The Brad Blog: 'Biased thermometers' to blame for global warming data, according to former Limbaugh producer

PERRspectives: Notorious hothead McCain now "madder than I've ever been"

The Impolitic: Libby's got links...

the talking dog: And now for something completely different

William K. Wolfrum Chronicles: I trust readers will forgive the overt nepotism

HOLY CRAP: All in The Family'...Christian Cowards...I preferred the holy blessing of the Christ-Cheeto and I didn't have to stare at the sun...Stem-Cell Advance...Pat Robertson on Karate...Our own Ahmedinijad...Socialism in the Bible...Uganda's Hollywood Christian Consul...Purpose Driven Heresy...Purpose Driven Murder...Jesus' General is always good

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 1393

PLAYS: 1002

(Michael Steele - Talk Fast, Talk Loud - pray nobody notices)

If Michael Steele is the best the Republicans can do in explaining their somewhat maladroit attempts at shooting down Health Care reform - they're in much more trouble than anyone thought.

On NPR's Morning Edition today, Steele was asked by host Steve Inskeep about where the Republicans stood on the question of Medicare. It didn't take anytime for that particular train to skid off the tracks.

Steve Inskeep: “You warn that some of the health care proposals out there would , quote ‘create government boards that would decide what treatments would and would not be funded’, and you ‘want that decision to be between the doctor and the patient’. When a private insurance company pays now, what is your impression of who decides what that private insurance company is going to cover? Is that purely between the doctor and the patient now . . ?

Steele: “Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn’t. It depends on the type of treatement and the medicines that are at stake and I’ve had this same experience my own self, where I needed a certain type of . .you know, medication and . .you know, the insurance company is like well, you can have it, but we’ll only pay for this amount or this portion. I don’t like that anymore than I like the government doing it. And my point is . . you know the governments gonna do it, they’ll do it ten times worse and it’s gonna be more pronounced than the private insurers. And I think that’s a feature we can fix right now. And sure, there are issues in the insurance market that we can regulate a little bit better and we can control better to maximize the benefits to the consumers. That’s something we can rightly reform and fix.

Inskeep: “ wait a minute . .you would trust the government to look into that?”

Steele: “No . .I’m talkin’ about the . . .talking about . . .

Inskeep: “Who . . .you said that’s something to be looked into. Who should look into that?

Steele: “Well . . who regulates the insurance markets?

Inskeep: “The government . . .”

Steele: “Wait a minute – hold up . . You’re doing a wonderful little dance here – you’re trying to be cute. But the reality of this is very simple; I’m not saying the government doesn’t have a role to play. I’ve never said that . . . the government has a role to play, the government has a very limited role to play . .

Iskeep: “Mister Chairman, I respect that you feel I’m doing a dance here, I just want you to know, as a citizen I’m a little confused by the positions you take, because you’re giving me a very nice, nuanced position here . .”

Steele: “It’s not nice and nuanced. I’m being very clear”.

It's pretty clear to everyone but the Republicans that the Republicans don't have a leg to stand on in the Health Care debate. But rather than attempt any kind of . . .dare I say it, bi-partisan approach, they are trotting out confusion, fear, hysteria and arrogance in rapid succession, hoping some words stick and no one will notice the others.

Hell of a way to run a barbecue.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (851)

PLAYS: (2577)

Watching the talking heads on the Sunday shows can be infuriating most of the time and here's an example of what I mean. During the 2008 election, health care reform was a central issue that Americans were considering when they went to vote. It was a huge issue for the Democratic Party as all the candidates including the final three stumped for weeks on the principle of health care reform. But in the eyes of Michele Norris, that's not what happened at all and she's supposed to be the liberal on the panel I assume.

Meet the Press:

MS. NORRIS: But outside of the Beltway there's an interesting data point here that people involved in the process talk about, the fact that some 90 percent of the people who voted actually have health insurance and three-quarters of them are satisfied with what they got.

And there's different ways of looking at that. And one way to look at that is to say that perhaps there is not the public mandate for this that would dictate this sort of rush to legislation, and that's going to make it harder to make that point and sell that when they, when they...

My God, what is she talking about? There's a lot of things Villagers can say to torpedo health care reform, but this is just gibberish. America knows that our health care system is in shambles. Even John McCain campaigned on a crappy health care plan, only his idea wasn't reform at all, but how does this mean that President Obama doesn't have a mandate? Why is Congress consumed with this legislation then? It's because he has a mandate that he's doing it! That's a major reason why Obama won the election. And if we look at the 40 million or so who are uninsured, well that number is almost as big as the amount of votes John McCain tallied. And doesn't the President represent all of America?

