Steele-ing the Achievement Gap

Already you have many observers drawing a false equivalency between the achievements of Steele and Obama, which is just another way of diminishing the latter as somehow "unaccomplished."

But Steele has never won an election, except the one held yesterday among RNC faithful. Obama won the Presidency. Doesn't that count for something in the "achievement" column?

The other day a dittohead of my acquaintance repeated to me Rush's line that Obama really hasn't accomplished very much in his life.

To which I replied: He's President of the United States!

That's pretty good isn't it?

Maybe not the same as being paid millions to sit on your fat ass scarfing Cheetos, popping amphetamines, and vicariously fantasizing about being physically able to grab one's ankles, but it is something.

Steele for Senate...a flashback

Had to post this re: Steele. They actually paid homeless people to walk around Baltimore in fall 2006 with this sign, falsely calling him a Democrat to try and peel off black votes. Heckuva job, Steelie!

Good Grief, Daschle

How dumb is this?

(sigh)

Republicans Gone Black

The RNC has just elected an African American as its chairman for the first time in its history.

Michael Steele, former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, who got thumped in the 2006 Senate race despite hiring homeless people to pass out fake signs and despite running away from his own party affiliation by touting the (non-existent) support of "Steele Democrats". His brother, Shelby Steele, is one of those hating-on-Obama "black conservatives" who has made a series of foolish, completely wrong predictions about Obama's fortunes over the past two years. (By the way, according to Shelby, I as a white liberal only voted for Obama for superficial reasons of white guilt and wannabe hipster fascination; to which I say, fuck you).

Anyway, my favorite reaction so far comes from Kos, who notes that Steele narrowly edged out South Carolina's Katon Dawson, who until recently belonged to that most Jurassic of entities, the all-white golf club, and who says he got into politics as a teenager in response to court-ordered school integration:

"So yet again, the black man kept Dawson down."

Juan Cole, Fearless Vampire Killer

Cole slays neocon "historian" Fouad Ajami in a must-read column today on his blog. Ajami attempts to pull the Rovian move of projecting your own failures upon your opponent (in this case, President Obama). Even a pull quote here won't do it justice - go read the whole thing.

I wish Cole was on TV more often.

"A has-been hypocrite loser"

As we watch Obama rope-a-dope Rush into a well-deserved obsolescence, it's enjoyable also to watch the dead-ender red state Republicans in Congress grudgingly bend over and grab their ankles (to use a Rushism) to appease the bloated pig who rules their world. My personal favorite response to Rush's recent whines about how he hopes Obama fails, how he's a victim of "the media," and how he thinks the economic crisis that his party's ideology created should be solved, came from Representative Alan Grayson (h/t Digby):

"Rush Limbaugh is a has-been hypocrite loser, who craves attention. His right-wing lunacy sounds like Mikhail Gorbachev, extolling the virtues of communism. Limbaugh actually was more lucid when he was a drug addict. If America ever did 1% of what he wanted us to do, then we'd all need pain killers."

This Was Just...Well, You'll See...

Arlen Specter, Wuss Boy

As a Republican Senator from a state that leans increasingly Democratic (PA), Arlen Specter has had to keep his moderate credentials current over the years. His willingness to vote for union-friendly legislation, his coolness to Republican tax cut orthodoxy, and his pro-choice stance have made him a target for the hard right at times. In fact, in 2004, then-Rep Pat Toomey of PA, a hard right conservative (and now the president of the Club for Growth, a righty pressure group), actually challenged Specter in a Republican primary for Specter's Senate seat.

Despite being far closer to Toomey philosophically, the Bush White House strongly supported Specter, recognizing that in Pennsylvania, Specter is a better candidate against a Democrat. With Bush's support, Specter still barely held off Toomey, winning 51-49.

