Now we have to wait to see if Harry Reid will schedule a vote this year, before three of the Senators supporting the change leave office:

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) said Saturday she's secured the votes to force a rules change ending the Senate's practice of secret holds.

McCaskill said on Twitter that she had secured the support of two more senators to give her the 67 votes necessary to change the rules in the Senate to abolish the traditional practice of being able to anonymously hold up nominees to positions requiring Senate confirmation.

Sens. Kit Bond (R-Mo.) and Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) were the last two signatories.

McCaskill tweeted Saturday:

First battle won!With Sens Bond and Brownbeck now have 67 Senators on my letter calling for the end to secret holds.Now gotta get a vote.

66 senators have signed a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in support of the rules change, and Reid has said he supports the change, too, but did not sign the letter since it was addressed to him.

McCaskill said earlier this month that she was two votes shy of ending the practice, which gives minority party senators the ability to hold up nominees. Republicans have used the privilege to some effect against President Barack Obama's nominees, most notably senior Sen. Richard Shelby's (R-Ala.) hold earlier this year on 70 of the president's picks for various positions requiring federal confirmation.

They're crawling out from under the rocks everywhere. In Missouri, white supremacist Glenn Miller has declared his candidacy for the United States Senate, vowing to "reach every nook and cranny in the state" in his quest for votes and launching a new campaign web site at the URL whty.org. His opponents include Roy Blunt and Robin Carnahan, and his last try got him around 40 votes or so, but hey, any excuse to spread a little hate among friends, right?

Miller isn't your ordinary run-of-the-mill Klansman either. From Southern Poverty Law Center, 2004:

One of the first white supremacists to use paramilitary tactics with his North Carolina-based hate group — the Carolina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, which later morphed into the White Patriot Party — Glenn Miller went on the lam in 1986 after mailing a letter to 5,000 people calling for "total war" against the feds, blacks and Jews.

Miller had also violated a court order, stemming from a lawsuit filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center, prohibiting him from continuing to operate a paramilitary organization. After a nationwide manhunt, authorities tear-gassed him out of a mobile home in Ozark, Mo.

But Miller served only three years in prison, largely because he testified against 14 leading white supremacists in a 1988 Arkansas sedition trial. Among other things, Miller told the court that the late Order founder Robert Mathews had given him $200,000 in stolen money to finance the White Patriot Party.

To kick off his campaign, he's running a series of vile anti-Semitic ads hosted on the white supremacist site Vanguard News Network.

This is what happens when the dog whistle sounds among the wingnut contingent. Sure, they're not all racists, but they know how to stir up the ones who are violent, evil and malevolent.

I'm amazed Miller is qualified to be a candidate for the Senate. Doesn't a felony conviction disqualify him?

(Check out Roy Blunt's hypocrisy)

We've been watching these Republican hypocrites for exactly a year now attack Obama's stimulus bill and then take credit for the cash it brought into their states.

Think Progress documents the atrocities.

Last month, President Obama admonished Republicans for going to “ribbon cuttings for the same projects that you voted against.” It’s true: Last year, Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO) appeared at a ribbon cutting event for GetAbout Columbia’s MKT Plaza, a pedestrian walking and recreation area funded by the stimulus. (See picture at top right.)

ThinkProgress has investigated opponents of the Recovery Act, reporting throughout the year that many of the lawmakers who tried to kill the legislation have been returning to their home states to claim credit for popular stimulus programs. In a new research report, ThinkProgress finds that over half of the GOP caucus, 110 lawmakers — from the House and Senate — are guilty of stimulus hypocrisy. Among some of the key findings:

– Top Republican Senate Recruits Are Stimulus Hypocrites: As ThinkProgress reported, Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE), a candidate for Senate, touted over $5 million in stimulus programs he voted to kill. Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL), the GOP nominee for Senate in Illinois, signed a letter urging Gov. Pat Quinn to provide “Recovery Act (ARRA) funding to expand the Illinois Community College Sustainability Network.”

– GOP Leadership Leads The Way In Hypocrisy: Although he regularly slams the stimulus as a waste while in DC, McConnell has returned to Kentucky to take credit for stimulus programs, even taking time to request more funds. ThinkProgress attended two job fairs held by Cantor, where we found dozens of employers able to hire directly because of the stimulus. Indeed, even Boehner’s office released a statement boasting that the stimulus will create “much needed jobs.”

