Amos Lee-Soul Suckers

Did you believe them

When they told you they discovered you

And that everything is free as long as you do what they tell you to

You think it's true

But nothing could be further from the truth, my love

Did you even listen

When they told you to change your name

And that nobody wants honesty when looking at a perfect frame

Play the game

It's a particularly uninspired line up for the Sunday shows. By the sheer number of Judiciary Committee members scheduled (Chairman Pat Leahy, Ranking Minority Member Jeff Sessions, Chuck Schumer, John Kyl and Dianne Feinstein) that Supreme Court Justice nominee Elena Kagan will be the topic of choice. Elsewhere, Pennsylvania Senate Democratic rivals Arlen Specter and Joe Sestak face one another on State of the Union. And if you're looking for something a little on the lighter side, former First Lady Laura Bush will be on Fox and Friends to pimp her new book.

ABC's "This Week" - Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

CBS' "Face the Nation" - Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.

NBC's "Meet the Press" - Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

NBC's "The Chris Matthews Show" - Panel: Andrew Sullivan, Katty Kay, Joan Biskupic and Pete Williams. Topics: The Goldilocks Pick: Why Do Liberals Fear Elena Kagan is Just Alright? Why Politics Favors Arizona's Tough Immigration Law

CNN's "State of the Union" - Sens. Arlen Specter, D-Pa., and Bob Bennett, R-Utah; Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa.

CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" - Prime Minister of Greece, the David Cameron and Nick Clegg coalition in Britain and a roundtable discussion on the global economy with Larry Summers.

"Fox News Sunday" - Former first lady Laura Bush and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

So, what's catching your eye this morning?

DOWNLOADS: (1595)

PLAYS: (2693)

Embed

Sen. Pat Leahy gave Sonia Sotomayor today the chance to set the record straight regarding the fake controversy over her "wise Latina" remarks:

SOTOMAYOR: Thank you for giving me an opportunity to explain my remarks.

No words I have ever spoken for written have received so much attention.

(LAUGHTER)

SOTOMAYOR: I gave a variant of my speech to a variety of different groups, most often to groups of women lawyers or to groups, most particularly, of young Latino lawyers and students.

As my speech made clear in one of the quotes that you reference, I was trying to inspire them to believe that their life experiences would enrich the legal system, because different life experiences and backgrounds always do. I don't think that there is a quarrel with that in our society.

I was also trying to inspire them to believe that they could become anything they wanted to become, just as I had. The context of the words that I spoke have created a misunderstanding, and I want -- and misunderstanding -- and to give everyone assurances, I want to state up front, unequivocally and without doubt, I do not believe that any ethnic, racial or gender group has an advantage in sound judging. I do believe that every person has an equal opportunity to be a good and wise judge regardless of their background or life experiences.

What -- the words that I use, I used agreeing with the sentiment that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was attempting to convey. I understood that sentiment to be what I just spoke about, which is that both men and women were equally capable of being wise and fair judges.

That has to be what she meant, because judges disagree about legal outcomes all of the time -- or I shouldn't say all of the time, at least in close cases they do. Justices on the Supreme Court come to different conclusions. It can't mean that one of them is unwise, despite the fact that some people think that.

So her literal words couldn't have meant what they said. She had to have meant that she was talking about the equal value of the capacity to be fair and impartial.

LEAHY: Well, and isn't that what -- you've been on the bench for 17 years. Have you set your goal to be fair and show integrity, based on the law?

SOTOMAYOR: I believe my 17-year record on the two courts would show that, in every case that I render, I first decide what the law requires under the facts before me, and that what I do is explain to litigants why the law requires a result. And whether their position is sympathetic or not, I explain why the result is commanded by law.

LEAHY: Well, and doesn't your oath of office actually require you to do that?

SOTOMAYOR: That is the fundamental job of a judge.

MSNBC has more.

DOWNLOADS: (1805)

PLAYS: (9946)

Embed

(h/t Heather)

In this clip you can see how easy it is for conservatives to have their talking points easily slipped into the traditional media at the drop of a hat. Even when they are meaningless and laughable. Today's accomplice is Bob Schieffer from Face the Nation. Sen. Pat Leahy is getting very adept in catching this from the talking heads that are interviewing him.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, is there the risk? I mean, and you know the argument you-- we’ve been hearing it all that-- that we somehow criminalize our political system. I mean, you know, in banana republics one group throws out the other group and they put them all in jail and then they stay there till somebody else comes along and throws them in jail.

SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY: (Overlapping) But I'm not--

BOB SCHIEFFER: Are we going down that kind of trail here?

SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY: No. I think not. And I-- you know, I've heard the talking point that’s-- usually by people who are afraid they may be looked are the ones making that-- making that argument. But I'm not out for some kind of vengeance and, certainly, if you have people in the field who are told here are the orders from the White House, here is a legal memo telling you what to do and how to do it.

Now, nobody is going to prosecute them, although, I would note that when FBI agents were there and they saw what was being done, when they reported back to the headquarters, FBI director Mueller said, "No, you can't do that. That violates our own rules. That violates our understanding of the law. You have to step back" -- and they did, till word got around.