Well, ol' Arlen is up for re-election again in 2010, and Toomey is still a darling of the right wing of a party that is pretty mad at getting its butt kicked in two straight election cycles. Holding their noses and voting for Arlen isn't exactly the mood of the right wing these days. Specter knows this, which is why he has spent the past several weeks attacking Obama's attorney general nominee, Eric Holder, for being peripherally involved in the infamous Marc Rich pardon during Clinton's final days in office. Specter delayed the confirmation hearing, then delayed the committee vote, and subjected Holder to harsh questioning, character attacks, and exhaustive discovery requests.

What a political boon for Specter. He gets to burnish his cred with the right wingers in his state by playing culture warrior, and to do so, he uses an issue that allows him to bring up the everlasting catnip of the culture war crowd--Bill Clinton. Hmmmm...could it be that visions of Pat Toomey were dancing in Arlen's head as he went down this uncharacteristic path? Nahhh...just a coincidence.

Well, yesterday, Toomey announced that he would not run against Specter in 2010. And...lo and behold, today, Specter announces that he will not only stop delaying the confirmation process for Holder, but he will even vote for his confirmation!

So...rake him over the coals to help forestall a primary challenge, then vote for him because that's what Pennsylvania voters would want, and besides, by November 2010, they won't remember how much trouble you created along the way. Arlen's a moderate! He voted to confirm Eric Holder, the first African-American attorney general in history! : )

So Obama Meets House Republicans...and...

A GOP source to TIME's Jay Newton-Small:

Nearly as many House Republicans sought to get their photos taken with Obama as questioned him about the stimulus during their meeting.

How I'd feel

if I had to deal with party hacks like John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, and so forth, who bargain in bad faith on the stimulus bill, who lie about the effects of closing Guantanamo, who whine like babies because Obama refuses to adopt the righty policies that voters overwhelmingly rejected in the last two elections and that are largely responsible for all our problems.

Assholes.

Obama Speaking to the Dems

At least as I imagine it behind closed doors. One of the greatest scenes in all of film, just for Jormungandr:

McCain, Relevant at all Costs

McCain accomplishes a double whammy of incoherence here--he manages to oppose the Obama economic plan because it doesn't "do enough" to create jobs, while also saying the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy need to be made permanent.


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sen. John McCain says it will take some big changes before he would vote for the Obama administration's stimulus package.
The Arizona Republican, who calls himself a member of the loyal opposition, says he can't vote for the proposal as it is now written. For one, he doesn't think it would do enough to put people back to work.
The former GOP presidential nominee also says he will push to make permanent the Bush tax cuts, which helped high-earning people. Those cuts expire next year and President Barack Obama has said he would not seek to renew them.
McCain spoke on "Fox News Sunday."

OK, so let's get this straight. We need to "do more" (how else do you "do more" without spending more?) to create jobs while also continuing the huge tax cuts for the wealthy that blew up the federal budget in the first place--tax cuts that do absolutely nothing to create jobs. I'll bet we hear about some silly little earmark soon from Mr. Maverick, protesting (justifiably) a few million dollars of dumb spending while he advocates for hundreds of billions of dollars of tax benefits for the wealthiest 1% of Americans.

The kicker is that this prescription is given by the guy who styles himself as an old-line fiscal conservative.

Will these contradictions be seriously questioned by the media? Doubtful. Do they ever really question McCain, esp. to his face?

But it does appear that the hyperventilating righty criticisms of McCain (see Santorum, Rick and Journal, Wall Street) as a tool of Obama's have sunken in. Why else would he say he will push to make the Bush tax cuts permanent? McCain is many things, but he isn't stupid, and he knows damn well that is simply never going to happen with Democrats in control of the House, Senate, and Presidency. Why would a so-called "realist" like McCain chase a fool's errand?

I guess this is what passes for Mavericky independence these days?

From my vantage point, politicians are moved by three things: (1) ambition; (2) fear of irrelevance; and (3) rarely, actual belief in something. Since this is now McCain's 20th (or 21st? I've lost count) position on the economy over the course of the last 2 years, I'll leave you to determine which of the three motives is driving him.

Updated, 12:30pm: I see this hasn't escaped notice...pretty obvious stuff, but disappointing.

