Saturday, December 05, 2009

Dickens weekend

"Dickens descendant helps Strand festival’s revival":

The London friends of best-selling British author Lucinda Hawksley could not understand why she suddenly decided to travel to what they considered an small, obscure provincial hamlet in Texas.

“They looked at me like I was mad,” Hawksley recalled in an interview.

Hawksley is making her first trip to Galveston's annual celebration of Charles Dickens, Dickens on The Strand, because her middle name is Dickens. She is the great-great-great granddaughter of the famous writer and members of her family have been attending the two-day celebration that begins today for more than a decade.

The 36-year-old festival, with visitors and entertainers roaming the streets in Victorian-era costumes, is returning to its full 10-square-block area with more than 150 vendors for the first time since Hurricane Ike wrecked Galveston in September 2008, drowning The Strand Historic District in 10 feet of water. Last year's celebration was restricted to The Strand because most of the shops in the Historic District were still repairing damage.

This is Texas' best street festival of the year, and I won't miss it for the rest of my life. We're driving down to the island today and staying over night.

Advance ticket sales this year are about 80 percent of sales at the same time in 2007, when 33,000 attended Dickens on The Strand, said Molly Dannenmaier, spokeswoman for the event sponsor, the Galveston Historical Foundation. Foundation officials were pleasantly surprised that 22,000 visitors showed for last year's truncated celebration.

Officials are hoping that clear weather predicted for today and new attractions like an exhibit from the Charles Dickens Museum in London and screenings of the musical film A Tale of Two Cities, based on Dickens' famous novel, will draw crowds from Houston.

The special events this year are greatly enhanced -- Victorian bed races and exhibits from the London Dickens museum among them. More on that at the end of this excerpt.

Drawing an accomplished author like Hawksley, who has written or coauthored 20 nonfiction books, was unexpected. Her parents, who have attended Dickens on the Strand in the past, had been scheduled to represent the Dickens family. But they were unable to attend and asked Hawksley to come in their stead. “I was really excited to get the chance,” said Hawksley, who admits to being amazed when she first learned that Charles Dickens was being honored in a small, island city in Texas.

Hawksley is known for two biographies: Katey, theLife and Loves of Dickens Artist Daughter, and Lizzie Siddal: Face of the Pre-Raphaelites, which she describes as the story of “a working-class girl who rose from obscurity to become one of the most recognizable faces in Queen Victoria's Britain.”

She is also a patron of the Charles Dickens Museum in London, which has sent to Galveston two curators and a number of valuable artifacts, including a partially completed painting, Dickens Dream so rare that it's being kept under lock and key at an undisclosed island bank when not on display.

Also on display is one of the quill pens Dickens used and the court costume he wore when he was presented to Queen Victoria.


See you there.

Friday, December 04, 2009

What's Kinky going to say on Monday?

Ross Ramsey thinks he'll slide down the ballot and challenge Hank Gilbert. First, Friedman's statement about today's events ...

"I think that all of these things are good for the party and good for the ticket. We all want new leadership in Austin and I think each candidate should be evaluating how best to achieve that. Everyone on the ticket or thinking of joining the ticket should be thinking about what will be best for Democrats in November. We will take the weekend to visit with all of the candidates, my advisors, and many of my supporters and have an announcement about how I believe I can best support our party on Monday."

Follow that with this:

Don't be surprised if he moves to another race. And don't forget that one of the people in this particular smoke-filled room is former Texas Agriculture Commissioner Jim Hightower, who knows a little something about one of the agencies on the ballot.

Ever since Tom Schieffer dropped out of the race — he endorsed Houston Mayor Bill White on the way out — the Democrats have been talking about changes on the ballot. With two seriously well-finance candidates in the governor's race — Shami and White — there are millions of incentives for the other candidates to find something else to do. After an initial meeting with state party Chairman Boyd Richie, nobody moved. But reality is setting in, and there are open slots on the ballot that need to be filled by people — people who might otherwise get pureed in a contest that includes two candidates with big treasuries.

