives in that area, and who has had certain dealings with the administrator responsible for implementing the iris scan program, offered a chracterization of this individual which -- unfortunately -- I cannot repeat here, for legal reasons. I have no way of knowing if my reader is, as he claims, a clinician, and thus qualified to offer such an assessment. You may, if you feel so inclined, get a gander of superintendent Phil Meara's mug here and come to your own conclusions. (Check out the hair! If I had kids, I'm not sure I'd want my youngsters in this guy's keeping...)

But I can say this: I used to be under the impression that folks in Jersey were feisty. I thought -- pardon my language -- that Jersey guys and Jersey gals didn't take shit. So why the hell are they putting up with this shit?

As many as four adults can be designated to pick up each child in the district, but in order to be authorized to come into school, they will be asked to register with the district's iris recognition security and visitor management system.

As I noted earlier, that database might end up who-knows-where in the future. Meara may swear that he will keep records confidential, and he may even be sincere. But if our increasingly Nazified federal goverment can demand (for no sensible reason) Google's data, they can surely subpoena iris scan records from a New Jersey school district. And that would be doubleplusungood.

When I was young, the schools didn't teach Orwell until Middle School (which we then called Junior High School). Jersey kids are getting an early start.

The Democratic Party should sue NBC -- and cartoonist Scott Stantis

Katie Couric had the audacity to lie to Howard Dean's face. She told Dean that he was the liar. This happened on Today, which apparently has been dragooned into the effort to provide RNC spin on the Abramoff affair.

She kept repeating the lie that Jack Abramoff gave money to Democrats, which he did not. Furthermore, his clients/victims -- casino-owning Indian tribes -- diverted their donations from Democrats to the Republicans, although the tribes continued to give small amounts to their traditional allies.

As we've seen in a previous post, the Washington Post tried to make the case that Jean Carnahan received funding at Abramoff's "direction." In fact, she received nothing; her opponent did. The Post said the same thing about Tom Daschle, who also received nothing. Max Cleland received a mere $500 from one of Abramoff's Indian clients, but that amount probably would have been much higher if Abramoff never existed.

The Democratic Party, as an institution, should file a lawsuit against NBC for libel. A similar suit can and should be filed against any "deep pockets" media organ who repeats the Jack-gave-to-Dems lie.

Can such a suit be won? Perhap not; libel suits are notoriously difficult, even when the facts are clearly on your side. But such a suit would have a number of other purposes:

1. It would inform the public that -- contrary to myth -- the major media are all owned and directed by conservative forces.

2. It would inform those media barons that Democrats are as numerous and as powerful as are the "wackos" who, lemming-like, will jump over any cliff that Ralph Reed points at.

3. A suit would force everyone who has been repeating the Abramoff lie to retreat and to play the humiliating game of "What I really meant to say was..."

Firedoglake has contact info for the NBC ombudswhatever. His name is David McCormick:

david.mccormick@nbc.com
212-664-3984

Give him a call and tell NBC to stop lying.

On a related note: Scott Stantis is an editorial and strip cartoonist operating out of Arizona. He regularly offers the world the absurd spectacle of a small black child mouthing Republican platitudes written by a white guy. Here's his latest:

In this case, I think that both the Democratic party and Howard Dean personally should sue Stantis and his syndicate.

Yes, I know that Howard Dean is a public figure. Yes, I know that any public figure will have a particularly hard time making the case for libel. But even famous people have rights (remember Carol Burnett vs. The National Enquirer?) -- and this cartoon is actionable. The provably false statement that 80 Democratic politicians received Abramoff money is not a matter of opinion and is not protected by the claim of "satire."

By the way -- I know Dean isn't easy to draw, but the Stantis caricature really stinks.

The Stantis cartoon brings up another question: Why aren't conservatives funny? I'll grant that H.L. Mencken was wonderful, and P.J. O'Rourke definitely had his moments when he wrote for the old National Lampoon. Dennis Miller used to be hilarious. Aside from that, the record is pretty dismal. The alleged "humor" of Rush Limbaugh appeals to the same Ancient Ones who also laugh at Hee Haw, Bob Hope and the Reader's Digest joke pages.

Another indication that the Bin Laden tape is fake

Bush used the questioned tape to justify his warrantless wiretapping of American citizens:

"I understand there are some in America who say, 'Well this can't be true, there aren't still people willing to attack.' All I would ask them to do is listen to the words of Osama bin Laden and take him seriously," Bush said at the National Security Agency.

Just who, exactly, said such a thing? Surely no-one on the left. We've been busy castigating Bush for ignoring Bin Laden.

You can't spell "Apocalypse" without a "Why?"

An odd story on Bellacio, by "Notepad" (a writer previously unknown to me), predicts economic collapse in the United States. Some of the listed reasons are familiar (massive debt held by China, Iran switching to the euro) but this bit was new:

Bank Of America and Compass Bank managers (probably all other U.S. banks too) have been instructing their employees in the last few weeks on how to respond to customer demands in the event of a collapse of the U.S. economy - specifically telling the employees that only agents from the Department Of Homeland Security will have authority to decide what belongings customers may have from their safe deposit boxes - and that precious metals and other valuables will not be released to U.S. citizens. The bank employees have been strictly prohibited from revealing the banks’ new "guidelines" to anyone. (however, employees have been talking to friends and family)

Is this claim just "idle scaremongering," as one of the Bellacio comentators suggests? Probably. I sure as hell haven't been able to find any verification.

Still, it can't hurt to ask if any of my readers works in a B of A, or knows someone who does...

Another comment following that story is also worth quoting:

The Iranian bourse is scheduled to open in March. Elections for the 17th Knesset will be held in Israel on 28 March. The Fed will hide the M-3 effective March 2006. The US mid-term elections take place in June. My guess is that something will happen during April or May. I don’t think the international community has the appetite for yet another unjustified, illegal war, particularly if Iran accepts Russia’s enrichment offer. All these new Osama videos surfacing, the foiled plot to kidnap Leo Blair, Al Qaeda’s threat to attack UN offices in Pakistan, etc. When you are desperate you’ll do anything. It pains me to think about the possibilities here.

Of course, the general elections will take place in November, although a number of primaries will happen in June.

The new Gestapo

The Patriot Act reauthorization bill of 2005 offers an interesting little tidbit. Most people don't know about this:

Sec. 3056A. Powers, authorities, and duties of United States Secret Service Uniformed Division

(a) There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the 'United States Secret Service Uniformed Division'. Subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division shall perform such duties as the Director, United States Secret Service, may prescribe in connection with the protection of the following:

What follows is a list of federal properties (the White House, Foreign Diplomatic Missions, and so forth). Then we get to the juicy bit:

(11) An event designated under section 3056(e) of title 18 as a special event of national significance.

The uniformed Secret Service are authorized, in the wake of such an "event," to make arrests without warrant.

What I've been looking for -- and have yet to find -- is Section 3056(e) of title 18. Just what is a "special event of national significance"? I'm thinking bombs. I'm thinking that all the Bushies need do is set off a single mini-nuke -- and then they will have the authority, based on laws already on the books, to send out the Gestapo to jail all dissenters.