Baracky

As long as our new Preznit is punking the dumbass Republicans, it seems a good time to revisit this fabulous video from the primary campaign:

Obama Continues to Lecture the R's

Brilliant.

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," Obama told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package.

Obama Pwns Congressional Republicans

Nice to see a Democrat who has some spine.

Today's very enjoyable quote of the day:


"I won."

-- President Obama, quoted by the Wall Street Journal, in response to Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) on why he's not including more Republican ideas in his economic stimulus plan.

Sublimated perversions of the Right

An indispensible compilation by Jon Stewart:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Fox News Fear Imbalance

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

Republican Hypocrisy Watch

This one just seemed particularly funny. Ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, Charles Grassley, who has been hammering away at Treasury Sec nominee Tim Geithner for tax filing errors (that Geithner has already corrected and settled up w/ the IRS), has his own financial reporting problems.

Pot, meet kettle. : )

Mr. President

Just hadda post this...complete with Roberts' flub too. From the commentary I've read, this speech has already been surprisingly underappreciated.

The Last Word on Blago

It belongs, fittingly, to Matt Taibbi.

NRO Losing Its Mind

Maybe a fallacy, because that assumes that it was in possession of it at one point. Anyway, here is how one of their minions responds to Obama's call for gov't that works:

"The Era of Big Government Is Over..." [Peter Kirsanow]
From Obama's inaugural address:
"The question we ask today is not whether our government is too large or too small, but whether it works..."
Hold onto your wallets, folks. We're about to get the biggest government in history.

Hilarious. Where was this guy when Bush was destroying the federal budget with tax cuts for the rich and sweetheart deals for Halliburton?

Cool Link

Follow this link to see inauguration headlines across America and around the world. Kinda neat.

"Put Away Childish Things"

Good luck, Obama.

The day after the historic inauguration, here are the most popular websites on CNN:




OK, first is Michelle's dress, second is a story about a gay mayor shagging a teenager, and then...a substantive story about the challenges the new administration faces.

"Ain't that America...for you and me...ain't that America...somethin' ta see, baby..." -- John Mellencamp

Just in Case You Needed More Symbolism...

LOL. How perfect.

Cheney in wheelchair with pulled back muscle
10 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Dick Cheney pulled a muscle in his back while moving boxes and will be in a wheelchair for Tuesday's inauguration ceremony.
White House press secretary Dana Perino said Cheney was helping to move into his new home outside Washington in McLean, Va., when he injured his back.
His doctor recommended that he needed a wheelchair for the next couple of days.
Perino said that Cheney is OK otherwise.
"The vice president is looking forward to being there for tomorrow's historic inaugural activities," Perino said.

Inaugural Thoughts

I've read quite a bit and seen lots of TV here in these last couple of days...

and I think this moment is entirely too big to be captured in words, images, music, gatherings of people...it's just too big. Maybe even bigger than Obama himself, frankly.

Shut Em Down

As we contemplate the human wreckage of Israel's misbegotten Gaza war, Americans need to start pressuring their elected representatives to cut off the gargantuan financial and military aid the US provides to our "friend" in the Middle East.

For decades now, Israel's illegal (and misnamed) "settlements" have expanded due largely to the multibillion dollar "loans" from the US. I put "loans" in quotes b/c it's a euphemism - Israel isn't expected to ever pay them back, so they're really de facto gifts.

Now, journalist Robert Bryce writes in Salon about the massive amounts of military hardware and gasoline - in the midst of a fuel crisis here - that our government has been funneling to Israel. Wonder why most of the Islamic world blames the US for Israel's actions, why we will get the blowback from Gaza? Read this and weep:

It's well known that the U.S. supplies the Israelis with much of their military hardware. Over the past few decades, the U.S. has provided about $53 billion in military aid to Israel. What's not well known is that since 2004, U.S. taxpayers have paid to supply over 500 million gallons of refined oil products -- worth about $1.1 billion –- to the Israeli military. While a handful of countries get motor fuel from the U.S., they receive only a fraction of the fuel that Israel does -- fuel now being used by Israeli fighter jets, helicopters and tanks to battle Hamas.