A bit of ballet lies ahead if Friedman wants to run for agriculture commissioner. Gilbert endorsed Shami and Shami "accepted" his endorsment and said nice things about him. But he didn't endorse Gilbert for ag commissioner. Shami is a longtime business associate of John McCall, who was Friedman's financial angel in the 2006 race for governor. McCall hasn't been nearly as generous this time around — you have to wonder if that has anything to do with having two friends in the same race — and might be more comfortable if Friedman ran for, say, ag commissioner. As long as there's no deal to break between Shami and Gilbert, that could work.

To that I say "harumph". If Kinky drops out of the governor's race and wants another statewide position, then I think he ought to run for land commissioner, like K-T (no disrespect to Bill Burton).

Truth to tell ... I'd just as soon see him go away.

Three Latinas will contend for Texas Supreme Court

Two Republicans, one Democrat, all for the seat vacated by Scott Brister and filled just last month by Rick Perry appointee Eva Guzman. Buried in this article from the Rio Grande Guardian:

... El Paso Justice Guadalupe Rivera, who is challenging for the Place 9 slot on the Texas Supreme Court. “Guadalupe has impeccable credentials as a judge and is going to be a fantastic candidate for the Democratic Party at the statewide level,” (2008 TSC Democratic nominee Judge Linda) YaƱez said.

If Rivera wins the Democratic Party primary she may face one of two Republican Latinas in the general election. Thirteenth Court of Appeals Justice Rose Vela has said she will run in the GOP primary for the Place 9 slot on the Texas Supreme Court. Gov. Rick Perry appointed Eva Guzman to this slot in October. Guzman has said she will be running and has the endorsement of Republican Party of Texas Chair Cathie Adams.


This is shaping up as the kind of contest that can really drive voter turnout.

Gilbert will run for Agriculture Commissioner, endorses Shami

In our conference call (just completed) Hank Gilbert stated that he would switch from the gubernatorial contest to a re-challenge of Todd Staples for commissioner of agriculture, and endorsed Farouk Shami in the Democratic primary.

My best to Hank, his family, and the campaign's staff.

Update: From the link above ...

“In August when I made the decision to enter the race for Governor, it was to provide the leadership and bold ideas this state needs. At the time, I believed I was the only candidate who could win and carry a tide of Democratic victories from the state House to the courthouse,” Gilbert said.

“With recent entries into the race, it’s become clear that there are now two people seeking the support of Democrats who can continue this fight to victory and allow me to return to the race for Agriculture Commissioner,” Gilbert continued.

“One of them I’m proud to support as a friend and fellow Texan, a man who will serve the citizens of this amazing state faithfully and provide them with the leadership to overcome any challenge. It’s my honor and privilege to endorse Farouk Shami for Governor of Texas ..."

“Farouk will force the transformation of Texas into a global leader in education, renewable energy, civil rights, and transportation,” Gilbert said.

Update II: Other reactions ...

Ross Ramsey at the TexTrib:

He said he endorsed Shami over Houston Mayor Bill White on the basis of trust. "I was raised to be a man of principle. I was taught that a man's word is his bond... On two separate occasions throughout this campaign, he gave me his word that he was going to stay in the Senate race," Gilbert said. "I never would have got into this race had I thought that he or John Sharp was going to get out of the Senate race and into this race.

"To me, it's a trust issue... I told him, 'Bill, you violated my trust.'"

Karl-Thomas Musselman at Burnt Orange Report:

I feel that endorsement serves as a distraction from what I view as encouraging and exciting news that Gilbert will remain a strong candidate for an office in which he will excel in running. It remains to be seen if it will have much impact on the race ...

Charles Kuffner of Off the Kuff:

... Hank Gilbert announced that he was dropping out of the Governor’s race, and will run instead for Ag Commish, which is where he started out. He also endorsed Farouk Shami for Governor. Whatever – next summer at the convention, when White is the nominee, no one will remember that.