– The Audacity Of Hypocrisy Knows No Bounds: Many opponents of the stimulus have been quite brazen with their ability to try to claim credit for the program. For instance, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) spent the morning of July 28th railing against the stimulus, yelling “Where’s the stimulus package? Where’s the jobs?” on the House floor. On the same day of his rant, Kingston’s office sent out multiple press releases bragging that he had secured hundreds of thousands in stimulus funds to hire additional police officers in his district. Other stimulus opponents, like Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) — who has called the stimulus a “trillion dollar debt bill” — have printed out jumbo-sized ceremonial stimulus checks to present to local communities to try to garner positive press.

Individually, over half of the entire Republican caucus has hailed nearly every aspect of the stimulus as a success — from infrastructure funds, to food programs, to education grants. But politically, admitting its success might harm the GOP’s chances in November. So with Republicans fixated on winning politically, they have focused on deceiving the public by calling the stimulus a failure, while pretending successful programs aren’t stimulus funded.

DOWNLOADS: (678)

PLAYS: (2318)

Embed

John Brennan, who isn't beloved by the left has actually been speaking up for the administration quite forcefully against the Republican bedwetter attacks on the way Obama is handling our national security. For conservatives, that's a little too much for them to handle.

mcjoan writes about the always pathetic Kit Bond, who is now calling for Brennan to be fired because they aren't used to being called terrorist enablers.

Republicans are back to their usual election year trick of fear-mongering, attacking--of all people--John Brennan, the former Bush director of the National Counterterrorism Center and current counter-terror chief. Kit Bond has called for him to step down, primary because Brennan has been taken the lead in fighting against Republicans attempts to protray Obama as weak on national security. The White House is on the offense...read on

Chris Wallace then dutifully did his part as a GOP shill to help embrace conservative criticisms of the president by feigning outrage over what Brennan had to say to his pals yesterday on Fox's Happening Now with Jane Skinner:

Wallace: Well, I don’t know if there’s a precedent or not, but it really is more a matter of the kinds of things Brennan has said. He went on one of the Sunday talk shows – not Fox News Sunday – last week, and really went after the Republicans. And then he had an article in USA Today on Tuesday, in which – and I don’t have it in front of me – he basically said, and this is pretty close to a quote, that the politically motivated criticism of opponents served the purposes of Al Qaeda.

That gets awfully, ah – and the Republicans certainly were offended, and I think there’s a question as to whether or not that really crosses a line, the idea – I mean, you can agree or disagree on the way that Abdulmutallab was handled, or the decision to try the co-conspirators, the alleged co-conspirators in 9/11 in downtown New York, but for the top counterterrorism advisor for the president in the White House to be saying that criticism of those policies serves the purposes of Al Qaeda, ah, it kind of crosses a line.

And you know, we’ve seen this crossed before. We saw the Bush administration do it after 9/11. But to somehow equate political criticism, or policy criticism, with lack of patriotism really doesn’t do much to help the debate.

Wallace does admit that Republicans used this tactic immediately after 9/11, but now that the shoe is on the other foot, it's totally unacceptable for him.

George Bush and Darth Cheney attacked our patriotism because they wanted to invade a country that didn't attack us and lied in the process of selling the Iraq war to the American people. Then they made sure that anyone who disagreed with them was labeled either a traitor, anti-American or simply soft on terrorism.

It's kind of funny watching their heads spin in shock like Linda Blair after being played by Brennan, who played by their own rules to do so.

And as usual, Fox News gets involved in an all-out smear campaign against Brennan.

John Brennan was on MTP Sunday to talk about our national security and really took some shots at the Republicans who haven't found an issue they can turn into a game of politics.

He called out Kit Bond and other GOPers when he said that they were briefed fully and now they are crying like morons (my words) and acting like political hacks who do not have the best interests of protecting America. Politicizing the "Underwear Bomber" like they have only emboldens terrorists.

JOHN BRENNAN: Whether they be U.S. Citizens or non-U.S. Citizens. Richard Reid, Ahmed Razam (PH)-- Amari (PH) and others. They were brought into custody by law enforcement officials and then treated accordingly. So, there was no distinction. And in fact, the F.B.I.'s-- guidelines that they used, the F.B.I. domestic investigations and operations guide, was the implementation of the Attorney General guidelines that were finalized by Attorney General Casey in the last Administration. In December of 2008.

--

JOHN BRENNAN: And quite frankly, I'm tiring of politicians using national security issues such as-- terrorism as a political football. They are going out there. They're-- they're unknowing of the facts. And they're making charges and allegations that are not anchored in reality.