Iris scans

Why, in a time of strained educational budgets, would the Freehold Borough School District feel obligated to spend $369,000 on a iris scanner system designed to identify everyone in or near an elementary school? Are terrorists infiltrating our grade schools?

According to the article, every single parent of every child who visits school grounds (for the Christmas play, the science fair, parent/teacher conferences, or even just to drop off a youngster) will have his or her eyes scanned. Do we have any guarantee that this information will stay private? No, we do not.

In fact, we can feel fairly certain that the data will receive wide distribution. Just like your cell phone records.

Imagine the outcry if Uncle Sam decided it wanted a database of every citizen's fingerprints. How is this any different?

Obviously, this is the first step. Today, we are told that these intrusions are justified by the sacred cause of protecting our children. Tomorrow, we will be living in the world of Minority Report.

I got millions (sez Bill)

According to Bill O'Reilly, bloggers who went after Deborah Howell for her Abramovian obfuscations -- in other words, bloggers like yours truly -- functioned as part of a well-organized smear campaign funded by George Soros and Peter Lewis.

Does O'Reilly feel obligated to provide any evidence that either of these men paid a single dollar to a single blogger for this purpose? Of course not. "Christians" like O'Reilly always have an elastic interpretation of the commandment forbidding false witness. For the well-heeled O'Reilly to accuse anyone else of taking money is like Germany accusing Poland of starting World War II.

Moonie mag speaks of impeachment (Update)

Insight on the News is a propaganda sheet allied to the Washington Times and subsidized by the Reverend Moon. To the shock of many, Insight has today published a piece on possible impeachment hearings for W.

Impeachment proponents in Congress have been bolstered by a memorandum by the Congressional Research Service on Jan. 6. CRS, which is the research arm of Congress, asserted in a report by national security specialist Alfred Cumming that the amended 1947 law requires the president to keep all members of the House and Senate intelligence committees "fully and currently informed" of a domestic surveillance effort. It was the second CRS report in less than a month that questioned the administration's domestic surveillance program.

The latest CRS report said Mr. Bush should have briefed the intelligence committees in the House and Senate. The report said covert programs must be reported to House and Senate leaders as well as the chairs of the intelligence panels, termed the "Gang of Eight."

There's a Lawrence of Arabia quote for every occasion -- and right now, I'm thinking of the scene where Anthony Quinn tells Omar Sharif "This is a new trick!"

The question is not "Should Bush be impeached?" but "Why is Moon pushing the idea now?" After all, the Korean Khrist has long been close to Dubya's daddy. Brother Neil has been tagging along with the Moon roadshow for some time. And W himself even gave a televised "thumbs up" to Moon's "Tear Down the Cross Day" rally. (How our Fearless Leader managed to avoid paying a political price for that endorsement remains a mystery.)

So...what's really going on here?

Possibility numero uno: The Bushies know they done wrong and they would rather face impeachment proceedings now, rather than later -- when the Dems control one or both houses.

Possibility numero duo: Maybe Moon is pissed. Maybe he wanted W to make a personal appearance at the "Tear Down the Cross" thing in 2003. Or maybe Moon has been demanding an unabashed declaraton of his Messiah-hood from the Smirking One. The Korean Khrist is just nutty enough, and just arrogant enough, to issue such a demand and to add an "or else." UPI -- another Moon outfit -- has published a flurry or reports surprisingly critical of the administration.

Possibility numero three-o: Perhaps the Bush forces want Dems to mount an impeachment drive based on illegal wiretapping -- because the Bushies know that a certain nuclear event will occur later this year. "We could have prevented this tragedy, but the Democrats weakened our security." A carefully-planned propaganda barrage on that theme -- in the wake of a national tragedy -- would destroy all opposition to Republican one-party rule.

UPDATE: Bob Fertik has more on this. It's must-read material.

Leonardo da Vinci in court: Ramdom esoteric mutterings...

I haven't posted on a non-political topic in weeks, so you'll have to bear with...

My lady and I are re-reading the esoteric classic Holy Blood, Holy Grail, which is a better book than many think. Fundamentalists despise the work because it suggests, toward the end, that Jesus not only had a penis but used it. To me, that was always the boring part. I like the weird historical stuff in the middle section -- the stuff that no fundie ever talks or cares about: The Cathars, Rene d'Anjou, Charles Radclyffe, Sir Isaac Newton, Nodier...

Of course, we know a great deal more these days about the Priory of Zion, which appears to be a latter-day fantasy concocted by right-wing French esotericists with dreams of aristocracy. That affectation is common among occultists -- Aleister Crowley, for example, loved to be called Sir Aleister Crowley, a title he never earned. (I've long suspected that Ian Fleming used his friend Crowley as the model for his arch-fiend Blofeld, who also had pretenses of nobility.)

Still, HBHG remains a lot of fun. It is careful to label speculation as such, and it does present some genuinely original research. These are virtues possessed by few other works in the genre.

HBHG also gave rise, in part, to Dan Brown's inaccurate-but-lovable page-turner The Da Vinci Code, the film version of which is slated to open in the middle of March.

Two of the authors of HBHG -- Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh -- are now suing Brown. This, despite the fact that Brown's bestseller helped renew sales of their own book. Obviously, the two plaintiffs want a piece of the film action.

Leigh looks like a biker: Leather jacket, dark glasses, smokes on camera... I'm not too surprised to see an aggressive move on his part.

The primary author of the orignal work, Henry Lincoln, is not party to the suit. He now seems disdainful of the book that made him famous. For some years, he has pursued a theory that ancient monuments in France and elsewhere are arranged according to geometrical patterns. There seems to be something to this claim -- but I'm not sure what!

I mention the upcoming court case because -- although I wish Leigh and Baigent well in all other respects -- I hope they lose this case. A writer of fiction should not have to share his earnings with the non-fiction writers whose research inspired his work. Otherwise, the fellow who wrote the play Give 'Em Hell Harry would have had to share royalties with everyone who had ever written a Truman biography.

Incidentally, even those who have read HBHG usually do not know that, way back in the 1960s, Henry Lincoln wrote the screenplay for Boris Karloff's final film, The Crimson Cult. I saw that one in the theater, when I was barely past tyke-hood. And I'll never forget it. First time I ever saw an actual naked lady on screen. She was the lovely Virginia Wetherell, best known for her role in A Clockwork Orange ("She came toward me...") -- and there's an hilarious story about Stanley Kubrick and her which used to be on the net but isn't anymore.

Ahem. I seem to have wandered from my topic. Forgive me. Some memories are pleasant.

Proof? Pfft!

Yesterday, I asked (as did a lot of other people) for Washington Post Ombudscreature Deborah Howell to provide "one-half of one molecule's worth of evidence that Abramoff DIRECTED any Indian anywhere to give one dollar to any Democrat that otherwise would not have received it." The Post has made an effort to back her BS.

I still haven't received my half-a-molecule's worth. According to the Post:

Prominent Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff mounted a far-reaching campaign in 2002 on behalf of his clients, the Louisiana Coushatta tribe, to prevent another tribe, the Jena Band of Choctaws, from winning federal approval for a rival casino. As part of his efforts, Abramoff sent the Coushattas a list of politicians and organizations, titled "Coushatta Requests," for whom he wanted to tribe to write checks.

