Oh, shocking -- another white male justice

It's no damn surprise to me ... just proof in the pudding. C'mon - George is a simple guy with a simple plan.

He doesn't give a sh*t about a Supreme Court that represents all Americans. He certainly doesn't think of the seat he's filling as belonging to a moderate justice, but that's his right. He wants a court that represents his America -- corporate, white and male. Unfortunately, these are the spoils of the election of 2004and the very thing that should have driven many more democrats to the polls.

So he nominates Miers and no one can dare to suggest that maybe he did so knowing that she'd never get to the hearings. Knowing that she'd be blasted for being unqualified and knowing that she would back out when she was hammered in the press. She was a lamb sent to slaughter.

No matter, he always intended to send up a reactionary conservative and a white male. By shoving Harriet in front of a train, he can say he tried. Baloney.

So all that crap he floated about the importance of diversity? Forget it. He sure will -- quicker than Scooter Libby will lose all recollection of when he first heard about ... what was her name?

Justice Poetic

There once was a bonehead named "Scooter"
Whose fortunes landed right in the pooter
He lied, cheated, stole
Then dug quite a hole
As his nose grew longer, dropping cooters

Then came the good guys, like Fitz
He asked all the questions, took no shits
He charged Scooter - bam
Five big counts, quite a jam

The defense we are told
Is planned to be bold
Because Libby was busy
He'll claim t'was a tizzy
He'd forgotten the facts - oh, that's old.

And it doesn't rhyme with anything, but crap like this you wouldn't accept from you 8-year-old.

Getting Mier'd Down

Pathetic. Read Harriet's why-I-can't-take-that-great-job-offer letter to Bush.
What a visionary. She's suddenly realized that she'd have to either hand over records or testify to her views on issues that have come up while she was White House Counsel? Oh, no ... she must preserve executive privilege? For the sake of "this great Nation" ... what, the magazine? Why is that capitalized? Why is " ... your Administration" capitalized?

You know, I think the English language can be difficult to navigate, but not as tough as the U.S. Constitution. If the woman doesn't know how to follow the rules of English grammar, I feel pretty sure that looking up all those big words would have been too much for her. Put simply, this job was waaaaay over her head and this withdrawl, for whatever reason, is simple, obvious proof that Bush made a brazenly incompetent choice.

More Savage Inequalities

Jonathan Kozol, author of "Savage Inequalities," has another book out, revealing the continuation of obscene inqualities in America's Schools. Read about it on Bloomberg.com or at the publisher's site.

If you still think it's not about race ... uh ... you're blind.

Sure, blame Maureen

Interesting to me is that this morning radio talk show host Don Imus asked NY Times Columnist Maureen Dowd about this column (see below) which he aptly described as "dropping a safe" on Judy Miller. Dowd's response: "If I'm going to hold accountable institutions I care about, then I have to be willing to do the same for an institution like The Times, which I love."

Imus (pig that he is) said that the "attack" on Miller "seems personal." Does this sound familiar? What's next? "You-should-have-called-me-before-you-ran-this" ?

Miller, according the Wall Street Journal, is on the way to the parking lot.

Anyway ... Dowd's column is now available on the Times' website only to readers who subscribe to their "Tmes Select" product, so I'm pasting it in here. They can sue me (and a hundred other bloggers). Dowd, for proving her integrity, has been moved to Saturday after 10 years on the Times' Sunday edit page. Lame. Cheap. Pathetic. Maybe we should throw our Sunday papers back at the newsstand or something.

If you EVER thought about writing to a newspaper to complain about the bad treatment of a columnist who was holding her management to an appropriate standard of professional conduct, now is the time. Send a letter to the editor by e-mailing letters@nytimes.com or faxing (212)556-3622.

But first, make sure you read this column, which ends with a helluva punch:

Woman of Mass Destruction
By Maureen Dowd
The New York Times
Saturday 22 October 2005