What I want to know is this: Who were the people in the Office of Legal Counsel, in the President's Council office, even in the Justice Department who knew this was against the law and still told people to go and break the law? I am far more concerned about those people than I am going after somebody in the field.

Does Bob Schieffer actually know what the term "Banana Republic" means?

From Wikipedia:

Banana Republic is a pejorative term for a country that is politically unstable, dependent on limited agriculture (e.g. bananas), and ruled by a small, self-elected, wealthy, and corrupt clique.[1] It is most commonly used for countries in Central America and Africa such as El Salvador, Belize, Grenada, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, and South Africa. In some cases, these nations have kept the government structures that were modeled after the colonial Spanish ruling clique, with a small, largely leisure class on the top, and a large, poorly educated and poorly paid working class of peons, though it might have the (fake) trappings of modernity (such as styling itself a republic with a president etc.)

Frequently the subject of mockery and humour, and usually presided over by a dictatorial military junta that exaggerates its own power and importance—"the epaulettes of a banana republic generalissimo" are proverbially of considerable size, usually portrayed in satire with a pair of mops—a banana republic also typically has large wealth inequities, poor infrastructure, poor schools, a "backward" economy, low capital spending, a reliance on foreign capital and money printing, budget deficits, and a weakening currency. Banana republics are typically also highly prone to revolutions and coups.

And then Bob takes what Dick Cheney says as gospel about CIA memos that will exonerate4 him. Isn't it obvious to Schieffer that if there were any of these "memos," Bush would have leaked them already?

Continue reading »

(Chocolati mocha photo via ChrisB in SEA.)

The Sunday Talking Head line-up is ready for perusal.

Wonder if there will be any questions about President Bush's obstruction of justice maneuver with the Libby commutation? If nothing else, I am looking forward to the Sen. Pat Leahy interview. Bob Geiger has some great weekend cartoons for everyone -- do not miss the Handelsman animation.

What is catching your eye on the blogs or in the news this morning?

Sen. Pat Leahy blasted the administration over the missing emails today on the Floor...

Download | play Download | play

Leahy: ...And they say they have not been preserved. I don't believe that. I don't believe that. You can't erase emails; not today...Those emails are there. They don't want to produce them. It's like the famous 18 minute gap in the Nixon WH tapes. They say they've been erased or misplaced. They're there. They know they're there. And we'll subpoena them if necessary and we'll have them...

He had a few other kind things to say about Alberto Gonzales and the Attorney scandal...

BREAKING: The White House lost Over FIVE MILLION e-mails in two year period

Now this would be just a little justice. via email: Pat Leahy at a hearing on voter fraud all but demanded that the Justice Department investigate and even prosecute Laura Ingraham for her election-day call to her listeners to jam the phone lines Democrats set up for reporting voter machine problems and the like.

Download | play -MP3

Media Matters explains:

As the weblog Firedoglake first noted, during the November 7 edition of her nationally syndicated talk radio show, Laura Ingraham urged listeners to jam the phone lines of 1-888-DEM-VOTE, a voter assistance hotline sponsored by the Democratic Party. Ingraham stated: "I want you to call it and I want you tell us what you get when you call 1-888-DEM-VOTE. They're on top of all of the shenanigans at the polling stations. One problem: you can't get through." Minutes later, while talking with a listener who called the hotline, Ingraham said: "Let's keep 'dem' lines ringing."

Jon Stewart takes a look at the hearing and makes some of his usual astute observations.

Download | play -WMP Download | play -QT

Jon: He's not under oath, but he's there.

Pat Leahy had the funniest line...

Leahy: Of course-I'm sorry Mr. Attorney General- I forgot you can't answer any questions that might be relevant to this.

The Bin Laden tag at the end was hysterical.

"These are the things that make hiding in a cave worthwhile."

Arlen Specter's revenge on James Dobson

Arlen Specter and Pat Leahy came out yesterday on This Week and raised the possibility that James Dobson was going to have to answer some questions about his conversations with Karl Rove on Harriet Miers nomination.

Download | play -WMP-Bittorrent-WMP

Download | play -QT- Bittorrent-QT

It's not surprising that Specter will be calling James Dobson before his committee. First of all it's the right thing to do. Secondly, after the presidential election it was James Dobson that ripped into Specter on This Week and tried to block him from being the chairman on the Committee for the Judiciary.

Specter the day after the presidential election:

Specter: When you talk about ahh-judges who would change the right of a women to choose-overt urn Roe v. Wade. I think that is unlikely and I have said that bluntly during the course of the campaign and before...

Dobson in Nov. 04' on This Week (loose transcript): "Senator Specter is a big time problem for us and we’re very concerned about him. I campaigned against him...the comment that was made was one of the most foolish and ill-considered comments that a politician has made in a long time--he is a problem and he must be derailed."

Download | play -WMP only-this file is almost a year old

They also despise Arlen because he is a champion of stem cell research and of course there is Robert Bork. Arlen talks about Dobson's remarks on Face The Nation 11/04- Download | play wmp only

Do you think Arlen Specter has a little derailing of his own to perform?