I have pretty good health insurance that's very costly now and none of my doctors are accepting it anymore in California. How's that for health care? It's been the trend for a few years now in the sunshine state. I just had an MRI on my wrist to see if there's a ganglion cyst buried there. I had to pay over 50% of the cost and now the doctor wants to do surgery, but I have to pay at least half of that too. Guess what? I'm not going to have the surgery. Thanks a lot PPO. Oh, my health care is so wonderful that my wrist will remain in pain until..who knows...And I have a good health care plan which is better than most people have. Calling Michele Norris. Please wake up. It's the talking heads that are making Americans more worrisome about change. Anytime we make some sort of change in our own life it's pretty scary. The fear card is being played over and over again as negativity from the press pool is being trumped up too. Are they so alien to the rest of the country that they have to make a mockery of it?

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (2135)

PLAYS: (4366)

For Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, white men deserve preferential treatment. Given his stated sympathies for the KKK, this is hardly surpising. But it is worth noting. In his opening statement, Sessions said, Sessions said:

I will not vote for — no senator should vote for — an individual nominated by any President who believes it is acceptable for a judge to allow their own personal background, gender, prejudices, or sympathies to sway their decision in favor of, or against, parties before the court.

(Emphasis supplied.) Yet, Sessions voted for Samuel Alito, who testified in his confirmation hearings that he does take his own personal background and sympathies into account as a judge.

Sessions demands preferential treatment for white men. He clearly applies a stricter standard to persons who are not white men. Given his history, this is hardly surprising. But it is also the perfect embodiment of the Republican philosophy.

h/t to Media Matters.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 735

PLAYS: 404

Mike Murphy is right: "Gov. Sarah Palin is the political train wreck that keeps on giving."

How great is it that a week after she aborts her career in politics, Republicans are still debating whether she has a future on the national ticket?

And Newt Gingich votes yes. [This audio, Newt Gingrich interviewed by his former mistress/now wife Calista, was posted to his website on Friday, July 10.]

One has to wonder with guys like Newt Gingrich still not giving up hope for Palin's future, whether NPR analyst Jennifer Pozner is right, that the public treatment, and Newt's tacit endorsement, of Sarah Palin is much more about her looks and sex-appeal than about her painfully obvious lack of qualifications:

Ironically, though Palin has railed against unfair treatment by the mainstream media, she has mostly been referring not to blatant sexism but to reporters who wouldn't show her "respect and deference." The last thing journalists owe any politician is deference.

In other Palin discussion among the GOP, Peggy Noonan created a major stir with this oped, opining that Palin wasn't qualified to run for high office and never will be. One good article out of a hundred, Peggy, but I still haven't forgiven you for your "GOP sex scandals can be traced back to Bill Clinton" wack-a-news bite. I for one am ready to stop talking about the Clenis and let GOP-nees take responsibility for their own wanderings and motivations. [h/t Nicole for the new lingo.]

We hear a lot about the reasons to get rid of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The fact that having openly gay servicemembers in the armed forces will do absolutely nothing to undermine the effectiveness of the military, whereas discharging gay Arabic translators like Lt. Dan Choi does plenty. There's the exorbitant costs of replacing discharged servicemembers.

Here's something to add to that list: the near-inhuman treatment the partners of gay military members face.

Silent Partners, the new episode of Brave New Foundation's In Their Boots shows loved ones of our armed forces confined to a world far from the tearful reunions on military base tarmacs, let alone the spousal support networks, base access, family assistance centers, and other amenities available to members of "typical" military families.

Under DADT, Ben Cartwright, the longtime partner of a deployed servicemember, must strip the "I love you" from his phone conversations, censor his written correspondence, meet his partner at a gas station rather than on base, and "de-gay" their home when his partner is picked up by his military buddies.

From his new post at HuffPo:

While my partner serves our country during these wars, I receive no benefits (medical benefits, family separation allowance, etc); I cannot access the family and spousal resources on the military base out of which he serves, or take part in military family events. I have no access to "military spouse" support groups and networks. When my partner graduated from military training and when he left for Iraq I had to stand on the sidelines- to vanish, disappear from his life and pretend I did not know him. I was proud to see him off, but heartbroken that I could not give him a hug and what could have been a final kiss goodbye.

Michelle Obama, speaking to military families in March, said, "See, military families have done their duty, and we as a grateful nation must do ours. We must do everything in our power to honor them by supporting them; not just by word but by deed."

An executive order scrapping Don't Ask, Don't Tell sounds like just the deed.

Sign VoteVets.org's petition to overturn Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

I'm proud to do social network outreach for In Their Boots.

NPR turned their camera to the audience instead of the senators involved in crafting legislation and asks readers to "name that lobbyist."

When 22 senators started working over the first health care overhaul bill on June 17, the news cameras were pointed at them -- except for NPR's photographer, who turned his lens on the lobbyists. Whatever bill emerges from Congress will affect one-sixth of the economy, and stakeholders have mobilized. We've begun to identify some of the faces in the hearing room, and we want to keep the process going. Know someone in these photos? Let us know who that someone is -- e-mail dollarpolitics@npr.org or let us know via Twitter @DollarPolitics.