I've always liked Judy Miller. I have often wondered what Waugh or Thackeray would have made of the Fourth Estate's Becky Sharp.
The traits she has that drive many reporters at The Times crazy - her tropism toward powerful men, her frantic intensity and her peculiar mixture of hard work and hauteur - never bothered me. I enjoy operatic types.
Once when I was covering the first Bush White House, I was in The Times' seat in the crowded White House press room, listening to an administration official's background briefing. Judy had moved on from her tempestuous tenure as a Washington editor to be a reporter based in New York, but she showed up at this national security affairs briefing.
At first she leaned against the wall near where I was sitting, but I noticed that she seemed agitated about something. Midway through the briefing, she came over and whispered to me, "I think I should be sitting in the Times seat."
It was such an outrageous move, I could only laugh. I got up and stood in the back of the room, while Judy claimed what she felt was her rightful power perch.
She never knew when to quit. That was her talent and her flaw. Sorely in need of a tight editorial leash, she was kept on no leash at all, and that has hurt this paper and its trust with readers. She more than earned her sobriquet "Miss Run Amok."
Judy's stories about WMD fit too perfectly with the White House's case for war. She was close to Ahmad Chalabi, the con man who was conning the neocons to knock out Saddam so he could get his hands on Iraq, and I worried that she was playing a leading role in the dangerous echo chamber that former Senator Bob Graham dubbed "incestuous amplification." Using Iraqi defectors and exiles, Mr. Chalabi planted bogus stories with Judy and other credulous journalists.
Even last April, when I wrote a column critical of Mr. Chalabi, she fired off e-mail to me defending him.
When Bill Keller became executive editor in the summer of 2003, he barred Judy from covering Iraq and W.M.D issues. But he admitted in The Times' Sunday story about Judy's role in the Plame leak case that she had kept "drifting" back. Why did nobody stop this drift?
Judy admitted in the story that she "got it totally wrong" about WMD "If your sources are wrong," she said, "you are wrong." But investigative reporting is not stenography.
The Times' story and Judy's own first-person account had the unfortunate effect of raising more questions. As Bill said in an e-mail note to the staff on Friday, Judy seemed to have "misled" the Washington bureau chief, Phil Taubman, about the extent of her involvement in the Valerie Plame leak case.
She casually revealed that she had agreed to identify her source, Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney's chief of staff, as a "former Hill staffer" because he had once worked on Capitol Hill. The implication was that this bit of deception was a common practice for reporters. It isn't.
She said that she had wanted to write about the Wilson-Plame matter, but that her editor would not allow it. But Managing Editor Jill Abramson, then the Washington bureau chief, denied this, saying that Judy had never broached the subject with her.
It also doesn't seem credible that Judy wouldn't remember a Marvel comics name like "Valerie Flame." Nor does it seem credible that she doesn't know how the name got into her notebook and that, as she wrote, she "did not believe the name came from Mr. Libby."
An Associated Press story yesterday reported that Judy had coughed up the details of an earlier meeting with Mr. Libby only after prosecutors confronted her with a visitor log showing that she had met with him on June 23, 2003. This cagey confusion is what makes people wonder whether her stint in the Alexandria jail was in part a career rehabilitation project.
Judy is refusing to answer a lot of questions put to her by Times reporters, or show the notes that she shared with the grand jury. I admire Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Bill Keller for aggressively backing reporters in the cross hairs of a prosecutor. But before turning Judy's case into a First Amendment battle, they should have nailed her to a chair and extracted the entire story of her escapade.
Judy told The Times that she plans to write a book and intends to return to the newsroom, hoping to cover "the same thing I've always covered - threats to our country." If that were to happen, the institution most in danger would be the newspaper in your hands.

When Faith Runs Policy - Wag The Dogma

If I hear one more time (and I will) that Harriet Miers' faith is the reason (wink, wink) that conservatives should "relax and support her," I believe I will throw up. (Get the bucket, here it comes)

Remember "relax and enjoy it" ... the good-ole-boys anti-rape strategy. Throwing up works better for that violation, too.

Being a good lawyer is not a qualification for serving on the high court. Neither is having ovaries. But in his most egregious effort to prove that he can do whatever he likes, George Bush has put his "work wife" up to replace a genuinely qualified and tempered voice on the court, Sandra Day O'Connor -- a judge with whom I have disagreed plenty (Bush v. Gore, 2000) but I respect her and consider her to be a fair judge who is devoted to only one thing professionally -- the Constitution.

But Miers is devoted to Bush - a man she considers to be brilliant. Exactly how much evidence of bad judgment do we need?!

I was always kind of fond of this idea of separating Church and State. Bush's galling "defense" of Miers (citing her faith as the key to his defense) is utterly repugnant. No one can attest to another faith -- that's not just ridiculous, it's completely insulting to Miers and to people of actual faith, which usually involves characteristics of humility and reverence for its deeply personal quality.

Herald-Sun's "More Local News" ="No News"

As is so often true, The Independent's Fiona Morgan has nailed it in this week's "Triangles" section. Don't miss her blast of the Herald-Sun's sorry excuse for coverage of the Durham's Most Wanted (city council/mayor) races. Reporter Ray Gronberg's eventual story was little more than a middle school book report on the News & Observer's right-on coverage of Vincent Brown, then-candidate for mayor and convicted felon.