Wayne Slater at the DMN's Trail Blazers:

... Gilbert says he's convinced that (Shami has) the state's interests at heart and "can make the difference for people of this state, to pull the wagon out of the ditch." While he clearly has differences with White at the moment, Gilbert is considered an unalloyed Democrat by party loyalists.

White in for governor (and other filing news)

Even though he still hasn't said so himself (that is to be tonight, downtown), the Chron says Bill White is a candidate for governor:

Mayor Bill White will formally enter the race for governor today, instantly becoming the Democrats' best hope of winning a statewide office in seven years.

White, a three-term mayor who is balding and known for something of a bland personality, is expected use self-deprecating humor to tell a Hilton Americas crowd of supporters that he knows he is not a “perfect candidate” but is someone who can get things done.

Hank Gilbert will have a statement today at noon...

Gilbert's campaign says he will conduct "a virtual press conference with Texas media to address his status in the race for Governor of Texas." The Democrat's staff sent the notice out at midnight, offering no clues as to what's going on. Other Democrats have been talking (constantly) about the shape of the party's ticket if White's in the race for governor. Gilbert, who ran four years ago for Agriculture Commissioner, could stay put, get out, or move into another statewide race. The most likely landing spot? Probably land commissioner, or another run at agriculture.

I think that lieutenant governor is equally likely, but I have no inside information; just playing a hunch. With all of the policy work Gilbert and his campaign have done, I would hate to see that go by the wayside. So I am hoping this man will aim high. Whatever he decides to do, Hank Gilbert will have my unqualified support. In my book he would be as valuable to Texans if elected to serve in any capacity as my friend David Van Os.

Yesterday -- the first day for candidates to file for the March 2010 primary -- brought Rick Perry in along with a gaggle of other Republicans. On the good guys' side, first to file were Barbara Ann Radnofsky (attorney general), Jeff Weems (Texas Railroad Commission, against Republican incumbent Victor Carrillo, presuming his surgery for a benign brain tumor last month does not preclude him from running for re-election), and Bill Burton (Commissioner of the General Land Office). Two more unknowns also filed for governor:

Dr. Alma Aguado, a San Antonio physician, says she's switching from the U.S. Senate race to the race for governor — still running as a Democrat. She's got a federal campaign account going — it had a $750 balance at the end of September — but hasn't run a state report yet. That filing isn't due until next month. William Corwin Dear, a private investigator from Mt. Calm, filed to run for governor, too.

The Texas Tribune has all this news and good explanations ...

It's also possible for candidates to move once they've filed. They can change races, pull out, you name it. It's a one-month biennial festival of political ambition, bluffing, chicanery, and rumor. It culminates when the doors close on January 4th and the parties stop accepting filings, and there's almost always something expected at the deadline.

Candidates file with the state parties if they're running a race in a district that crosses county lines. Statewide races cross all of them. But lots of urban and suburban candidates have districts that don't cross the lines; they can file in their county party offices. The state parties put the filings on the Internet; local offices have varied levels of skill. So the lists we've got are incomplete, because not all of those local parties have distributed the information.

The Republican Party of Texas lists its candidate filings here. The Texas Democratic Party's list is here. We'll add links for other counties, and to a comprehensive list we'll compile from those, when they open the spigots.

This reporting is what the Trib folks should really do well, and I look forward to their extensive coverage.

Finally, this off-the-wall speculation from Gardner Selby about Grandma Carole Many Names ...

I kiddingly speculated some time ago that I wouldn’t be surprised if Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Independent Carole Keeton Strayhorn, the 70-year-old former Austin mayor twice elected as state comptroller, ran next year as a Democrat for governor.

That no longer looks even remotely likely with Houston Mayor Bill White poised to join the gubernatorial field.

But maybe she’s looking at another statewide office.

White, expected to say Friday that he’s shifting his political sights from the U.S. Senate to the Democratic nod for governor, confirmed Thursday that Strayhorn has tried to reach him.