According to documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, between 2004 and 2007 the U.S. Defense Department gave $818 million worth of fuel to the Israeli military. The total amount was 479 million gallons, the equivalent of about 66 gallons per Israeli citizen. In 2008, an additional $280 million in fuel was given to the Israeli military, again at U.S. taxpayers' expense. The U.S. has even paid the cost of shipping the fuel from U.S. refineries to ports in Israel.

In 2008, the fuel shipped to Israel from U.S. refineries accounted for 2 percent of Israel's $13.3 billion defense budget. Publicly available data shows that about 2 percent of the U.S. Defense Department's budget is also spent on oil. A senior analyst at the Pentagon, who requested anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the press, says the Israel Defense Force's fuel use is most likely similar to that of the U.S. Defense Department. In other words, the Israeli military is spending about the same percentage of its defense budget on oil as the U.S. is. Therefore it's possible that the U.S. is providing most, or perhaps even all, of the Israeli military's fuel needs.

What's more, Israel does not need the U.S. handout. Its own recently privatized refineries, located at Haifa and Ashdod, could supply all of the fuel needed by the Israeli military. Those same refineries are now producing and selling jet fuel and other refined products on the open market. But rather than purchase lower-cost jet fuel from its own refineries, the Israeli military is using U.S. taxpayer money to buy and ship large quantities of fuel from U.S. refineries.

The Israeli government obtains the fuel through the Defense Department's Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program, and pays for the fuel and the shipping with funds granted to it through Foreign Military Financing (FMF), another Defense Department program. (In 2008, Congress earmarked $2.4 billion in FMF money for Israel, and $2.5 billion for 2009.) The dimensions of the FMS fuel program are virtually unknown among America's top experts on Middle East policy. For his part, the Pentagon analyst was surprised to learn that FMS money was even being used to supply fuel to Israel. "That's not the purpose of the program," he says. "FMS was designed to allow U.S. weapons makers to sell their goods to foreign countries. The idea that fuel is being bought under FMS is very, very odd."

The fuel program, in fact, raises a number of pressing questions. The shipments have occurred during times of record-high oil prices, when American consumers have been angered by motor fuel prices that in 2008 exceeded $4 per gallon. Given those high prices, it appears to make little sense for the U.S. government to be promoting policies that reduce the volume of -- and potentially raise the price of -- motor fuel
available for sale to U.S. motorists.

The U.S. fuel shipments are part of a sustained policy that has widened the energy gap between Israel and its neighbors. Over the past few years, the Israel Defense Force has cut off fuel supplies and destroyed electricity infrastructure in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon. Those embargoes and attacks on power plants have exacerbated a huge gap in per-capita energy consumption between Israelis and Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza. And that sharp disparity helps explain why the Palestinians have never been able to build a viable economy.

Wondering what your tax dollars are paying for? Go look at the photographs taken in Gaza this past month, which I won't post here, of dead kids and families who were deliberately killed by our "friend's" military. What would they do without our money?

President Obama needs to shut this shit down. His advisors are promising that he will "forcefully" address the situation on Wednesday, his first full day in office. Let's hope so.

In Praise of Me

Well, after a pretty lousy run of prognosticating in the playoffs this year, I finally scored big yesterday...so why not praise me for it?

Arizona-Philly: I said 31-20 Arizona, and they won 32-25. Let's look further, though.

I said the Arizona receivers would be just too much for Philly--check.

I said Arizona's defense would not be great, but would do just enough to slow down McNabb--check (yes, he led a great comeback, but they got the big stop on the last drive).

I said the Eagles receivers would drop a few critical passes--check.

Pittsburgh-Baltimore: I said 20-17 Pittsburgh, and they won 23-14. Again, let's look further.

I said Santonio Holmes would score a long TD, and he scored on a wild 65-yard TD pass--check.

I said that both QBs would be pummeled, but the key would be Flacco's 3 INTs to Roethlisberger's zero--EXACTLY RIGHT!

