DOWNLOADS: (744)

PLAYS: (1127)

Embed

(h/t Heather)

Has there ever been a worse man running a political organization than Micheal Steele? I mean, I agree with his take here from the other day on Hannidate, but I doubt his RNC peeps do. They attacked him the following day which made him back off. I have to say he's been a really interesting character. He's stuck more shoes in his mouth than any politician that comes to memory since Kristol's boy named Dan Quayle. I do hope they don't fire him because he gives us so much material to work with.

HANNITY: Predictions for the election?

STEELE: Predictions for the election, I think that overall -- and we're beginning now to do the assessments on the various races. But I think overall, given what we know so far and what this administration's proclivities are, we're going to see, I think, nice pick-ups in the House. I think we're going to see nice...

HANNITY: More specific.

STEELE: Well, I can't give a number right yet. Because like I said, we're just now beginning to look at the races. And we have races where it hasn't been clear...

HANNITY: Do you think you can take over the House? Do you think Republicans...

STEELE: Not this year. And Sean, I would say honestly.

HANNITY: You don't think so?

STEELE: Well, I don't know yet, because all the candidates we still have vacancies that need to get filled. But then the question we need to ask ourselves is, if we do that, are we ready?

HANNITY: Are you?

STEELE: Are we...

HANNITY: Answer your own question. Are we -- do you think they're ready?

STEELE: I don't know. And that's what I'm assessing and evaluating right now. Those candidates that are looking to run have to be -- have to be anchored in these principles. They have to be -- they have to understand...

HANNITY: I'm agreeing with what you're saying. I think...

STEELE: They have to understand these steps, because if they don't, then they'll get to Washington, and they'll start drinking that Potomac River water. And they'll get drunk with power and...

Honesty is a deadly word when you're a conservative. The NRCC responded this way.

"The NRCC's goal - as the campaign arm of the House Republican Conference - has always been to recapture the majority in 2010. Independent political analysts and even liberal columnists have stated that Republicans have a very real shot at taking back the majority in 2010. Make no mistake about it, we are playing to win," said Ken Spain, NRCC Communications Director.

Washington's (and the complicit media) obsession with the Christmas Day underpants bomber and the need to not only find blame, but to demand reactions to "make us safe" made me realize that we collectively have become the five year old who needs his parents to scare away the monsters from under his bed at night. How else can you explain the fear behind the Fox poll showing a majority of respondees wanting to waterboard Abdulmutallab?

It's ludicrous to think that there is any system that could offer us *perfect* security. Forcing us to stay seated for the last hour of a flight? What's to say the next bombing attempt won't be during take-off, or even in a crowded terminal prior to boarding? Richard Reed forced us to remove our shoes; will we now have to strip naked, thanks to Abdulmutallab? And how do we enforce this from foreign airports, since Abdulmutallab boarded a flight in Amsterdam? Or maybe it won't be airline-related at all. Lex at Scholars & Rogues:

What i don’t understand is the idea that Americans are entitled to perfect security. Here we are (and for the record, all the troops stationed everywhere in the world are you and i) crashing around the globe and blowing shit up, yet those of us in God’s country should face no threat. And for the most part, we don’t face any threat. Nobody’s bombed any of the weddings i’ve been to over the last few years. I’ve never thought, “I don’t think i should go downtown, because somebody might suicide bomb where i shop.” I’m convinced that the Canadians will launch their plan for world domination any day, by invading the social and evolutionary cul-de-sac of America where i live. But as of yet i have not had to contend with RCAF close air support in the neighborhood.

Still here we are, gripped by fear and willing to submit to whatever the organs say is necessary to protect us.[..]

I’m not being glib nor am i underplaying all those “very real dangers” that we face in the post-9/11 world. I’m saying that if we don’t want to live with the dangers then we might want to stop provoking them. I’m saying that there is no such thing as perfect safety and security; you are going to die someday and you probably won’t go to heaven. And i’m saying that our government consistently overplays any actual threats (and their probability) in order to control us through fear.

The intent of terrorism is, by definition, to terrorize. If we have reached the point where we can no longer have anything on our laps or use the restroom during the last hour of a flight, then the terrorists have succeeded in doing just what they had hoped.

I still have to--on occasion--chase out the scary monsters from under my little one's bed. I do this by mocking them: I've told her that they can't stand the smell of my perfume, because they know I am a ferociously protective mama and much scarier than any of them could hope to be. So I spray a little bit of my cologne around her room and she feels better, knowing that familiar scent will keep the monsters away. I acknowledge the fear, but minimize its importance. I would much rather not have my government be the parent who focuses on the scary monster so much that it becomes bigger and scarier than anything that could fight it.