Asked if he’d welcome Strayhorn to the Democratic ticket as, say, a candidate for her former office of state comptroller, White weaved. (The only Democratic figure otherwise believed to be eyeing the state comptroller slot: former U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson.)

Take a pass, Grandma.

Thursday, December 03, 2009

War. What's it good for?





The Bible has a liberal bias

At least according to conservatives.

The Gospel of Luke records that, as he was dying on the cross, Jesus showed his boundless mercy by praying for his killers this way: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."

Not so fast, say contributors to the Conservative Bible Project.

The project, an online effort to create a Bible suitable for contemporary conservative sensibilities, claims Jesus' quote is a disputed addition abetted by liberal biblical scholars, even if it appears in some form in almost every translation of the Bible.

The project's authors argue that contemporary scholars have inserted liberal views and ahistorical passages into the Bible, turning Jesus into little more than a well-meaning social worker with a store of watered-down platitudes.

"Professors are the most liberal group of people in the world, and it's professors who are doing the popular modern translations of the Bible," said Andy Schlafly, founder of Conservapedia.com, the project's online home.

Yes, he's related. Continuing from the AP link ...

This liberal slanting, Schlafly argues, ranges from changing gendered language - Jesus calling his disciples to be "fishers of people" rather than "fishers of men" - to more subtle choices, like the 2001 English Standard Version of the Bible, which uses "comrade" and "laborer" more often than the conservative-friendly "volunteer."

And this from the Right Wing Watch link (the original source's link, the Nashville Tennessean, appears to have expired):

The most radical change in the Conservative Bible might be dumping two passages of familiar Scripture.

One is the long ending of Mark's Gospel, which includes verses about snake handling and the story of the woman caught in adultery. Neither is found in most of the oldest Greek manuscripts used to translate the Bible. Schlafly says that adultery story, in which Jesus says, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" should be cut because it portrays Jesus as being soft on sin.

"It's a liberal addition, put in by people who wanted to undermine the reality of hell and judgment," he said.

Now I frankly had more than enough quarrels with Christianists without learning of this devolution.

The "best" part is the substitution of 'Pharisees' with 'intellectuals', and also 'liberals'.

Conservatives have their own news network to tell them how to think; they are vigorously denying and reinventing their own science as it relates to climate change and evolution; why, it's simply a "logical" extension to find them rewriting the Bible in their own (craven, misguided mental) image.

The Locke campaign's self-immolation

We're nearing the merciful end of a bad campaign run by a really bad candidate and some truly awful staff.

Parker campaign manager Adam Harris called the claims from Tejano Chair Sandra Puente and black Dems' leader Gabrielle Hadnot "twisted and misleading." Using the same spreadsheet from which Locke's team compiled its findings, Harris calculated that more than 71% of the Controller's Department staff is composed of minorities.

As Martha notes, one day the candidate says this:

“I am not going to go into issues of race, issues of sexuality ...”

And the next day his campaign says this:

“It is unacceptable that in this day and age, a citywide elected official would employ such discriminatory hiring practices,” said Sandra Puente, HCTD Chair. “Annise Parker is not someone we can trust to lead our city. The leadership of her office does not reflect the great diversity of our city.”

Imploding in a foul-smelling morass of lies, bigotry, and disgraceful conduct is no way to run for political office, people. You highly paid out-of-towners can now be dismissed to pack up and move on, and you locals need to line up to be deloused.

Update:

A day after black and Hispanic groups criticized Annise Parker's record of hiring minorities in the city controller's office, the diversity record of her runoff opponent's law firm has been called into question.

A January 2007 report compiled by four minority attorney organizations shows that Andrews Kurth, the law firm in which Gene Locke is a partner, scored a "D" under a formula the groups developed to assess minority representation in 21 of Houston's largest law firms.

The report, which was emailed anonymously to me, showed that Locke, an African-American, was one of 116 minority partners -- 5.2 percent -- at Andrews Kurth in 2006, when the figures were gathered. The scoring formula gave greater weight to partners than to lower-ranking attorneys. Winstead Sechrest & Minick had the highest proportion of minority partners at 17.4 percent.