-

JOHN BRENNAN: On Christmas night, I called a number of-- senior members of Congress. I spoke to Senators McConnell and Bond. I spoke to Representative Boehner and Hoekstra . I explained to them that he was in F.B.I. custody. That Mr. Abdulmutallab was in fact talking. That he was cooperating at that point. They knew that in F.B.I. custody means that there's a process then you follow as far as mirandizing and presenting him in front of the magistrate.

None of those individuals raised any concerns with me, at that point. They didn't say, "Is he going into military custody? Is he going to be mirandized?" They were very appreciative of the information. We told them we'd keep them informed. And that's what we did. So, there's been-- quite a bit of an outcry after the fact. Where again, I'm just very concerned on behalf of the counterterrorism professionals throughout our government that politicians continue to make this a political football. And are using it for whatever political or partisan purposes.

Brennan also wrote a piece for USA TODAY called "We Need No Lectures," "bashing the GOP over their counterproductive behavior on our national security issues which is actually helping al-Qaeda in their efforts to create more fear in America..

Politics should never get in the way of national security. But too many in Washington are now misrepresenting the facts to score political points, instead of coming together to keep us safe.

--

Cries to try terrorists only in military courts lack foundation. There have been three convictions of terrorists in the military tribunal system since 9/11, and hundreds in the criminal justice system — including high-profile terrorists such as Reid and 9/11 plotter Zacarius Moussaoui.

This administration's efforts have disrupted dozens of terrorist plots against the homeland and been responsible for killing and capturing hundreds of hard-core terrorists, including senior leaders in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and beyond — far more than in 2008. We need no lectures about the fact that this nation is at war.

Politically motivated criticism and unfounded fear-mongering only serve the goals of al-Qaeda. Terrorists are not 100-feet tall. Nor do they deserve the abject fear they seek to instill. They will, however, be dismantled and destroyed, by our military, our intelligence services and our law enforcement community. And the notion that America's counterterrorism professionals and America's system of justice are unable to handle these murderous miscreants is absurd.

Liberals are no fans of Brennan, but when he speaks like a serious person we'll listen. Peter King, Kit Bond and all his pals should stop the fearmongering. Do they love al-Qaeda that much? Instead they continue the assault on the President. They have been in campaign mode ever since he took office -- regardless of the consequences.

The right-wing pundits love to hurl insults and ridiculous talking points about the Obama administration. The newest one to date is that what we've really got here is a "Banana Republic." The media won't tell you this, so the blogs have to. Right-wingers were quite happy to try to prosecute Bill Clinton after he left office and weren't shy about their feelings.

Jamison Foser has the lowdown on the bottom feeders:

Gaps in the Right's "banana republic" rhetoric

... In fact, Sean Hannity argues in favor of investigations and prosecutions of past administrations -- as long as the past administrations are Democratic administrations.

In April of 2000, for example, when independent counsel Robert Ray (Ken Starr's successor) suggested that he might indict Bill Clinton when Clinton left office, Hannity said he thought that should happen. On January 21, 2001 -- the day after George W. Bush replaced Clinton in office -- Hannity reiterated that position. In March of 2001, Hannity argued that there should be a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton pardons, and that Clinton attorney general Janet Reno should be indicted...read on

--

What really lends this a through-the-looking-glass quality, however, is that the conservative media who now denounce potential investigations of torture by portraying it as a mere policy disagreement previously sought investigations of a pardon. Whether or not you think all of Clinton's pardon decisions were correct, there is pretty much nobody who denies that he had the authority to make those decisions -- so investigating the pardons essentially was investigating a policy disagreement. Torture, on the other hand, is not a policy disagreement; it is a crime. Thus, the Journal's case against investigating the Bush administration better applies to investigations of the Clinton administration -- investigations the Journal supported.

That's what the conservative media consists of: partisans offering inconsistent, insincere, and nonsensical arguments on behalf of torture and the depraved thugs who authorized it.

They are hypocrites, crooks and liars -- the whole lot of them.

DOWNLOADS: (2503)

PLAYS: (7281)

Sometimes Andrea Mitchell can be a tool, but sometimes she acts like a journalist. Kit Bond was on a wanker role today on MSNBC and actually had Andrea Mitchell almost jumping out of her seat with his distortions of so many facts. Bond said that the Senate Armed Services Report was a partisan report and it was wrong. When he tried to say that Abu Ghraib was just a few rogue soldiers that's when Andrea got into it with him.