This article is cunning work. The Postfolk do not circle names and say "See? Democrats! Right here!" And an unrelated squib directs our attention to Ralph Reed. This charade is designed to convince us that they are being fair and balanced.

But in the attached graphic, we see only a partial list (mostly restricted to people whose names begin with C) of pols who -- supposedly -- received an Abramoff recommendation. In that list are Max Cleland, Jean Carnahan and Tom Daschle. Dems all.

Does that list prove Howell's point? Not by a long shot.

Remember, the challenge is to find a donation to a Democrat who otherwise would not have received one. Indian tribes traditionally give to Democrats. When Jack got his blackmailing clutches into a tribe's guts, he diverted much of their political contributions to the right.

Mark Schmitt tells us the part of the story the Post doesn't want you to know: The Coushatta tribe didn't give one dime to Jean Carnahan. Obviously, the tribal leaders received further "directions" in their confabs with Team Abramoff.

Jack Abramoff did, however, make a hefty donation to her Republican opponent. And where did Jack get his loot? From the Coushattas! (And from a lot of other places, most of them shadowy and grotty.) Since money is fungible, we can fairly say that Coushatta money went toward the effort to unseat Jean Carnahan.

Same thing with Daschle. Even though he is good on Indian issues, and even though he has often received tribal donations in the past, the Coushattas did not give him a farthing. Meanwhile, Coushatta money found its way (after a brief stop in Jack Abramoff's bank account) into the coffers of Daschle's opponent.

Which leaves Cleland, who received a grand total of $500 from the Coushattas. His opponent got eleven times as much. That tiny $500 amounts to spitting in the face of a thirsty man and then bragging that you gave him a drink.

Republicans got millions. They cannot build the case for a "bipartisan" scandal based on the claim that, in this entire country, one Democrat received the kind of money that might pay for a valve job.

The point is this: The Indians wanted to help Democrats, their traditional allies, who surely would have received far more from tribal donors if Jack Abramoff never existed. We still don't have even a quark's worth of proof that any tribe gave any amount to any Democrat purely because Godfather Jack directed them to do so.

INFURIATING! (Note: This post has been expanded)

Even though the "big bloggers" are talking about Washington Post "ombudsman" Deborah Howell's outragous attempt to preserve the Bush line on Abramoff, I must have my say.

On January 15, Howell wrote a column filled with deliberate lies, in which she claimed that Abramoff "had made substantial campaign contributions to both major parties." She also intimated that the Washington Post had covered up these phantom donations to Democrats.

Today she offered an "apology" which turns out to be almost as deceptive as the original outrage.

I wrote that he gave campaign money to both parties and their members of Congress. He didn't. I should have said he directed his client Indian tribes to make campaign contributions to members of Congress from both parties.

"Directed"?

If Howell has one-half of one molecule's worth of evidence that Abramoff DIRECTED any Indian anywhere to give one dollar to any Democrat that otherwise would not have received it, let her produce her proof. If she can't offer any, she should stop writing altogether.

Here are the facts: Indian tribes generally give to Democrats. They have every right and every motive to do so; historically, Democratic politicians have been more likely to show a sympathetic interest in their causes. Any Republicans or Republican-friendly columnists who believe that these perfectly legal contributions are "tainted" should join forces with those progressives who call for the public financing of elections.

The only Indian tribes who gave substantially to Republicans were those working with Abramoff.

Of the top 10 political donors among Indian tribes in that period, three are former clients of Abramoff and Scanlon: the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe of Michigan, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, and the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians of California. All three gave most of their donations to Republicans -- by margins of 30 percentage points or more -- while the rest favored Democrats....

Clearly, Godfather Jack directed those donations which went against historical patterns. If the tribes also allowed some additional money to go to their traditional Democrat allies, so what? The money would have gone to members of that party anyway, even if Jack Abramoff had never existed.

In fact, if Abramoff weren't around, Democrats would have received much more. The tribes were victimized by a Republican extortion racket: Those who didn't play ball with Jack would soon have their casino operations targeted by fundamentalist kingpin Ralph Reed and his hordes of activist Christian "wackos." (That's not my word: It appears in cynical emails from within the Abramoff mob.)

I say Democrats who received money from any Indian tribe -- even the ones which got "jacked" by Jack -- should keep it. The Indians want them to have it. They gave to Republicans only out of fear.

Howell complains about the battalions of awful, awful liberals who sent her so much nasty email. I say: Good show! There is no reason -- no reason on earth -- why columnists and newsfolk should not fear us as much as they fear the conservative hordes.

Howell has no reason to carp. I've been on the recieving end of a reactionary barrage -- death threats, accusations of communism, pleas for my soul, the works. I know what it's like. And I say screw it. We can't convert or even converse with those apes -- but we can match their firepower. It's time our side started hitting back instead of maintaining the "Thank you sir, may I have another?" stance.

Howell still makes contact information available: "Deborah Howell can be reached at 202-334-7582 or atombudsman@washpost.com." Tell her that she should quit if she cannot prove her lying claim that Democrats received money entirely due to Abramoff's direction. Don't let her change the subject or rephrase the question.

Folks, we've had an impact. Don't wimp out now. Let her have it! Force her to offer a second apology. Be mean, be stern, be profane, be reasonable, be gentle, be loud, be soft, be whatever your temperament tells you to be. But BE HEARD.

Incidentally, she also writes: "To all of those who wanted me fired, I'm afraid you're out of luck. I have a contract. For the next two years, I will continue to speak my mind."

Some may be under the impression that by "speak her mind," she means "read my script" and "take my pay-off." I suspect that if she were to write several columns in favor of -- say -- a cessation of aid to Israel, the WP powers-that-be would soon find a loophole in that "contract" of hers.

Osama Bin Laden, William Blum, and False Quotation Syndrome

Say what you will about Wayne Madsen, his latest column about the Osama Bin Laden tape offers interesting -- and perhaps independently verifiable -- evidence that something is amiss.

Bin Laden allegedly quotes the following passage from Blum's book, Rogue State: "If you (Americans) are sincere in your desire for peace and security, we have answered you. And if Bush decides to carry on with his lies and oppression, then it would be useful for you to read the book Rogue State, which states in its introduction: 'If I were president, I would stop the attacks on the United States: First I would give an apology to all the widows and orphans and those who were tortured. Then I would announce that American interference in the nations of the world has ended once and for all.'"

I haven't read (or even skimmed) the Blum book. But according to Madsen -- who knows Blum -- these words do not appear in the introduction.

Nevertheless, the conservatives are using this quote to tie all progressives to Al Qaeda.

Furthermore, Blum had previously (in his book Killing Hope -- which I did once own) decried the CIA's support of Osama Bin Laden's forces in Afghanistan.

I will soon see for myself just what it was that Blum actually did say, and in what context. Even if he did write those words, I personally have no problem with the idea of offering apologies to torture victims. By condoning torture, the Bush administration handed Islamic fundamentalists an enormous propaganda coup.