The overall score for Andrews Kurth was 64 on a scale of 100, the sixth-lowest among the firms included. Weil, Gotshal & Manges was the winner with a score of 100.

Kimberly Devlin, a senior strategist for Locke, said his campaign didn't issue the statement criticizing Parker and would have no comment on the law firm diversity report.

Poor Sandra. Muse has the coup de grace.

Wednesday, December 02, 2009

One-stroke penalty for grounding your club in a hazard

It may be OK this time to hate the playah and not the game ...

Tiger Woods said he let his family down with transgressions he regrets “with all of my heart,” and that he will deal with his personal life behind closed doors.

His statement Wednesday follows a cover story in Us Weekly magazine that reports a Los Angeles cocktail waitress claims she had a 31-month affair with the world’s No. 1 golfer.

“I have not been true to my values and the behavior my family deserves,” Woods said on his Web site. “I am not without faults and I am far short of perfect. I am dealing with my behavior and personal failings behind closed doors with my family. Those feelings should be shared by us alone.”

The cocktail waitress, Jaimee Grubbs, told the magazine she met Woods at a Las Vegas nightclub the week after the 2007 Masters — two months before Woods’ wife, Elin, gave birth to their first child. Grubbs claims to have proof in 300 text messages. About three hours before Woods’ statement, the magazine published what it said was a voicemail — provided by Grubbs — that Woods left her phone on Nov. 24, three days before his middle-of-the-night car crash outside his home in Florida.

Shorter Grubbs (for once, the paramour has an appropriate name): Gee, I'm sorry I sent the voice mail and the 300 text messages to the media and I'm sure this has severely damaged your squeaky clean reputation and could cost you your marriage and hundreds of millions of dollars in endorsements alone, but I sincerely hope we can remain good friends.

The voice mail?

“Hey, it’s, uh, it’s Tiger. I need you to do me a huge favor. Um, can you please, uh, take your name off your phone. My wife went through my phone. And, uh, may be calling you. If you can, please take your name off that and, um, and what do you call it just have it as a number on the voicemail, just have it as your telephone number. That’s it, OK. You gotta do this for me. Huge. Quickly. All right. Bye.”

This story isn't quite as ridiculous as the Balloon Boy Caper or even the Salahis crashing the White House state dinner, but it does reveal a continuing American fascination with lurid distractions. I used to blame the media exclusively for it, but the truth is that in a miserable advertising environment they're just chasing ratings (or clicks, as the case may be)...

We in the respectable media are not interested in Tiger Woods' car crash for prurient reasons. Oh, no. We don't care about what a celebrity, but a private citizen, may or may not have been doing with his extracurricular time. Nor do we care about the rush of viewers and readers—like you there, who came to this article by Googling "Tiger Woods car crash affair rumors"—and how good it will make us look to our advertisers if we indulge it.

No, we care only for high-minded reasons. It's about, um, the business impact of the story on the lucrative sports-endorsement business. It's about, um, the ever-changing culture of American celebrity. It's about, um, traffic safety! How many more innocent trees must suffer? Wait, no! It's about the media coverage itself! That's the ticket! So here is a blog post about the media coverage itself! ...

But whenever a story like this breaks, the first thing that gets exposed is the gap between media outlets, like TMZ, that unashamedly love this kind of story and cover it well, and more-traditional media outlets, who are either uncomfortable with or unsuited to the story, yet finally can't ignore it.

These outlets aren't blind, either to the news or to the interest in it. They are as capable as you of seeing, for instance, that the most searched term at the New York Times website is, as of this morning, Tiger Woods.

And yet the "serious" news outlets can't just wholeheartedly revel in the human filth of the story. Not just for high-minded reasons, either: there are cold business reasons. As with so many things today, traditional media are caught between a newfangled audience, with new expectations, and an old-fashioned audience that expects old-fashioned standards of propriety.