Is it so difficult to not be treated like a five year old?

Natasha Chart at Open Left:

Glenn Hurowitz recently wondered who's going to help Tibet bring down China, like the Russians were brought down in Afghanistan and the British in India.

International pressure and protest seems to carry no weight among the Chinese. Their government is still arresting monks for "unauthorized gatherings", they're still shooting and killing Tibetans. They've also been shipping weapons to Zimbabwe's dictator, who's currently ignoring the results of an election that voted him and his party out of power. They buy 90 percent of Sudan's exported oil, and sells them small arms destined for Darfur. Darfur, where the Sudanese government is carrying out air attacks against helpless civilian targets. Oh yes, and they're now the world's top carbon polluter, though the US still remains the top carbon polluter per capita.

Yeah, that Chinese government, complete jerks, tyrants, to put it charitably. People are surprised that the Olympic torch protests seem only to have stirred Chinese nationalism, surprised that the Chinese don't understand why people are angry. Still, I think Glenn asks the wrong question. Because who is it that raised China up? The lack of self-awareness in this situation isn't exclusive to the Chinese, people everywhere have an amazing capacity to accept almost anything as normal.

Indeed, let's cut right to the heart of the matter: whom else will we buy our shoes from?

I looked this up once when I was working at my community college paper in 2005. There was an editorial insistence on doing a fashion insert, so I contributed something about sweatshops and the offshoring of clothing manufacture. (I know, total killjoy.) I found a copy of that article in my old files, and according to the research that I'd done at the time, the US had lost over 860,000 textile and apparel jobs since 1993, and China was making 80% of the world's shoes.

Sure, if you have (usually) more money to spend, you can find shoes made somewhere else. But not everyone has that kind of time or latitude. Funny thing, though, now shoe manufacturers are closing down in China. Now that "many factories have to meet social obligations" and workers have been agitating for better pay, manufacturing jobs are slowly starting to leave China as they once left the US. Read on...

I can't believe I had to make that statement. I thought it was a pain to have to remove your shoes and dump your baby's bottle to get through the security checkpoint. Now this?

A Texas woman who said she was forced to remove a nipple ring with pliers in order to board an airplane called Thursday for an apology by federal security agents and a civil rights investigation. [..]

Hamlin, 37, said she was trying to board a flight from Lubbock to Dallas on Feb. 24 when she was scanned by a Transportation Security Administration agent after passing through a larger metal detector without problems.

The female TSA agent used a handheld detector that beeped when it passed in front of Hamlin's chest, the Dallas-area resident said.

Hamlin said she told the woman she was wearing nipple piercings. The agent then called over her male colleagues, one of whom said she would have to remove the jewelry, Hamlin said.

Hamlin said she could not remove them and asked whether she could instead display her pierced breasts in private to the female agent. But several other male officers told her she could not board her flight until the jewelry was out, she said.
She was taken behind a curtain and managed to remove one bar-shaped piercing but had trouble with the second, a ring.

"Still crying, she informed the TSA officer that she could not remove it without the help of pliers, and the officer gave a pair to her," said Hamlin's attorney, Gloria Allred, reading from a letter she sent Thursday to the director of the TSA's Office of Civil Rights and Liberties. [..]

She said she heard male TSA agents snickering as she took out the ring. She was scanned again and was allowed to board even though she still was wearing a belly button ring.

Okay, this is just stupid. The belly button ring stays, but the nipple piercings have to go? Does anyone feel safer knowing the skies are free of some body piercings? What is the fear? That she'll rub up against the plane with her chest and scratch the fuselage? Alan Colmes has the pictures of the confiscated hardware. (h/t Tim in Japan)

It's full of nice, salacious tidbits. Think of it as a real life "Sex in the City" set in DC (but without the expensive shoes).

The basic details are as follows: a former Senate aide is suing his former girlfriend (also an aide) for her "WAY-too-much-information" confessions on her blog, detailing aspects of their sex life as well as relationships with five other men (which of course, you know Wonkette was only too happy to pass on, link and mention, thus expanding the audience considerably). Careers were lost and the guy in question moved far from DC. Unfortunately, for him, the "tubes" of the Internets lay open his sex life in what he calls "humiliating" specifics no matter where he goes. The story is available here on MSNBC.