Senate armed services committee released an exhaustive report detailing direct links between the harsh interrogation programme of the CIA and abuses of prisoners at the US prison at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, in Afghanistan and at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison.

When Andrea brought this fact up to Kit, he called the SASC report lies...( rough transcript. Fill in the thread)

Mitchell: Do you really feel that the CIA/terror fighters are being stabbed in the back by the President's actions?

Bond: Yes, very clearly. by released these classified has put all the CIA under the gun.There could be prosecutions for following orders and there could be prosecutions in other countries.

Mitchell: ...the Bush administration lawyers, one a sitting federal judge, on the federal appeals court on the 9th circuit in San Francisco, so those legal opinions themselves are being questioned, the practice is being questioned, the chain of how these decisions led eventually to Abu Ghraib according to the Armed Services Committee report yesterday and your own committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee has released a time line that shows that Condi Rice and others as early as July, 2002 approved these techniques, your colleagues have done on the hill.

Bond: There are about five different questions in there. No 1, Abu Ghraib had nothing to do with intelligence, that was a bunch of rogue reservists from West Virginia

Mitchell: That's not what what the Armed Services Committee report says sir.

Bond: It's absolutely wrong. It is a DOD report, they did not have access to the classified information on Intelligence community and we will be doing a review of the intelligence committee. It did not , it did not have access to what the CIA was doing. To say that Abu Ghraib had anything to do with intelligence is flat wrong.

Mitchell: So you're saying the Armed Services Committee report was in error yesterday?

Continue reading »

Download | play Download | play (h/t Logan)

Obviously, the Republican leadership has gotten to Sen. Kit Bond with the message: You're. Not. Helping. Our. Cause. by likening waterboarding to swimming. So Bond goes on C-Span's Washington Journal and tries to clarify his comment with increasing incoherence.

Apparently, he meant that there was as much variety in waterboarding techniques as there are swimming strokes--still not helping, Senator Bond. The kind of waterboarding the Japanese did to our soldiers in WWII--bad...the kind we did (?--have we stopped?) to our soldiers in training--fine. Not particularly sure that's helpful either, Sen. Bond. Unfortunately for those of us who actually understand the issue at hand, he doesn't specify which kind we've done to detainees like Maher Arar, or if it's acceptable. That glaring omission is certainly helpful to the Republicans torture apologist platform.

However, he does feel a blanket banning on waterboarding--such as the one in the Geneva Conventions that we signed--is bad, because it then prevents us from using it in an extreme national emergency--the Jack Bauer scenario raising its ugly head again. Bingo, Sen. Bond! You found the party line. How amoral of you.

(h/t Scarce)

Download | play Download | play

Senator Kit Bond appeared on PBS's The NewsHour and further muddied the water with all the lies and rationalizations one must use to abet war crimes, bless his heart (I'm learning from Blue Gal), including the laughable-on-its-face claim that discussing waterboarding enables "the enemy" to adapt to it. This is an assertion that I feel strongly should be tested out on anyone amoral enough to suggest it. But it was this claim that earns him the Wanker title for today (and from such an embarrassment of riches of other awardees too!):

IFILL: I just would like to -- but do you think that waterboarding, as I described it, constitutes torture?

SEN. KIT BOND: There are different ways of doing it. It's like swimming: freestyle, backstroke. The waterboarding could be used almost to define some of the techniques that our trainees are put through, but that's beside the point. It's not being used.

I don't know if you're a religious man, Sen. Bond, but I surely do hope that if you are, this fine bit of wankery is used against you at the Pearly Gates. One word for you to hold in your heart: Nuremberg.

  Courtesy of Penndit, here's the line up for this morning...

Sunday Talk

* MTP: Dir. of Natl Intel Mike McConnell on NIE & terrorism; Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) on Iraq; roundtable of NYT's David Brooks, Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes and WaPo's Bob Woodward on Bush-Cheney admin

* FTN: Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) on Iraq and terrorism

* FNS: WH Homeland Sec. Adv. Frances Townsend; Sen. Kit Bond (R-MO); Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN); Sir Richard Branson

* Late Edition: WH Homeland Sec. Adv. Frances Townsend; Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY); David Bonior (D-Edwards); roundtable of Dana Bash, John King & Candy Crowley

* No This Week, this week. (British Open)

I have high hopes for my man Russ on Meet The Press, but otherwise, it looks like same old, same old...

What's catching your eye this morning?