This is pretty cool. They aren't doing a Michael Savage on them, but pointing out how much the Health Care Industrial Complex is invested in what happens with health care reform.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 1170

PLAYS: 1393

My longtime friend and colleague Chip Berlet of Political Research Associates was interviewed on NPR's Fresh Air earlier this week, talking about right-wing extremism (a term he actually loathes). It's a fascinating discussion and an enlightening listen, as it often is with Chip.

The focus of the discussion was a new paper Berlet wrote for PRA: "Toxic to Democracy: Conspiracy Theories, Demonization, and Scapegoating". [The main PDF is here.]

Berlet bounced off the paper for Huffington Post in discussing the Holocaust Museum shooting, and sums up his argument concisely:

People who believe conspiracist allegations sometimes act on those irrational beliefs, and this has concrete consequences in the real world. The shooting today is a prime example of why it is a mistake to ignore bigoted conspiracy theories. Law enforcement needs to enforce laws against criminal behavior. Vicious bigoted speech, however, is often protected by the First Amendment. We do not need new laws or to encourage government agencies to further erode civil liberties. We need to stand up as moral people and speak out against the spread of bigoted conspiracy theories. That's not a police problem, that's our problem as people responsible for defending a free society.

... Apocalyptic aggression is fueled by right-wing pundits who demonize scapegoated groups and individuals in our society, implying that it is urgent to stop them from wrecking the nation. Some angry people already believe conspiracy theories in which the same scapegoats are portrayed as subversive, destructive, or evil. Add in aggressive apocalyptic ideas that suggest time is running out and quick action mandatory and you have a perfect storm of mobilized resentment threatening to rain bigotry and violence across the United States.

Now the only question is: Will Bill O'Reilly send one of his ambush crews after Chip now?

Happy Watergate Day! (It's the 37th anniversary of the break-in at the Democratic National Committee office at the Watergate Hotel, DC.)

H/T Talk of the Nation. Thanks WeberLaxMan55 for the "All The President's Men" digest.

Open thread below...

You know, I'm not a Democrat to protect our politicians. As far as I'm concerned, they're little more than tools to execute the policies I support. But I know not everyone else feels that way, and that's why it really makes me furious to see them use people by promising one thing and delivering something completely different - you know, like this expensive mishmosh of a healthcare "reform."

The Kathleen Sebeliuses of the world, those timid souls who can be found out in the middle of the road hugging the center line with the rest of the road kill, can go take a flying leap if they think we're going to support backward thinking like this:

As lawmakers on Capitol Hill hammer out legislation to overhaul the nation's health care system this year, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says that a single-payer option is not on the table.

"This is not a trick. This is not single-payer," Sebelius told Steve Inskeep. She added: "That's not what anyone is talking about — mostly because the president feels strongly, as I do, that dismantling private health coverage for the 180 million Americans that have it, discouraging more employers from coming into the marketplace, is really the bad, you know, is a bad direction to go."

[...] Republicans have also raised the specter that a public option could evolve into a single-payer health care system where funding comes from one source — usually the government. The GOP says that such a system would lead to health care rationing and long delays in treatment.

Asked if the administration's program will be drafted specifically to prevent it from evolving into a single-payer plan, Sebelius says: "I think that's very much the case, and again, if you want anybody to convince people of that, talk to the single-payer proponents who are furious that the single-payer idea is not part of the discussion."

Sebelius says such concerns are unfounded because a single-payer plan is not under consideration, and these "draconian" scenarios have muddled the conversation over the president's proposal for a public option.

If Obama does, in fact, include language to prevent the public health plan from becoming a single-payer option, we might as well kiss this Democratic majority goodbye. Because, as history shows, given the choice between a fake Republican and a real one, people will pick the real one every time!

(You can let the Secretary know how you'd feel about that. HHS - 202-619-0257.

Better still, Democracy for America, Health Care for America Now and Open Left join Stand With Dr. Dean in a project to pin down the politicians on where they stand.

Send an email asking the following four questions:

Do you support a public healthcare option as part of healthcare reform?

If so, do you support a public healthcare option that is available on day one?

Do you support a public healthcare option that is national, available everywhere, and accountable to Congress?

Do you support a public healthcare option that can bargain for rates from providers and big drug companies?

The goal is to remove all hedges and dodges. We want to know where they stand on the public option.

Add your responses to the form at Stand With Dr. Dean.

Just try to remember: The AMA only represents a mere percentage of doctors. More doctors want single payer than don't. In the meantime, more on the proposed reform from Kathleen Sebelius:

As debate gets under way over Obama's initiative to revamp health care, Republican opposition has centered on one of the key pillars of the president's proposal: the so-called public option — a publicly funded insurance plan that would likely compete against private insurers.