I won't replay Fiona's story, except to comment that Herald-Sun Editor Bob Ashley makes some disturbing comments for the story (hey, glad he talked to her ... an improvement over the stonewall strategy). He says, for example that they didn't want to just reiterate the N&O's coverage and were looking for a new angle on the story. For five days?! Is he on FEMA time?

Second (and more alarming IF it's true) he said that they routinely do criminal background checks on candidates and that theirs turned up nothing on Brown. Multiple convictions and 100 charges, but they turned up nothing? Maybe the Ouija board isn't the best method, Bob.

Durham's distinguished candidates

Oh, Lord. It's not bad enough that half the candidates for city council in Durham have been convicted of one thing or another, then comes this factor ... holy crap, this one's a real head case.

To wit, Carolina James-Rivera, candidate for Ward #2 (wait, is that the psych ward)? Here are some snippets from her interview/questionairre with the Herald-$un. These are only highlights ... if you really want to enjoy yourself, make some popcorn and read the whole thing.

"To disrespect a USA Military Mans' wife, children and home in front of the world is the lowest of a war crime one can comment."

"It's been over two year since the release of my brain wash daughter that was hardored from home and school with and sexual, physical and mental abuser. My parent rights was stolen as her youth years."

"It took a flood to prove to me that African American are not equal to any human or animal. As well to be reinstated to vote in 2007 clearify the abuse my family experience in front of the whole city of Durham the past eight years."

Within her answer to the question What would be your top priorities in office?:
"to Qestion City Manager and City Mayor of Health Care provider drugging me to cover up scandal."

To the question Why are you qualified to hold this office?
"1) Durham North, Carolina Michael Peterson scandal rebellion, revange, hate crime, copy cat murder case scandal movie."

Follow the bread

We all remember that famous story about Willy Sutton, the 1930s bankrobber, who was asked why he robbed banks. "That's where the money is," he said.

So, if you're in it for the bread, you have to appreciate the giggle in this story of a Chapel Hill restaurant getting ripped off recently. I wonder if the robbers made out with any dough.

Never Trust a Grown Man Named "Scooter"

At last, the NY Times reporter-who-didn't, Judith Miller, is free. She was finally released from her confidentiality agreement with VP Cheney's Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby and testified today on the whys and wherefores of his and Carl Rove's leakage of Valerie Plame Wilson's identity.

Soon, we hope, the right guys will be off to prison or at least off the government's payroll. One of those two buggers should be indicted by Halloween. Trick or Treat.

As for Miller, God bless her, she didn't even write the damn story that outed Plame's CIA operative status. That was Bob Novak, a washed up hack of a columnist who is now suspended from CNN for cursing and walking off the set during a live broadcast. (Suddenly, James Carville was able to offen him -- amazing) Miller, in fact, wrote no story related to the matter. Eventually she will, I'm sure, and that should be a real page-turner.

Watching Those Lemmings in Texas

Last week I watched the long, long lines of SUVs sitting on the highways outside Houston, sitting ... waiting ... running out of gas. Looking at the helicopter shots of miles of stopped traffic, I had to laugh -- I mean, really, I just couldn't help it.

See, here were all these people trying to evacuate to avoid injury in a hurricane. They were doing the right thing. Unfortunately, they left some of their common sense back at home, locked up tight. Here you are on the interstate in the midst of many miles of stopped traffic. Coming the opposite direction are three lanes of open pavement with a car here and their occasionally.

And you sit there? In your kick-ass $50,000 this-thing-can-climb-Everest SUV? No, I don't think so.

I think you drive over (or IN) the grassy meridian and you carefully proceed up the breakdown lane in the opposite direction. In 30 seconds, 5,000 people are behind you. It's an emergency for crying out loud. Hey, if a cop stops you, take the ticket. Happily PAY the ticket. But sit there like a sack of dirt, run out of gas and tell reporters (as many did) that you'll now wait for the government to come and gas you up?

These are the self-reliant Texans we've heard so much about? The lone star state? Unimpressive.

More old taxes

Regretably, Catherine DeVine's denial of owing old taxes (2000 and 2001) to Orange County are false. She does owe them, according to Jo Roberson, Director or Orange County's Revenue Department. When I corresponded directly with Catherine, she said she was suprised that I "would rely on such an unreliable source" (the County's online records). "Those taxes are paid," she declared.

Well, they're not paid. According to Roberson, there is a payment plan now in place to resolve the debt (with interest) but the fact is that this alderman candidate owes the county money that was due five years ago.