All too true. The reason we -- you and me; American citizens -- cannot focus on the critical topics like healthcare or Afghanistan is because we are all too willingly distracted by the titillating gossip and celebrity scandal, not to mention the wannabe reality-show contestants trying to clock in on their 15 minutes or the cocktail waitresses digging for gold.

So we can wring our hands and cluck our tongues and bemoan the loss of role models or the weakness of the male of the species and how they (we) think with our little heads too often, but we probably can't whine any longer about stories like this not being 'news'.

Locke: Hotze endorsement acceptable based on "my record"

Just an amazing prevarication.

(Debate moderator and ABC-13 anchor Gina) Gaston: Mr. Locke, are you comfortable with political help or endorsements by people who oppose Annise Parker solely on the basis of her sexual orientation?

Locke: The reality is this: Both Annise and I oppose bigotry. Both Annise and I have been victims of bigoted attacks during this campaign. But this election is not about me or her. It's about which of us has the best chance to move this city forward -- to keep it safe, to grow jobs, to protect our neighborhoods and give a quality of life to our citizens. Understanding that, I will accept endorsements from those people who believe that I am the best candidate, and they would join a long list of folks who have endorsed me, from the police officers union to the firefighters to the Realtors to the home builders to the Teamsters. I think my criteria is, do you believe I am the best candidate, and if you do I accept your endorsement.

Parker: The mayor of Houston must represent all Houstonians and do it effectively. But the mayor of Houston does not have to embrace all of their ideas, and there are certain endorsements that I don't believe are appropriate to accept.

Gaston: Do you accept those endorsements of people who are choosing your campaign over hers based solely on that one issue?

Locke: If it's based solely on that one issue I've rejected them. If it's based on looking at my record and seeing that I am the better candidate I would accept them.

So let's get this straight (no pun intended): Locke will accept Hotze's endorsement not because Hotze is a homophobe, but because Locke isn't. The endorsement of a virulent bigot is acceptable not because Gene Locke is also the same sort of bigot, but because the bigot thinks Locke has been a successful attorney. Or has been endorsed by the police officer's union. Or something.

Seeing as how Locke insists he has never been a lobbyist when in fact he was registered with the state of Texas as one, perhaps he is also forgetting -- or wants us to forget -- that he asked for this endorsement. And he did not seek it because Hotze was about to endorse Parker. And Hotze most certainly is not endorsing Locke because of "his record", no matter what Locke says.

Then again ... maybe he is.

More from last night's debate here. KTRK has the entire debate file videos posted; you can see the specific exchange excerpted above here.

Reactions to the Afghanistan escalation

Mr. Obama never used the words "Coalition of the Willing," but his high-flown rhetoric about NATO and an international alliance to deal with Afghanistan stood in stark contrast to reality. Hardly anyone in the international community appears to have much interest in sharing or increasing the burden of continued warfare - a few of those hesitant nations have personal experience with that region in their history, none of it positive - leaving Mr. Obama and the United States pretty much on their own going forward. This may change, but not by much.

Where Mr. Obama departed from the well-worn script of Mr. Bush was in the realm of the rhetorical. He weaved a tapestry of interconnected American interests - economic, social, diplomatic - to explain why the war in Afghanistan must not just go on, but grow. Take this gem, for example:

But as we end the war in Iraq and transition to Afghan responsibility, we must rebuild our strength here at home. Our prosperity provides a foundation for our power. It pays for our military. It underwrites our diplomacy. It taps the potential of our people, and allows investment in new industry. And it will allow us to compete in this century as successfully as we did in the last. That is why our troop commitment in Afghanistan cannot be open-ended - because the nation that I am most interested in building is our own.

Indeed, it was all wonderfully phrased and brilliantly delivered. But in the end, Mr. Obama simply told us what we have been hearing for too long already: we must beat our swords into ploughshares by using swords. Mr. Bush never said it so well, but he said it all the time nonetheless.