I do know that for more than a hundred years, reactionaries have received enormous benefits from the production of manufactured quotations and forged documents. Anyone who doubts the point should read up on the numerous fake quotes attributed to Lenin. You've probably seen (and perhaps even believed) a few of them: The "pie crust" misattribution, the "ripe fruit" concoction, "the capitalists will sell us the rope with which to hang them," the "ten rules for revolutionists," and so forth.

The tactic continues: Fundamentalist Kent Hovind once quoted Thomas Huxley as saying "We've accepted this evolution theory because it gives us sexual freedom" -- a completely spurious quotation. And who can forget 2004's infamous "metrosexual" remark attributed to John Kerry by Fox News?

One can cite dozens, perhaps hundreds of similar examples. I have studied "false quotation syndrome" at great length (I once hoped to write a book on the subject) and can state with confidence that the illness is almost entirely confined to the conservative community.

Conservatives also love to cobble together spurious words which allegedly issued from people they like. At a Republican National Convention, Ronald Reagan used a bogus Lincoln quote: "You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift." (In light of Reagans' deficits, that was a pretty damn cheeky thing for him to say.) Fundamentalists also routinely quote something called "George Washington's Prayer Journal" which all Washington experts agree is a ludicrous hoax.

Then there is the long history of forged documents: The Zinoviev letter...the many anti-Mason and anti-Catholic hoaxes...the Protocols... "Parapolitics"..."Silent Weapons"...the Clinton "apology" letter...and, of course, the recent Niger "yellowcake" fakes.

All of these bogus materials (with the exception of Iron Mountain, which was intended as satire) stemmed from rightist sources. Do not kid yourself: These works have had a very real political impact over the past century or so, even though they received wide distribution only within the political fringe.

For the reactionaries, reality does not matter. What is real is what they want to be real.

Could the Osama tape be another concoction? The audio technology is certainly there. The motive is there. More importantly, the history of fakery is there -- for all to see.

Losing the war on terror

Consider this post an addendum to the one below. According to Rand (no hotbed of liberalism), we are losing the war on terror:

The sum of "international" and "domestic" terrorist attacks in 2005 was 3991, up 51% from the previous year’s figure of 2639. The number of deaths that resulted from those attacks was 6872, which is 36% higher than the 5066 that occurred in 2004...

In contrast, in the last year of the Clinton presidency (2000), there were 1138 attacks and 776 deaths. Since then, after five years of Bush's macho 84 billion-dollar-a-year War on Terror®, attacks have increased by 250% and deaths by a whopping 550%.

Let's force the Republicans to run on that record.

Make Osama the issue: WHY IS HE STILL FREE?

No less a personage than John Kerry -- does the name sound familiar? -- is the blogger of the moment over on Daily Kos. And the post is so damn good, I would have made it a top recommendation even if his name were John Doe.

I'm sure you've seen the piece already. But just in case you haven't, it's a hard-hitting expose on how the Bush administration let Osama Bin Laden get away at Tora Bora. Lots of blogs (including this one) and other online periodicals have discussed this episode, but Kerry's piece offers the best research currently available.

This is exactly the strategy -- the Rovian strategy, we could call it -- Democrats should pursue: Attack the enemy on his perceived strong points. Those "strong points" are anything but.

Don't let the Republicans define one more issue. Take control of the issues. Hit first. Force Tora Bora onto the national stage. Force the other side to defend what happened there.

As Rove used to say: If you're defending, you're losing.

Incidentally, Senator Kerry says Teresa reads blogs passionately. If she saw the vote fraud coverage here, she knows we think she's the real first lady.

FU, AP!

I normally wouldn't do a "what he said" post based on a Joshua Marshall column, since many of you probably read his words before you come here. But he draws our attention to an outrageous Associated Press story that literally had my jaw dropping. According to AP:

The Abramoff investigation threatens to ensnare at least a half dozen members of Congress of both parties and Bush administration officials...

With the midterm elections 10 months away, Democrats have tried to link Abramoff to Republicans, the main recipients of his largesse.

So...Democrats are under investigation? News to me. Which Democracts? It's a fact of history: Abramoff's mafia was designed to finance only one party -- the Republican party.

And how the hell can AP possibly justify that smarmy "tried to link" comment? The linkage is as inescapable as the chains around Marley's ghost. Those links are found in investigative reports, not in statements from Democratic leaders. Why is AP parroting the RNC's desperate spin doctors?

And why aren't we screaming about this biased pseudo-journalism? AP serves up crap only because passive, bovine progressives allow them to do so.

Don't be complacent and cow-like. Contact Associated Press here. The message: "FU, AP!"

Vote fraud: Smoking gun?

The data available here speaks for itself:

The National Election Data Archive (NEDA) is the first mathematical team to release a valid scientific analysis of the precinct-level 2004 Ohio presidential exit poll data. NEDA's analysis provides virtually irrefutable evidence of vote miscount.

Oh yeah? Let's say I'm a skeptic. Convince me.

In E/M precinct 27, with an estimated 100 respondents, Kerry’s official vote count was 29% less than his exit poll share, creating a 58% difference between Kerry and Bush exit poll and official vote margins. There is less than a one in 867,205,500 chance of this occurring due to chance.

Yeah, well...that's just one example.

In E/M precinct 25, with an estimated 62 respondents, Kerry’s official vote count was 28% less than his exit poll share, creating a 56% difference between Kerry and Bush exit poll and official vote margins. There is less than a one in 234,800 chance of this occurring due to chance.

Pfft. I dare you to come up with a third example.

In E/M precinct 48, with an estimated 100 respondents, Kerry's official vote was 16% less than his exit poll share, creating a 32% difference between Kerry and Bush exit poll and official vote margins. There is less than a one in 17,800 chance of this occurring due to chance.

Okay, three examples. How many precincts had these problems?

35% of 49 precincts studied. Let's see...that comes out to...

(Cripes. Where's the calculator on this damn computer? And how do you work it? Damn it, Jim! I'm a painter, not a mathematician...)

...I think that comes out to 17 precincts in this sample where the exits indicated that Kerry would receive a larger vote than he was officially awarded. However, there were two -- count 'em: TWO (2) -- precincts in which the exits overestimated the Bush vote.

So I guess this is a bipartisan problem. You know -- like the Abramoff thing supposedly is.

Osama on tape

My first reaction to the new Osama tape mirrors the point others have raised. Why is there no new terror alert as a result of this recording? During the election, we had plenty of 'em; they kept a sector of the populace in a constant state of anxiety. Since then -- well, correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can recall, there have been no alerts whatsoever.

Odd.

Some have also questioned whether the tape is real. Even if the voice is that of Osama Bin Laden, it could still be a fake, thanks to advances in technology. Check out this Washington Post piece from 1999:

"Gentlemen! We have called you together to inform you that we are going to overthrow the United States government." So begins a statement being delivered by Gen. Carl W. Steiner, former Commander-in-chief, U.S. Special Operations Command.

At least the voice sounds amazingly like him.

But it is not Steiner. It is the result of voice "morphing" technology developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

By taking just a 10-minute digital recording of Steiner's voice, scientist George Papcun is able, in near real time, to clone speech patterns and develop an accurate facsimile. Steiner was so impressed, he asked for a copy of the tape.