So, there are two problems here. First is a candidate for public office with years-old unpaid taxes who hopes to be spending the people's money. That part is up the the people of Carrboro to resolve for themselves.

The second, however, is her response to the information itself ... declaring, falsely, that the taxes were paid and impugning the tax office's recordkeeping to boot. I have some experience with the Orange County tax office, both as a taxpayer and as a reporter. I have always found their staff to be helpful, knowledgeable completely professional. Our Revenue Department is rated as among the best in this state. I don't appreciate Catherine's describing the office or its online records as "such an unreliable source."

It seems to me that beyond the money, Catherine DeVine owes the people of Carrboro and the county taxpayers an explanation.

A Texas-sized blast from mutha nature

Just for the record, when Rita knocks the states of Texas AND Louisiana for a loop, certainly doubling the hurricane damages bill for the federal government, I'll betcha that our fearless leader, George II will stare straight into the camera and say (again) that we still don't need any form of taxpayer sacrifice to cover the cost. I'm not talking about jacking up tax rates for average folks, but criminy, we need to let those cuts for the very, very rich sunset as they were enacted to do.

But George II will want to "stay the course" and keep his rich white boy welfare program in place. Lord, how I wish our system would allow a recall election.

Taxing Questions

It must be too dry a topic, but when people run for office, someone should look up and see whether or not they've paid their taxes. After all, if elected they're going to be spending money that comes from those of us who do get the job done.

The first race I'm looking at this year is that of Carrboro's Board of Aldermen and, unfortunately, I've found one of the candidates, Catherine DeVine, in serious delinquency. She owes Orange County $239.31 for her 2000 taxes and interest on her 1994 Mazda and $216.29 in 2001 taxes and interest on the same vehicle, whose registration is now blocked. That means she can't sell the car without satisfying the tax bill.

I checked out the other candidates and found either no records (Haven-O'Donnell, Ryan) or bills paid in full (Herrera, Gist).

Pointing this out gives me no pleasure. I happen to like Catherine DeVine. We'll hope she clears this up in short order.

A word about "Naysaying"

It has already begun, of course. If you're criticizing the Bush Administration, then you're just throwing rocks and this "won't help the victims in New Orleans."

Bullshit. Scream, yell, curse and if at all possible, do it in front of a TV camera. That is probably the ONLY thing that has or will save the 25,000 at the New Orleans Convention Center. Speak out. Be loud.

Don't think that's necessary? Well, if you were too poor or too sick (or both) to evacuate New Orleans and now you're stuck there, it's pretty much your fault, according to FEMA head Michael Brown, who says that relief efforts are going very well.

Riiiight.

New Orleans meltdown

Homeland Secretary Michael Chertoff has a favorite talking point in his litany of excuses for the New Orleans disaster. "We've had two disasters," he says. He goes on to cite that advent of the hurricane, followed by the flooding.

That's what he has to excuse himself from leaving 25,000 people at the New Orleans convention center for five days without food & water - gee, how was he supposed to know that a hurricane striking a below sea level city would be followed by floods? What is he, a genius?

The relief effort is going just great, he goes on to say. Everyone is doing an outstanding job. He should list a third disaster - his hiring. This particular natural disaster - a Cat 4 or 5 hurricane striking New Orleans - is among the most planned-for in emergency preparedness. It is a classic scenario, easily anticipated. Chertoff says, however, that you can't fly helicopters and drive trucks in a hurricane. Wow, that's lame. The storm didn't hit the whole country. So ... they couldn't figure out an approach from the west? Is this a cartoon government or what?

Like that terrible September day four years ago, we are reminded now of the media's power. Were it not for cameras reaching the conventions center to show us bathroom sinks filled and overflowing with human waste, dead bodies in lawn chairs and lying on the ground and children too tired to cry anymore, we would not know this story first hand.We would be left with smartly dressed liars in comfortable Washington offices declaring that everything is going great.

The people actually doing the relief work are, obviously, working their tails off and performing heroically, but no one ever doubted that. On this Friday morning, there is no public official on the site of that convention center, where there is a desperate and dying population of a small town.

President Bush will "survey the damage" from his helicopter, setting foot only at the New Orleans airport to make a speech. Isn't that just what the suffering and dying need? Speeches about what a great job Chertoff is doing. He'll also be on the ground in Mississippi and Alabama where it's safer.

Before departing D.C. this morning, Bush said that relief efforts were not adequate. Do you suppose that he'd be doing that without the media's work here? And what does this tell us about how things really are going on his other little project in Iraq?

