Akkam’s Razor

Wow. Just wow.

That debate last night.

Wow.

As of right now, there are over 12,000 comments lambasting the debate and moderators at ABCNEWS.

First, to get this out of the way, Hillary clearly ‘won’ (please note that I am an Obama supporter) the Philadelphia Democratic debate which took place at the National Constitution Center last night (Wednesday, 4/17/2008) .

Via Journalist Fight Club:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

If only our liberal media could somehow find the strength to channel this vibe…

And adding another mini-series to the list… John Adams on HBO.

The full trailer:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

A longer (8-minute) background piece from HBO:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Our art and culture is speaking to us, if only we’d listen.

Wingnut wet dreams not withstanding, I’m fairly certain that the multitude of cameras (over 600, circa 5/2005) surveying Times Square will quickly identify the alleged ‘bomber’ of the US Armed Forces Recruiting Station in NYC.

The rise of Mike Huckabee and John Edwards unexpectedly strong finish in Iowa is a strong appeal away from establishment rhetoric towards populist values, with predictable results.  There been scores of economic impact coverage framing the cost of Edwards economic populism such that you could think it was a resurgence of socialism or communism.  The right is about to unleash a blue-blood jihad against the corn-suckers of Iowa and other religious adherents, attempting to torpedo Huckabee while promoting the next annointed GOP nominee, Rudy Giuliani Mitt Romney Fred Thompson John McCain.  Since these folks don't particularly care (nor are aware of) the chattering classes, they will likely be unmoved by their criticism (although the corporate and hawk wings of the party will likely open their wallets).  The end result of which will end up with a blessing for liberals and progressives - a disenchanted Evangelical grassroots movement that will likely stay home in November, 2008, and possibly write off the GOP for a generation or more.

Among the general population, there seems to be no question over immunity for the telecoms.  Either the public is unaware of the scope of the story or they believe - erroneously - that any domestic spying undertaken has actually kept us safer and not diminished our rights, or even inconvenienced us.

Knowledgeable readers have been following this since the Mark Klein, an AT&T whistleblower, broke the story broke nearly two years ago.  To briefly surmise, the ENTIRE internet passes through the NSA.  They grab huge chunks of it - your emails, Amazon purchases, credit card transaction, web browsing, instant messages, Facebook stalking - and then winnow it down to find what they are looking for.  The presumption is that everyone could be guilty, and that we don't need probable cause to monitor communications and go on fishing expeditions.

Even worse still, much of that actionable intelligence is no longer processed and disseminated by Federal employees, who behavior is governed by law, legislation, and the threat of losing a well-paying government job, but rather outsourced to private industry, outside of Congressional oversite. 

The President's call for immunity hints at the 'alleged' law breaking that industry 'might' have done in 'cooperating' with law enforcement, promising to veto legislation that does not tender complete retroactive immunity to the industry, all the way back to September 11th, 2001 (Which is interesting, since they started their efforts on 2/27/2007).  He uses "complicated language" as reported by Crooks and Liars:

It's very difficult to wrap your head around the technology and legal concepts surrounding the issue.  Fortunately, Senator Chris Dodd, the first Presidential candidate willing to go to the mat over telecomm immunity, has posted this short video with Klein breaking down the issue [via EFF]:

Klein seems to think that the attempt for immunity is nothing more than a coverup... 

It wouldn't be Islam Awareness Week without Islamo-Facism Awareness Week.  Perennial attention-whore and ivory-tower hater David Horowitz (Rightweb), in cooperation with former-Senator Rick Santorum (Rightweb) are traversing the country to make you aware of the Phantom Muslim Menace.  Their plan brings IFAW to 26 campuses with 37 events, with a who's who of wingnuttery.  You can 'learn' more about this travesty of logic at TerrorismAwareness, as if you had no idea what terrorism is…

Those Yellow Elephants sure are keeping their heads down, though.  I see unbelievably low participation in the various IFAW-realted groups and events on Facebook.  True to form, the shrieking harpies and hardcore wingnuts are not blaming their own failed ideologies for the lack of participation, but rather the usual suspects, the librul media, the secular universities, and other terrrahrist sympathizers.  Alas, I see nothing on the RightWingFacebook stirring support either.  Kids today…

John Stauber has a post at PR Watch that is sourced from Matt Bai's book, The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics, where former NY Governor Mario Cuomo speaks to a group of wealthy Democratic activists:

Shortly after the November 2006 election the Democracy Alliance, an exclusive group of about 100 Democratic Party millionaire activists, met in Miami, Florida. Members and their guests heard their keynote speaker and liberal legend Mario Cuomo analyze the Democratic Party in the wake of its stunning electoral victories that had given Democrats control of the US Congress. Cuomo criticized the Democratic Party for lacking vision, big ideas and a winning political argument. His recipe for future Democratic victories was simple: "You seize the biggest idea you can, the biggest idea you can understand. And this is what moves elections."