I have no way of knowing if this technology has been applied to any Bin Laden recording. But no-one can deny that the article referenced above raises unnerving possibilities.

A manipulation of this sort would explain why Osama has recently shown a tendency to say what Republicans would like him to say. He discusses polls in America. He no longer dwells on obscure (to Americans) points of Islamic history or theology.

Faked audiotapes and television broadcasts were prophesied by Dr. Steven Metz and Lieutenant Colonel James Kievit (of the Army War College) in their extraordinary 1994 document The Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War, which is one of those revealing "think" pieces the Pentagon probably wishes had never seen a public release. You can read the file here.

Interesting, wasn't it, how an Osama communication hit the public in late 2004 -- just in time to help deep-six John Kerry's chances?

By the way, you may be interested to learn that rightists have put this latest development to typically bad use. This conservative blog includes the following observation:

Sounds to me like raising a white flag without admitting defeat. I am sure all the lefties will jump on it and agree with Osama's "opinion" (or more likely an attempt at creating deeper fissures between left and right in the US) that it is big business that supports Bush and the war. Um, excuse me, but there was a little matter of the destruction of the WTC and damage to the Pentagon and loss of three planes and thousands of innocent civilians...

I am forever struck by the contrast between the way right-wingers think we think and the way we actually do think. This boob, like many of his boob brethren, actually believes that progressives want to do business with Osama Bin Laden. Anyone who studies this blog knows that -- to the contrary -- I've consistently damned Bush for not capturing him, and for coddling the Saudis who have supported Al Qaeda. I've damned the Bush administration for ignoring warnings of the WTC disaster and for not conducting a genuine investigation of how the hijackers moved about this country so freely. And, because the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend, I've damned the Reagan/Bush I administrations for supporting Bin Laden's efforts against the Russians.

Scan the Democratic Underground responses and you will see many insults hurled toward Bush but not one iota of support for Bin Laden.

Alas, conservative fantasists will believe precisely what they want to believe -- and apparently, they want to believe that Democrats wear "I like Osama" t-shirts. Folks who view reality as a malleable commodity can be described in one word: Nuts.

By hook or by crook, W wants information...INFORMATION...

The Bush administration wants Google to turn over a ton of info on you and me -- including records of ALL Google searches. The excuse: The Bushies are gunnin' for child molesters. I suspect that their definition of "molester" is broad enough to include anyone who criticizes the war. Of course, if the Feds were really interested in finding pedophiles, they would look at the GOP.

George W. Bush, Bill Bennett, and strange sex (with an update on male cheerleading!)

I thought that yesterday's item would attract some attention. Who could resist a story about a proud and open vampire Satanist, now running for Governor of Minnesota, who claims a friendship with Jeb Bush and Brother Dubya?

Alas, the readers didn't even get a good chuckle out of that one. Okay, lesson learned. Satanism is yawnsville. So let's return to an old favorite: George W. Bush's alleged sexcapades.

Although the "fear of fudgepacking" factor gave W's popularity a huge boost among the Jesus voters (most of whom erroneously believe that he and Kerry had very different stances on the gay marriage issue), many rumors -- and a couple of pieces of evidence -- link our current prez to various claimed homosexual affairs. The best evidence can be found in the White House logs (supply your own pun here) which confirm that he-ho "journalist" Jeff Gannon stayed overnight in the White House on a number of occasions. Quite a few men work in that building, but -- so far as I know -- only one male regularly sleeps there.

We must also keep in mind the fact that George W. Bush's roommate at Yale was Victor Ashe, who later became the mayor of Knoxville, Tennessee -- and who is now the American ambassador to Poland. During their Yale years, the two men were both male cheerleaders.

I never get tired of writing that last sentence. (Update: Some have questioned the accuracy of this claim. Please see the postscript.)

Is Victor Ashe gay or bisexual, as so many have contended? Each reader must come to his or her own conclusions; for my part, I've heard the claim so often that I've mentally transferred it from the "possible" file to the "probable" category. It is said (but not documented) that Ashe was twice arrested for committing homosexual acts in public. Frankly, I find it difficult to believe that any man with political ambitions would act so recklessly -- even so, the details of this rumor (which come to us via the Green party of Tennessee) are intriguing:

It's rumored that NOxVile's mayor, Victor/Victoria Ashe, whose momma (who took Vic's place when busted for "underage legislating") was arrested for hit-and-run while hiding out at the mayor's house, is suspected of two arrests. One was in Washington DC and the other was in Atlanta, while he was a state legislator. They allegedly involved arrests while picking up homosexual prostitutes in public restrooms while dressed in a dress. Our mayor also was allegedly introduced on live TV as "The gay mayor from Knoxville," at a national mayor's conference in San Francisco. Mayor Ashe is rumored to have refused changing Gay Street's name to something less, er, gay, preferring instead the name "Gay Way."

The most common version of the "live intro" story holds that Peter Jennings said those words. Alas, no-one had ever offered any videotaped proof for that allegation.

I've received a number of letters from people in Tennessee "confirming" the Ashe-is-gay rumor: "Oh, everyone here knows..." They may know, and you or I may or may not choose to believe -- but until someone offers proof or eyewitness testimony, no reputable journalists will get behind this one. So to speak.

Does such testimony exist? Gary Buell (without whom I wouldn't have had a blog over the past couple of days) directed my attention to a mysterious web site, which details the story of a "Las Vegas woman" who claims that she can indeed address this matter authoritatively.

The site does not name the woman directly. We will discuss her identity, and her credibility, presently. For now, let's hear her tale:

This situation took place in 1984 in the State of Tennessee. It concerns a 41 year old woman [currently residing in Las Vegas], Victor Ashe and George Bush's encounter in 1984 during the senate debates between Al Gore, Jr., Victor Ashe and Ed McAteer. She was invited to come to Tennessee by Victor Ashe. While attending one of these debates she spoke briefly with Ed McAteer (Senatorial candidate in 1984 who debated alongside Al Gore, Jr. and Victor Ashe, and was responsible in part for the emergence of the Religious Right).

More:

The Las Vegas woman was paid $15,000 to arrange sexual liaisons involving bisexual men for George W. Bush (then private citizen) and Victor Ashe (then a Tennessee State Senator). These adulterous bisexual affairs (3 encounters in all-3 different cities) took place in the state of Tennessee during the 1984 senate debates between, Al Gore, Jr., Victor Ashe and Ed McAteer. An African-American woman was invited to participate in this adulterous sexual encounter with George W. Bush and Victor Ashe immediately following the Chattanooga senatorial debate. This woman was paid $1,500. A few years later the Las Vegas woman was detained in Washington D.C. with Victor Ashe by the Metro D.C. police. She was released but Victor was taken into custody.

Can any of this be verified? Well....

We initially contacted Mr. McAteer back in May of this year. He mentioned at that time Victor Ashe's sexual shenanigans were no secret in Tennessee. He seemed resentful of his party's choice to back a 'sodomite' which is why he ran as an independent. Ed was on chemotherapy and it was extremely difficult for him to talk so we deferred until late August at which time his wife [Faye] informed us he wanted to talk further but was under doctors orders to refrain from all strenuous activity. Sadly, Ed McAteer passed away on Oct. 5, 2004, before we could do a follow-up interview, he was 78. For Ed's sake [and that of his family] we hope his departure was natural [God's will], however, the timing of it all seems rather untimely in our opinion. It bares looking into by the Tennessee authorities.