A public health insurance plan, Sebelius said, will put pressure on private insurers to keep costs competitive. "And that's a good thing," she says. "I think that's a good thing for the American public. Medicare right now has lower overhead costs than private insurers."

Republicans argue that upward of 100 million Americans would opt out of private insurance in favor of a public plan if such a plan were available. That figure comes from a study by the Lewin Group, a consulting group owned by Ingenix, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group, but it is a selective representation of the study's findings.

Big surprise there, huh!

"The whole idea of the public option has been difficult, in part, because some of the opposition has described it as a potential for a, you know, draconian scenario that was never part of the discussion in the first place," Sebelius says. "So, disabusing people of what is not going to happen is often difficult, because there's no tangible way to do that."

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 108

PLAYS: 10

(The Heath Brothers, minus "Tootie" for this gig)

(Jay McShann - fingers ran the gamut)

(Stan Getz - workin' on his "hit man" voice)

In the 1970's to the early 1980's, NPR ran a weekly program called "Jazz Alive". It hearkened back to the days when Network radio routinely ran live Jazz programs almost nightly, sampling clubs and concerts from around the country, giving the audience a thorough knowledge of Americas greatest art form.

Sadly, those days are pretty much gone and we are all the poorer for it. But in 1982 things were still popping and Jazz Alive ran performances from The Kool Jazz Festival, including these featuring The Heath Brothers (July 1, 1982), Jay McShann (July 2, 1982) and Stan Getz (June 27, 1982). Ben Sidran is the announcer.

"Senator, that I don't recall remembering." With those six words uttered during the furor over his purge of U.S. prosecutors, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales likely etched his epitaph. But as it turns out, "hypothetical" may be the most important word Gonzales ever spoke to Congress. New revelations this week suggest that in the spring of 2002 then-White House Counsel Gonzales personally approved the use of waterboarding, months before the Justice Department's infamous Bybee memo blessed the practice. By labeling such questions "hypothetical" during his 2005 confirmation hearings, Attorney General Gonzales may well have committed perjury.

As NPR reported this week, Gonzales apparently played a central role in authorizing the use of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques months before the August 2002 Bybee memo defined torture as "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death." In April and May 2002, it was White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales who gave CIA interrogation contractor James Mitchell the greenlight to waterboard detainee Abu Zubaydah:

One source with knowledge of Zubaydah's interrogations agreed to describe the legal guidance process, on the condition of anonymity.

The source says nearly every day, Mitchell would sit at his computer and write a top-secret cable to the CIA's counterterrorism center. Each day, Mitchell would request permission to use enhanced interrogation techniques on Zubaydah. The source says the CIA would then forward the request to the White House, where White House counsel Alberto Gonzales would sign off on the technique. That would provide the administration's legal blessing for Mitchell to increase the pressure on Zubaydah in the next interrogation.

But that's not what Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee during his January 2005 confirmation as Attorney General.

Continue reading »

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: 1228

PLAYS: 819

(Richard Helms - What Didn't He Know and When Didn't He Know It)

Ever since the latest fiasco regarding the CIA surfaced, I kept thinking how adept the CIA has always been, historically in telling half-truths, no truths and "who me?" prevarications.

Beginning in 1975, a series of hearings took place in an attempt to investigate certain "illegal goings on" within the CIA, It ran the full gamut from wiretapping, domestic espionage, assassinations and mail tampering. Heading up the Senate Select Committee was Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho), and the hearings were dubbed The Church Committee. The hearings lasted several months and fortunately most all of them were recorded and broadcast by NPR, back when NPR actually stood for something in the way of integrity and solid reporting.

This particular clip, from the afternoon session of October 22, 1975, features former CIA Director Richard Helms (who would later serve as Ambassador to Iran) being questioned by Senator Church over his role in the matter of illegal mail tampering - a practice that had gone on since the days Allen Dulles ran the CIA in 1953.

Since there are numerous hours of testimony to sift through from many witnesses, I will try and offer as much as I can in small doses over the next few weeks. Bear with me - it'll be worth it.

Danger Mouse has made a spellbindingly great record in collaboration with Sparklehorse and visual aid by David Lynch -- but he can't release it due to legal battles with his label. Undeterred, Mouse and co. are releasing the album, Dark Knight of the Soul as a booklet with 100 of Lynch's photographs and a blank CD. Each CD is monogrammed 'For Legal Reasons, enclosed CD-R contains no music. Use it as you will,' the clear intention being for listeners to download the album via a BitTorrent client or other black market means.

The album features guest vocals by Julian Casablancas (the Strokes), Vic Chesnutt, Suzanna Vega, Black Francis (on 'Angel's Harp, the track heard here), and more. You can stream the whole thing at NPR.