Cuomo then dared to voice an inconvenient truth: "Now it's 2006 and we're all rejoicing. Why? Because of Iraq. A GIFT. A gift to the Democrats. A lot of whom voted for the war anyway." The former New York governor challenged his partisan audience, "If Iraq is not an issue, then what issues do we have to talk about? … Where does that leave you? It leaves you in the same position you were in in 2004 – without an issue. Because you have no big idea."

Stauber goes on to illustrate why Iraq is a "gift":

The Argument is an important book but Bai muffed the title. He should have titled it “The Gift,” because as Cuomo points out it was primarily the political gift of voter anger and revulsion over a horrific, continuing war that caused them to oust Republicans.

He then goes on to lament how the current Democratic Congressional Leadership is failing to deliver on the voting public's wishes (he is, of course, correct, but that's a whole-another-post).

It's simply too easy to beat the administration over the head with their incompetence regarding Iraq, and that's even if totally ignoring the deceptions and ideology driven mechanisms that created, sold, and marketed this war.  Strangely, most pundits choose to look at the war in isolation, as though it were a unique creature born of unique circumstances.

AND he should be fired for this nonsense :

America's fabric is pulling apart like a cheap sweater.

What would sew us back together?

Another 9/11 attack.

[…]

Is there any doubt they are planning to hit us again?

If it is to be, then let it be. It will take another attack on the homeland to quell the chattering of chipmunks and to restore America's righteous rage and singular purpose to prevail.

The unity brought by such an attack sadly won't last forever.

The first 9/11 proved that. *

E-mail stubyko@phillynews.com or call 215-854-5977. For recent columns:

http://go.philly.com/byko.

This last 6-years has been a slow-motion train wreck.  OBL is still on the loose.  The Anthrax attackers are still on the loose.  We're stuck in a quagmire in a war of choice in Iraq, losing a winnable war in Afghanistan, and then contemplating opening a third front of the Great War on Terror in Iran (and Pakistan).

I'm tired of staring into the abyss.  In addition to the 3000 lives lost on 9/11 and the near 5000 (3600 military deaths, and an estimated 1000 contractor deaths) in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can chalk up threats to free speech, habeas corpus, our own privacy, and any semblance for advocacy for the middle class in Washington.  We are distracted from true threats like class inequality, our aging infrastructure, precarious financial environment, and global warming with bright and shiny objects like Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan, and divisive social wedge issues like abortion, gay marriage, and evolution.

Although Bykofsky takes the easy way out and (correctly) states that another 9/11 would finally unite us, he's correct, but I hope he's thinking of the wrong outcome.  He thinks that another 9/11 would would cause us to put aside our partisan differences to get "it" done - I'm assuming by "it" he means the War on Islamofacism.  But there's danger in these thoughts.  With the right proudly proclaiming that we are safer BECAUSE there have been no new attacks, another 9/11 might have the complete opposite consequences - reinforces the disgust and despair many of us are feeling towards our media and political institutions.

The next-9/11 will preceed one of two outcomes - either the police state, or the beginning of the American Renaissance, where we cast of the dead weight and corrupt institutions of the past and become the America we thought, hoped, and dreamed we were.

Should Bykofsky get fired?  Should free speech have consequences?  Vote here. 

"…I knew it was you all along."

NYTimes call for the Impeachment of Alberto Gonzalez.  Finally.

It confirmed what most people long ago concluded: that Mr. Gonzales is more concerned about doing political-damage control for Mr. Bush — in this case insisting that there was never a Justice Department objection to a clearly illegal program — than in doing his duty. But the White House continued to defend him.

As far as we can tell, there are three possible explanations for Mr. Gonzales’s talk about a dispute over other — unspecified — intelligence activities. One, he lied to Congress. Two, he used a bureaucratic dodge to mislead lawmakers and the public: the spying program was modified after Mr. Ashcroft refused to endorse it, which made it “different” from the one Mr. Bush has acknowledged. The third is that there was more wiretapping than has been disclosed, perhaps even purely domestic wiretapping, and Mr. Gonzales is helping Mr. Bush cover it up.

Democratic lawmakers are asking for a special prosecutor to look into Mr. Gonzales’s words and deeds. Solicitor General Paul Clement has a last chance to show that the Justice Department is still minimally functional by fulfilling that request.

If that does not happen, Congress should impeach Mr. Gonzales.

Ironically enough, Bush's nickname for Abu Gonzalez is "Fredo".

I'm ashamed to say this, but bleeding heart liberal that I am, I have no real minority friends.  No people of color were at my wedding.  I don't share any hobbies or interests with people from other lands.  So I can't fall back on my legion of brown, red, and yellow allies.  I do have plenty of coworkers, classmates, employees, and acquaintances, but no real friends to speak of.

But that doesn't mean I'm unqualified to comment on the issue.

Well, Mr. Moore says you don't have to wait anymore…

Alas, the movie is pulled.