"Bares." That's my favorite misspelling of the day.

So the only witness is now dead. All righty, then. Who is this lady?

According to Buell, her name is Leola McConnell, a professional Femme-Domme whose working name was Mistress Lee. She got into the blogosphere, or at least on the outskirts of the blogosphere, when she made similar claims about Bill Bennett -- the Republican propagandist who signed his name to books written by others. (The topic, you will recall, was virtue.) He was later shamed by the revelation of his gambling addiction, and by a racist comment he made on the radio.

Here is Mistress Lee's sworn testimony regarding Bennett:

I, Leola McConnell, do affirm that from the year 1998 until May 2003, I was PNAC member and radio talk show host William J. Bennett's Domina. I further stipulate that I counseled him [on several occasions] to seek professional help for his gambling addiction. He declined.

When the first reporters came to me here in Sin City, from the very start they proceeded as if I had the burden of proving that a degenerate gambler was a liar, degenerate gamblers are by their very nature liars, they live a lie on a daily basis.

Is this true? You decide. So far, my only problem is with the claim that a sex worker would care much about a client's gambling problem. Here's more:

Everything humanly possible is being done to torpedo this from being brought to people's attention. I've had two hard-drive viruses, my front door lock vandalized in a failed effort to enter my home. My car locks were tampered with. Whacked out e-mails come at the rate of 20 per day and other silliness I won't bother to waste time mentioning.

In a chorus they (reporters) would ask me if I have any cum-stained sheets from our first encounter in 1998. At first I thought I was the star in a black comedy or that they were trying [like many subs] to have phone sex with me then I realized that most were Bennett's spin department coming upon malicious knavery to start my quiet. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know asking me sexually provocative questions like these would enrage me. It would only take a fleeting glance at me to know this woman would find those kinds of questions offensive. I did find them offensive and here we stand today. The truth untold. I guess one of his CIA psychological profiler buddies told him that any woman that wanted muscles would be less then pleased to be asked such questions (whips with his DNA still attached, hash stained underwear that hadn't been washed. His not mine, apparently I would be collecting soiled underwear).

Well, I'm no subby-boy, and I surely don't want either to enrage this woman or to have phone sex with her. But I can see the forensic value of the blood-stained whips and soiled sheets and such.

Back to willy boy-Those reporters also asked if there were drugs present; did money change hands between us; were their any other women [or men] present; what was his sexual orientation and did we have a written contract, as they were told so many dominas have with their subs. (fyi:That contractual rule of thumb usually applies to a professional dominatrix with a dungeon. Some encounters of that sort can become very violent. A domina will sometimes require a contract for obvious reasons.) They honestly don't want to hear a story of a woman in charge of a man they view as a Washington D.C. power broker. Had I been the 'pleasure unit' type this story would have broke in June 2003, not June 2004.

I have played dodge ball with this issue now for over A YEAR and I'm sick of it. It doesn't seem to want to go away. Republican operatives that wrote me and now people accuse me of seeking publicity. One blog moron claims I wrote him months ago, tell him to post the e-mail, he's a liar. Like all the other republican operatives he seeks attention for his silly blog. I didn't even know what a blog was until mid January of this year, that's how much I follow the latest internet happenings.

The "blog moron" mentioned above is probably Calico Cat, a right-wing blogger. I'm somewhat suspicious of his anti-Leola expose pieces, if only because I don't trust anyone on his side of the political aisle.

Leola, believe it or not, is running for Governor of Nevada. The election will be held in November of 2006; she is not widely considered a leading candidate. (The likely opponents will be Democrat Jim Gibson and Republican Jim Gibbons. Now that's a race designed to give copy editors nightmares.)

To be frank, I like many of her positions. (No pun intended.) Here's the former Mistress Lee's view of the warrant-free spying scandal:

If I am elected by the citizens of Nevada to be their Governor, I will aggressively investigate this affront to our liberties as they pertain to the state of Nevada. If I find that 'any' citizen of the state of Nevada was spied upon by any member of the Bush administration without a warrant from a judge authorizing it, and they are not charged with a felony by The United States Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales at the federal level (Attorney General Gonzales says no crime was commited) -- I will work with our State Attorney General, to have President George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United States, and any other participants operating under his authority to facilitate these crimes, charged with a felony for each violation of our state law...

Nice -- although a truly hard-core Dominatrix might have thrown in a few words about nailing testicles to a board. (If you work for the Secret Service, please understand that I am speaking poetically.)

So. What do we make of Leola's claims? Hell if I know! Judging from Buell's experience -- and from some of her writings -- she is not the most approachable or trusting person in the world. Perhaps with good reason. She probably would not consent to pointed questioning.

We should note that Wonkette would not touch this story with a ten foot pole. So to speak. I cannot help but wonder why a Vegas pro would have anything to do with arranging a tryst between a DC pol and a failed Texas oilman, especially since the two men already knew each other. (You know...back when they were roommates and male cheerleaders.)

No-one can deny that this woman is well-read and politically motivated. Although she is a poor writer, I suspect that she is smart -- smart enough, perhaps, to engineer a con or a prank.

On the other hand, I cannot see a monetary motive for Leola McConnell to tell such a lie. She has not written a book. A professional Dominatrix who reveals the name of her customers will soon lose customers. Even if she is fibbing, she has done herself no favors, financially speaking.

So why have I bothered to relate tales that even Ana Marie Cox shunned? Because I have spoken to a few "professional ladies" in my time, and they really do tend to store up experiences which read like something out of an absurd novel. For example, there's a certain well-known conservative in the entertainment industry who hires out a "Mistress" with the world's worst boob-job...

Who knows? Maybe Leola's claims have some merit. And even if they don't, they are certainly amusing to contemplate.

POSTSCRIPT: A reader informs me that George W. Bush may not have been a cheerleader at Yale. True, a massive number of websites have stated that he did lead cheers there; some even say that he was the head cheerleader. But the only photographic evidence available on the net clearly shows that he was a cheerleader at Andover prep school. See, for example, this image, which bears an incorrect label.

In 2004, a group called Cheerleaders for Truth wryly asked:

"Did George Bush actually win a Varsity letter in Cheerleading at Yale? Or was this another 'no show' like the National Guard?" current and alumni Yale cheerleaders are asking. "Why haven’t any member of Bush’s Cheerleading Squad come forward and verified that he actually attended practice and the games?"...

More importantly, did George Bush actually earn a Varsity Letter in Cheerleading, or was this, too, awarded to him (like his place in the freshman class) because of his wealthy family’s longstanding relationship with Yale? Were the injuries he supposedly sustained on the field athletic injuries, or did he hurt himself simply because he was intoxicated at the time?"

Nobody has ever questioned Victor Ashe's history as a cheerleader at Yale.