The prurient details of this particular case are less interesting to me than the larger issues of blogger etiquette and the expectations of privacy in an Internet age. As the article rightfully points out, calling it a "diary" does not necessarily make it so, especially when it's available to millions to view. What rights do bloggers have in relating personal stories? Can anyone truly expect privacy any more? I know that for many, the first and last argument is "free speech." But imagine yourself this man. Would you want details about your sexual proclivities being broadcast for all to see? How about if your partner took a photo of you during an intimate moment and uploaded that as well? Where is the line when your stories involve others?

AP via MSNBC:

House Speaker Dennis Hastert is expected by many Republicans to step aside as the GOP's leader if Democrats win big in next week's election. He may be on his way out even if the GOP emerges with a narrow majority.

The No. 2 House Republican, Majority Leader John Boehner of Ohio, is looking very much like a candidate to fill Hastert's shoes even though some Republicans appear to be agitating for fresh faces all around, win or lose. Read on...

The Stakeholder:

Can Jean Schmidt even tie her shoes without lying, cheating or stealing?

From the Wulsin campaign:

SCHMIDT PLAGIARIZES POLICY POSITIONS

This Week's Op-Ed Identical to Press Release by Deborah Pryce

Cincinnati, Ohio - Jean Schmidt added another blatant deception to her long list of publicly-exposed lies this week when she published an op-ed about Medicare Part D in the Community Press and Recorder that is almost identical to a press release issued by Congresswoman Deborah Pryce (R-Columbus) on July 10 of this year. She also published the op-ed on August 30 in the Piketon News Watchman and in the Adams County People's Defender.

"If we can't trust Jean Schmidt to give us her own opinions on basic political questions, then we can't trust her to represent us in Congress," said Dr. Victoria Wulsin. "This blatant act of plagiarism isn't just embarrassing, it's downright insulting to the voters in this district. Jean Schmidt has absolutely nothing original to say. She can only regurgitate what the Republican Party tells her to say."

Read on...

(h/t E and Raw Story)

Listening to Snappy O'Beirne's false indignation over Reverend Lowry's speech is enough to make "Forrest Gump Mirengoff" get acid reflux. Well, maybe not him, but how low is Hardball sinking to have on a person that's not going to offer any type of feedback other than contempt? Never mind that she had the nerve to utter the name Paul Wellstone.

Chris Matthews should be ashamed of himself because he stood there mute as she danced all over Jimmy Carter's reputation because he broached a subject that Correta knew all too well. You used to work for him-remember?

Download | play -1-WMP Download | play -QT (video in two parts)

Download | play -2-WMP Download | play -QT

Digby:

Kate O'Beirne isn't fit to wipe Coretta Scott King's shoes and criticizing her on the day of her memorial service is disgusting. What kind of unfeeling ghouls have Republicans become? Oh and I think they need to apologize to the Reverend Lowry. He is a man of the cloth and a friend of the deceased. Are they saying that leaders of the African American church are less worthy of respect than the white churches they are so proud of representing? It sure sounds like it. Republicans, it seems, only respect the church when its leaders "behave" the way they deem appropriate...read on "

Steve Gilliard:

Let me put this simply: Kate O'Beirne needs to shut her filthy mouth. When black people were dying in New Orleans, they called us everything but a child of God. We were animals, looters, out of control. ...read on

FireDogLake:

It's nice to know that whenever MSNBC needs something said that is so ugly, so fulminatingly rancid and dog-whistle racist that even Bill Bennett will not show up and do the honors that a vile, bilious hatchet-faced nag like Kate O'Beirne is always at the ready....read on

Where's Condi in all of this? Buying shoes and playing a little tennis.

The Carpet Bagger Report has some cool photo's of Frist and this report:

Apparently, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist swung by an Allen-Edmonds shoe store today, and like many working families in Tennessee do all the time, picked up two pairs of shoes totaling $530. What he didn’t realize, however, was that the Allen-Edmonds was located in the same building as the offices of Americans United to Protect Social Security.

So, while Frist shopped, AUPSS staffers got organized. By the time he was done, dozens of protestors had assembled to chant, “Senator Frist Don’t Privatize” and “Hands Off My Social Security.” He doesn’t look like he’s having a good time. And, as an added bonus, according to my source, Frist had parked his SUV in front of Allen-Edmonds illegally, blocking traffic. The Majority Leader not only was berated by those who support Social Security, he was ticketed. (Though, one has to assume, Frist spent more on his new shoes than he will on his parking ticket.) read on