Mr. Bush was proud to call himself a war president - "I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign policy matters with war on my mind," he famously boasted to Tim Russert with that signature smirk on his face. On Tuesday, Mr. Obama was nowhere near as blunt, but nonetheless, the torch has been passed. Whether or not his strategy for Afghanistan will be successful remains to be seen, but he sold it to the American people in exactly the same fashion as his predecessor. There was a little more sugar to make the medicine go down, but the taste of it remained all too terribly familiar.

-- William Rivers Pitt

This is a continuation of the Bush Doctrine; the waging of war based on the possibility of a future threat.
-- Rachel Maddow

I oppose sending 30,000 additional American troops to Afghanistan because I am not persuaded that it is indispensable in our fight against Al Qaeda. If it was, I would support an increase because we have to do whatever it takes to defeat Al Qaeda since they’re out to annihilate us. But if Al Qaeda can operate out of Yemen or Somalia, why fight in Afghanistan where no one has succeeded?"

I disagree with the President’s two key assumptions: that we can transfer responsibility to Afghanistan after 18 months and that our NATO allies will make a significant contribution. It is unrealistic to expect the United States to be out in 18 months so there is really no exit strategy. This venture is not worth so many American lives or the billions it will add to our deficit.

-- Sen. Arlen Specter

I may be the only person in the United States who was trying to wait for President Obama's Afghanistan speech to make up my mind about his war plans. Of course, I mostly failed at that. Sure, all of Obama's options are bad, but still, few decisions seem as clear-cut as this one. Escalation is hard to see as an exit strategy. Obama has no clear path to "victory." We are likely to waste more lives than we save. I thought that was true before Obama's big speech, and I still think it now, afterwards.

At the moment he needed all of his persuasive powers, Obama gave the worst major speech of his presidency. I admit: I expected to be, even wanted to be, carried away a bit by Obama's trademark rhetorical magic. But I wasn't; not even a little. I found the speech rushed, sing-songy and perfunctory, delivered by rote. I despise the right-wing Teleprompter taunts, but even I wanted to say, Look at your audience, not the damn Teleprompter, Mr. President. Obama looked haggard, his eyes deeper set, and I believe this decision pained him. But I'm not sure even he believes it's the right decision. Neocon Danielle Pletka Tweeted happily mid-speech: "So far, could be Bush speaking" and later, approvingly: "count me gobsmacked." That makes two of us. Rep. Maxine Waters spoke for me on "Countdown" tonight when she opened her remarks by telling Keith Olbermann: "I'm very saddened." ...

So what's an increasingly disappointed Democrat and Obama supporter to do?

-- Salon's Joan Walsh

I agree with President Obama that it would be a setback for democracy and stability if the Taliban regained power, but I have serious concerns.

First, why are American taxpayers and our brave soldiers bearing almost all the burden in what should be an international effort? Where are Europe, Russia, China and the rest of the world? Second, why in the midst of a severe recession – with 17 percent of our people unemployed or under-employed and one out of four kids on food stamps – are we going to be spending $100 billion a year on Afghanistan when we have so many pressing needs at home? Third, I worry about how we can forge a dependable partnership with an Afghan government that is ineffective and corrupt.

My nightmare is that we may get caught in a quagmire situation from which there will be no successful exit.

-- Sen. Bernie Sanders

It's the strategy that worked in Iraq.

-- Sen. Joe Lieberman

And I would have to ask a question: Why 30,000 troops and not 40? Why 30,000 troops and not 20? Why 18 months and not 16 or 24? These are artificial time lines and numbers that have no true military significance as planners sit down and develop what's called "troop to task" requirements. There is nothing that I heard tonight that would convince me that we are embarking on a strategic mission that is both vital and necessary. We invaded Afghanistan with less than 1,000 special forces personnel and killed or captured over 98% of all the terrorists that we could identify.

And now with the remaining few, less than 100 according to the national security adviser, we are going to deploy an army of 100,000 to rebuild a nation?