I think I can fairly continue to write that the two Yale roommates were cheerleaders. After all, people referred to Michelangelo as a "sculptor" even when the ceiling gig forced him to spend years without a chisel in his hands. I believe that cheerleading was and remains in George W. Bush's blood. He is, if you will, the Michelangelo of male cheerleading.

Only a pedant would insist that one roommate was a former cheerleader while the other was currently practicing.

Jeb Bush and the Satanic vampire

A self-proclaimed "Satanic Dark Priest" named Jonathan "the Impaler" Sharkey is an official candidate for governor of Minnesota. He's running on an anti-crime platform:

Sharkey also pledged to execute convicted murders and child molesters personally by impaling them on a wooden pole outside the state capitol.

Sharkey told the Minneapolis Star Tribune that he's a vampire "just like you see in the movies and TV."

"I sink my fangs into the neck of my donor...and drink their blood," he said, adding that his donor is his wife, Julie.

I wonder if she wears a scarf to campaign events?

(Actually, most real-life blood aficionados don't partake from the neck. Don't ask me how I know this.)

Of course, many an election has attracted "fringe" candidates -- we had a boatload of 'em during the California recall -- but the Impaler has a genuinely interesting history as a Republican activist. According to his official site...

From 1988 to 1991, I was heavily active in the Union County Republican Party, and was elected a District Chairman.

From July 1992 until April 1996, I was very active in Hillsborough County (FL) Republican Party. I was elected as City Chairman for Temple Terrace in November 1992. In 1994, I was blessed to work on Jeb Bush's first campaign for Governor. Though Jeb did not win, he showed me the true meaning of a man of character.

Jeb Bush. Man of Character. Boy, those Satanists really do love to talk backwards.

This page allegedly shows Jeb Bush posing with the Impaler, along with a couple of paintings from hell. In an autobiographical piece on his turn to "the Dark Side," the Impaler refers to his former friendship with both Jeb and -- get this! -- George W. Bush, our current prez.

I can just picture W's mumbled reaction when he saw that web-page: "Ixnay on the end-fray, Jonny-boy..."

Before you become too worried about the Impaler, I should tell you that he once did a tour as a professional wrestler. The idea of a former wrestler becoming a governor is too absurd to contemplate.

My attempts to get responses from Garrison Keillor and Al Franken went unanswered. They were not in the room when I called out their names.

(Incidentally, I first learned of this oddity via the Covert History site.)

Stuck in the '60s

A couple of days ago, I told readers that I would not remain mired in the JFK assassination and other scandals from the 1960s. But as the poet said, the past is never really past. So let us revisit history one more time; I promise to keep this sort of thing both brief and rare.

A correspondent offered one fascinating observation about the current attempt to rewrite the Warren Commission's findings in favor of a "blame Fidel" scenario: The last surviving member of the Commission, Gerald Ford, is not in the best of health. Once he passes from the scene, right-wing revisionists will no longer be in the uncomfortable position of arguing with a former Republican president.

A good site dealing with this controversy, and with many related matters, is Covert History. Stupidly, I had not visited that site for some time and thus missed lots of juicy observations, such as this one:

Castro's intelligence service was and is highly rated and the notion that they could not have found anyone else is preposterous. Moreover, the idea that they would use someone who could be traced back to them, a man who had met with officials at both the Soviet and Cuban embassies, is absurd. The Cubans were well-aware that both embassies were closely monitored by the CIA.

You'll also find a good review of the new book Ultimate Sacrifice by Lamarr Waldron and Thom Hartmann. This book has caused some gnashing of teeth, because it espouses a "mob did it" theory and because Hartmann is a rising progressive star who has done a lot of good work.

Waldron and Hartmann argue that JFK had hoped to back an anti-Castro coup led by Che Guevara, an idea which surely would have horrified any anti-Castro exiles who caught wind of it. I once went over some old (1963-64) copies of Human Events, the John Birch Society journal which then had close ties to the exile community. The magazine published articles hinting of an administration plan to replace Fidel with someone the exiles considered just as bad. Of course, the Birchers thought that JFK and (most of) the CIA had gone bolshie.

As Buell notes, the most important of the Human Events pieces on Cuban matters was written by one John Martino, whose bio can be found here. Even some people who know the case well don't know about Martino, who once made a startling confession:

In an article published in January, 1964, Martino claimed in had important information about the death of John F. Kennedy. He argued that in 1963 Fidel Castro had discovered an American plot to overthrow his government. It was therefore decided to retaliate by organizing the assassination of Kennedy. Martino and Nathaniel Weyl both claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald had been in Cuba in 1963 and had been recruited by Cuban intelligence to kill Kennedy.

Martino told his friend, Fred Claasen, that he was not telling the truth about the Cubans being behind the assassination of Kennedy. He admitted that he had been involved in the conspiracy by acting as a courier delivering money. He also told the same story to his wife Florence Martino.

Shortly before his death in 1975 Martino confessed to a Miami Newsday reporter, John Cummings, that he had been guilty of spreading false stories implicating Lee Harvey Oswald in the assassination. He claimed that two of the gunmen were Cuban exiles. It is believed the two men were Herminio Diaz Garcia and Virgilio Gonzalez. Cummings added: "He told me he'd been part of the assassination of Kennedy. He wasn't in Dallas pulling a trigger, but he was involved. He implied that his role was delivering money, facilitating things.... He asked me not to write it while he was alive."

Fred Claasen also told the House Select Committee on Assassinations what he knew about Martino's involvement in the case. Florence Martino at first refused to corroborate the story. However, in 1994 she told Anthony Summers that her husband said to her on the morning of 22nd November, 1963: "Flo, they're going to kill him (Kennedy). They're going to kill him when he gets to Texas."

Buell adds the following:

Richard Cain, a high official in the Cook County Chicago Sheriff's office, as well as a CIA asset and a "made" Mafia member, spoke of an exile force sponsored "by the Pentagon which is in competition with CIA." David Phillips himself said shortly before his death that the assassination likely involved "rogue" intelligence agents, although he did not admit to being one of them.

So what have we learned, boys and girls? Two things: 1. The current "war" between CIA and the Pentagon actually has a long, long history (although by no means do I consider all Agency personnel innocent of JFK's blood); and 2. The current attempt to blame Castro has a similarly hoary pedigree.

As I said: The past is never past.

Incidentally: If you scroll down further in the Covert History site and you will also find conclusive documentary evidence that Clay Shaw, the only man charged in the assassination, was a well-paid CIA contract agent. Shaw denied under oath that he worked in any way for the CIA.

Stuck in the 1970s: Writer Gary Buell also revives an old interview from 1977 in which Frank Sturgis, the infamous Watergate burglar, insists that Deep Throat was actually Robert Bennett -- then of CIA, now of Capitol Hill. This was also my own belief. As you will recall, Jim Hougan, author of Secret Agenda, also fingered Bennett, and continued to do so even after Mark Felt "outed" himself. The opening words of the '77 article are of some interest:

Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis said yesterday the CIA planned the break-in because high officials felt the then-President Nixon was becoming too powerful and was overly interested in the assassination of President Kennedy.

Fake Diebold offices! And other vote fraud news...

Here are a few scattered reports concerning the ongoing battle against corrupt elections...