Vaca for George II

The White House today had the unmitigated gall to announce that the President was "cutting his vacation short" to return to Washington to spearhead the Hurricane relief effort.

Excuse me? Why the hell wasn't he flying back to D.C. on Sunday when it became obvious that the gulf coast was going to see devastating damage? Why did he wait until over 20,000 people were on day three in the Superdome to declare that the homeland security department (with its vast resources and authority) would be the lead agency in the aftermath? Did he have to see the bodies floating through the streets of the "big easy" to realize that an American city will soon be compared with Calcutta?

It has been made me puke all weekend prior to the arrival of the deadly Katrina to see that Bush would go out on his regular speaking engagements and take a minute or two from the podium to give advice on "taking cover" and "protecting your families." Evacuation instructions and preparedness advice ... that's work for Governors. Bush is so desperate the change the subject away from Iraq, he'll even ride in on the tide of a Category 4 hurricane to do it.

And what will the help be that comes from George II? I guess we won't be listening to all that wonderful conservative drivel about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, will we? No testimonials rugged individualism, no siree ... this is going to be the time to pull out the big government big red pen and write some checks. These are the times when even Republicans are thrilled with the massive power and reach of the federal government. One hopes that the Dems can take some notes and try to remember these times when rhetoric of tax cutting turns up again and the question comes to "What has the federal government done for you lately?" I hope it will save my fellow citizens from starvation and dehydration and prevent the economy from crashing into an energy crisis-provoked recession.

It's a lot to hope for.

A friend in Kneed

Oy. The month of July, now mercifully over, did not treat me well.

A minor knee injury became a worse injury, then was revealed to be more a chronic problem (cartilage loss on the back of the patella ... all loose in the joint resulting in pain, locking, etc). Finally virtually unable to walk on it, I had a scope procedure last week whose results are yet unclear. And during my recovery (plenty of time to surf and learn) I'm finding that this is at best a short term solution.

So, oh crap, perhaps another re-alignment or other open joint surgery to fix the underlying problem. I went through all of this in '76 and '78 and thought that was the end of it ... endured in my youth. Next week, my son has the second of his two re-alignments this year. It's a LONG, painful recovery. I'm still astonished at how exhausting this minor procedure has been.

Well, I'll have to make more use of the old laptop and return to the blogosphere. And being stranded with daytime TV ... oy! So now that Bush is in Crawford we can all settle in for a midsummernight's dream, right?

Associate Justice Clinton?

So there I was wrapping up my time at the beach and the news of Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement comes along -- something to restore the blood bressure to normal working levels.

Anyone who was watching all the filibluster recently had to know it wasn't really about these two women who sat quietly beside their president as he complained about their nominations being held up in the Senate. No, this was about O'Connor. Yeah, yeah, all the blabber was about Rehnquist retiring, but he'd be replaced with a similar conservative ... no real movement.

It would be O'Connor's departure that Bush might need the so-called nuclear option for and indeed the time is here. Just one problem --- his approval ratings are in Nixon territory. If the Senate tips toward the left next year and Bush loses that control, wow ... watch out. There will be hearings on Gitmo, on Haliburton and on everything that's has simmered for the last 5 years.

And that's why, in my sun-soaked moment of screen writing I thought how can Bush save himself? There's only one answer: Nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton to replace O'Connor. When you're done laughing, think about the problems this would solve for Bush ...

1. NY Governor George Pataki would replace Senator Clinton with a Republican -- Rudy? Are you ready?
2. There could be no clearer "gesture" of reconciliation ... reaching across the aisle toward democrats.
3. As a member of the court, Clinton would obviously be out of the '08 presidential race.
4. More importantly, she would not be raising money for the democrats, which is why such a move would make the Democrats more weak in the knees than Republicans. She'd be out the radical right's hair (on the political side) virtually forever. Holding control on the Senate in '08 would be a lot more secure with Hillary out of the picture.

She might just say no, which would make the gesture argument even more perfect, but she'd have to be careful in doing it. When your president calls, you answer.

"Not Guilty"

So young Mr. Pan goes home to Neverland (I can call him young ... his birthday's about two weeks after mine) and can claim to be innocent. Fine. But the jury wept, asked for privacy and wouldn't look at Michael Jackson today. To me, that screams "not guilty" --- not "innocent."

Wouldn't it be nice to think that now he'll keep his hands of the young boys who seem to flow toward him somehow. Unlikely.

I'm glad the jury had the integrity to hold the prosecution to its burden, even though they apparently failed to meet it. Certainly the public is warned. He'd have died in prison within a year anyway.

:-(