The president says, as one of his major points, we are going to act as a partnership with the Afghan government and yet we all know, anyone who has studied it, anyone who has his eyes and ears open, that that government is corrupt beyond malice. I think and I hold strong objection to sending American soldiers into harms' way and combat to prop up a government that is more corrupt than Tony Soprano and his lieutenants. And so, no, I heard nothing tonight that would sway me against my absolute objection to what I consider to be a fool's errand.

-- Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY)

Don't be deceived into thinking that sending a few more troops into Afghanistan will make a difference, or earn you the respect of the haters. They will not stop until this country is torn asunder and every last dollar is extracted from the poor and soon-to-be poor. You could send a million troops over there and the crazy Right still wouldn't be happy. You would still be the victim of their incessant venom on hate radio and television because no matter what you do, you can't change the one thing about yourself that sends them over the edge.

The haters were not the ones who elected you, and they can't be won over by abandoning the rest of us. ...

All of us that voted and prayed for you and cried the night of your victory have endured an Orwellian hell of eight years of crimes committed in our name: torture, rendition, suspension of the bill of rights, invading nations who had not attacked us, blowing up neighborhoods that Saddam "might" be in (but never was), slaughtering wedding parties in Afghanistan. We watched as hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians were slaughtered and tens of thousands of our brave young men and women were killed, maimed, or endured mental anguish -- the full terror of which we scarcely know.

When we elected you we didn't expect miracles. We didn't even expect much change. But we expected some. We thought you would stop the madness. Stop the killing. Stop the insane idea that men with guns can reorganize a nation that doesn't even function as a nation and never, ever has.

Stop, stop, stop! For the sake of the lives of young Americans and Afghan civilians, stop. For the sake of your presidency, hope, and the future of our nation, stop. For God's sake, stop.

-- David Van Os, "An Open Letter to President Obama"

As a nurse, I have been involved in major traumas. I remember one in particular: a young woman was involved in a motor vehicle accident. Her sports car went under the back of an 18-wheeler. It took the top of her head off, as well as many other injuries, but that was the most spectacular. She came in with large bore IV's. We were squeezing the blood in by hand while it was running out of holes everywhere else. We were literally ankle deep in it. She was losing it so fast that we couldn't keep up with the volume.

After slamming in 15+ units of blood, and still not able to get a viable blood count, we had to let her go. All of the blood in the world couldn't replace what was lost. We tried, but there was nothing more we could do.

This is how I feel about Iraq. It is analogous to a country bleeding to death and our troops are the transfusion. However we simply cannot transfuse fast enough, because when we stop one bleeder, there are 20 others to take its place.

It's time to pronounce the patient, Mr. Obama. Our resources can be conserved to utilize when it can make a difference. Now, it simply does not.

-- "Horse With No Name"

Tuesday, December 01, 2009

Oh no. Not at all.



So, not only is Sarah Palin's new book chock-full-o-crap, so is the so-called bus tour she's taking to promote it:

As much of her entourage, including HarperCollins publicist Tina Andreadis, risked a collective case of White Line Fever, covering more than 3,000 road miles during the book tour’s first week, Sarah Palin herself seems to have remained above it all, apparently cosseted in the luxury of a Gulfstream II 12-passenger jet rented from Universal Jet Aviation of Boca Raton, Florida, at a cost of more than $4,000 per hour.

More than two weeks ago, quoting Andreadis, USA Today reported that Palin would be “making two and sometimes three stops a day, traveling in a bus painted with the cover of her book.” And just before the tour started, Palin herself said on her Facebook page: “I’ll post our progress from the road.” To further the illusion, the populist heroine gave televised interviews from the bus, including one to Greta Van Susteren en route to Fort Bragg, North Carolina. [...]

It seems now that Palin hasn’t been on the bus, except for short hops between local airports and hotels and book-signing sites. Instead, as first reported by the Alaskan blog Palingates, she’s apparently been aboard UJT750, the Gulfstream American twin-jet ...

Both Palin and the publishing house that has invested so many millions of dollars in her seem to have felt it would send the wrong message to let the “common-sense conservative” be seen winging her away across the country just like any other good old-fashioned Republican CEO.


She's so real and honest.