I say thee Ney: Bob Ney, whose ties to vote fraud were discussed earlier, is stepping down from his Chairmanship position. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy -- after all, Ney had a huge claw in the drafting of HAVA, which we may now dub "the Diebold Act." To help grease the way for passage of that disastrous legislation, Diebold paid a ton of money to Ney's Chief of Staff David DiStefano...

Abramoff: Just how much of the Abramoff scandal is really about funneling money to the string-pullers and pocket-stuffers and programmers and "computer repairmen" who rig elections? Note that Tom Feeney was thisclose to Abramoff, and that eyewitness testimony connects Feeney to an attempt to write vote-rigging software.

I'm sure it was just coicidence that Abramoff had one of his Indian tribes give some dough to the New Hampshire Republican Party just before operatives of that party did their illegal best to ruin Democratic "get out the vote" efforts. And I'm sure it is just coincidence that Diebold's troubles began not long after Abramoff's operation was shut down.

For more on this topic, check out this Democratic Underground thread.

While I can't claim a Wilkes/Diebold connection, I'd like to draw your attention to a little-known story in which our unfavorite voting machine company showed a decidedly Wilkesian attitude toward running a business. According to the wonderful Kathy Dopp, things weren't what they seemed in Utah...

Diebold sold its voting equipment in Utah in part by convincing Utah decision-makers that it had "about 20 offices in Utah" and so was a big company with substantial presence.

However, a local volunteer noticed that only one of Diebold's Utah office (in Evergreen Business park) answered its phones and that all the others listed in the white pages never answered its phones.

See White Pages (type in Diebold as the business and select Utah)

A few days ago this volunteer drove around to all Diebold's locations in 3 counties and discovered that of the 18 Utah offices listed in White Pages - 16 of the listed Diebold locations were phoney and the addresses belonged to either a Walmart or a Sam's Club or no building at all.

(My emphasis.) Many thanks to Dopp for this remarkable catch, and thanks as well to blogger Dee Taylor for publishing it.

We should conduct similar investigations in other states. How much of Diebold is a Potemkin village?

Vermont has now made plans to institute telephone voting systems for the disabled. Remember, one of the big arguments in favor of compu-voting had to do with the notion of making things easier for such individuals. Seems to me that a wheelchair-bound person would find voting at home much easier than a trip to see the kindly old lady down the street who has turned her cramped living room into a computer-filled polling station...

John Dean, certainly a friend to this blog, has another segment of his ongoing series on the conspiracy to malign Bev Harris. As you know, my own feelings toward her have been conflicted. But I respect Dean and urge you to give his research a fair and thorough hearing. He makes three points I cannot deny...

1. It was Bev Harris who discovered that "Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., had an ownership share in Election Systems & Software (ES&S)" and "ES&S voting machines count all the votes in Hagel's home state of Nebraska, except in those counties that tally ballots by hand...When she posted the information about the situation on her (previous) Web site, she promptly received a cease-and-desist order from ES&S lawyers. She e-mailed the cease-and-desist order to 3,000 of her media contacts."

2. It was Bev Harris who found the Diebold source code on the internets, and took the appropriate steps to get it in the hands of people to examine and determine its flaws.

3. It was Bev Harris who first posted internal Diebold/Global Election Systems emails online, and took the appropriate steps to spread them far and wide. Diebold shut down her blackboxvoting.org site for 30 days as a result, during which time she did not have access to her files, the emails, the source code, or membership lists. But David Allen did.

Meanwhile, In Ohio: A couple of evangelical churches may have given illegal partisan aid to Kenny the Kapo, who is running for governor:

In a rare and potentially explosive action, the moderate ministers signed a complaint asking the Internal Revenue Service to investigate World Harvest Church of Columbus and Fairfield Christian Church of Lancaster and determine if their tax-exempt status should be revoked.

Hee hee hee. Let's see what happens.

California: In Sonoma and Mendocino counties, the election board has asked to have a mail-only primary -- with no polling places open. While this system (actually, any system) would be preferable to Diebold-style compu-voting, I'm still not sure I like the idea. Helping the disabled vote is one thing; absentee ballots are another thing. But making an entire election "go postal"? Man. I just don't know about that.

Frankly, my first reaction was to ask: "What have those guys been smoking up there in Sonoma?" But the question answers itself...

Finally: Mark Crispin Miller's Buzzflash interview is just about the finest thing you can find on the internet right now. The subject is vote fraud, but the conversation covers much wider territory. One section had me applauding my cathode-ray tube (no, I don't yet have a flat screen):

When it comes to the Enemy, the Other, we can draw whatever war-like inferences we like, make whatever dark associations we might feel like making, speculate as grimly as we may, without any need for evidence or historical background or even logic. So, for example, the fact that Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party and al-Qaeda are both Arab movements, and both Islamic (although only nominally so in the Iraqi case), means that we may freely argue that they partnered up against us on 9/11. Never mind that those movements were in fact at violent odds, and even though there wasn't a scintilla of real evidence that they were in cahoots, the theory is not just permissible but "evidence" of one's "realism." It's like the old theory that the Soviets were in collusion with Red China, or the view that Vietnam was China's cat's-paw, or, to bring the fiction home, that the anti-war movement in the Sixties was a Soviet operation. The enemy is seen not as a mere human entity, subject to accident and chance and human nature, just like us, but as a ubiquitous demonic force with special powers.

This coincides with a point I've made for years: You have to be a conspiracy theorist in order to engineer a conspiracy. You have to believe in your heart that you are getting them before they get you. (That's why conspiracy theory is always a dangerous thing -- even when your suspicions have a factual basis. Yes, I know full well how strange that sentiment must sound coming from me.)

More:

But it is not so easy to distinguish between cynicism and sincerity within the minds of many leading propagandists. Certainly Karl Rove is cynical, and so is Tom DeLay. They're the types who say or do whatever they believe it takes to do the party's business. On the other hand, there is a genuine vindictive zeal with which the likes of Rove, DeLay and other poison-spewers hold forth. They are not clinically detached. In other words, the boundary line between cynicism and conviction is unclear even to them.

And as it is within such characters, so is it in the movement overall. For every William Kristol - who seems to be a largely sane and savvy far-right operator - there are many true believers, who are effective rabble-rousers, not despite their vehemence, but because of it. With, say, the Limbaugh brothers, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Ann Coulter, the zeal is not completely phony. David Limbaugh evidently does believe that there's a giant secular conspiracy against Christianity. O'Reilly evidently does believe that there's a plot to ruin Christmas. And, in my view (a lot of people disagree with this), Dick Cheney really does believe that there are, or were, "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq, just as Bush really believes that he's on God's side, fighting "evil-doers" who otherwise would kill all Christians.

It's ultimately all about projection. All the malevolence that they decry, all the conspiratorial intent that they deplore, comes only and directly from within themselves.

Every reader must come to his or her own conclusions regarding the sincerity of these various propaganda bombardments. Personally, I think O'Reilly's "plot against Christmas" hogwash was utterly disingenuous. One could almost smell the big, fat ciger he lit up after every broadcast while muttering "Suckers!" That said, one should not underestimate the fanaticism factor at work in these psyches...