I said the Ravens would score a TD off a Willie Parker fumble--not quite, but Parker did fumble and the Ravens recovered.

So...I am now the king of football. :)

The AIPAC-Likudnik logo

H/t John Cole

Game On

Arizona 31, Philly 20

• Boldin and Fitzgerald just too much.
• Neither team runs the ball well at all.
• Cards defense not great, but does just enough to slow down McNabb.
• Eagles receivers will drop a couple of critical passes.
• Throw in some really ugly, lucky play (tipped interception, questionable fumble call...something), and Arizona wins!

Pittsburgh 20, Baltimore 17.

• Watch out for Santonio Holmes to break a big TD.
• Both QBs will get pummeled. Flacco will throw three picks, Roethlisberger will throw none.
• Ravens will score a defensive TD off a Willie Parker fumble.
• FG on the last play of the game wins it for Pittsburgh.

Becoming What You Say You Hate

H/t Juan Cole. Apparently our pal Thomas Friedman voiced similar sentiments in the New York Times too.

Mr. 22% Readies His Exit

Can the 22% who still (still!) approve of Bush...not to be rude here...but can they leave when he leaves?

Thomas Friedman, R.I.P.

How he walks out of his house after this devastating takedown by Matt Taibbi is beyond me. This is deeply funny, must-read stuff.

Bill Moyers on Gaza

Great stuff (h/t Glenn Greenwald):

For too much of the world at large the names of the dead and wounded in Gaza might as well be John Doe too. They are the casualties and victims of Israel's decision to silence the rockets from Hamas terrorists by waging war on an entire population. Yes, every nation has the right to defend its people. Israel is no exception, all the more so because Hamas would like to see every Jew in Israel dead.

But brute force can turn self-defense into state terrorism. It's what the U.S. did in Vietnam, with B-52s and napalm, and again in Iraq, with shock and awe. By killing indiscriminately - the elderly, kids, entire families by destroying schools and hospitals — Israel did exactly what terrorists do and exactly what Hamas wanted. It spilled the blood that turns the wheel of retribution.

Hardly had Israeli tank fire killed and injured scores at a UN school in Gaza than a senior Hamas leader went on television to announce, "The Zionists have legitimized the killing of their children by killing our children." Already attacks on Jews in Europe are escalating — a burning car crashes into a synagogue in Southern France, a fiery object is hurled through a window in Sweden, venomous anti-Semitic graffiti appears across the continent, and arsonists strike in London.

What we are seeing in Gaza is the latest battle in the oldest family quarrel on record. Open your Bible: the sons of the patriarch Abraham become Arab and Jew. Go to the Book of Deuteronomy. When the ancient Israelites entered Canaan their leaders urged violence against its inhabitants. The very Moses who had brought down the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" now proclaimed, "You must destroy completely all the places where the nations have served their gods. You must tear down their altars, smash their pillars, cut down their sacred poles, set fire to the
carved images of their gods, and wipe out their name from that place."

So God-soaked violence became genetically coded. A radical stream of Islam now seeks to eliminate Israel from the face of the earth. Israel misses no opportunity to humiliate the Palestinians with checkpoints, concrete walls, routine insults, and the onslaught in Gaza. As if boasting of their might, Israel defense forces even put up video of the explosions on YouTube for all the world to see. A Norwegian doctor there tells CBS, "It's like Dante's Inferno. They are bombing one and a half million people in a cage."

America has officially chosen sides. We supply Israel with money, F-16s, winks and tacit signals. Our Christian right links arms with the religious extremists there who
claim divine sanctions for Israel's occupation of the West Bank. Our political elites show neither independence nor courage by challenging the consensus that Israel can do no wrong. Although one recent poll found Democratic voters overwhelmingly oppose the Israeli offensive by a 24-point margin, Democratic Party leaders in Congress nonetheless march in lockstep to the hardliners in Israel and the White House. Rarely does our mainstream media depart from the monotonous monologue of the party line. Many American Jews know, as Aaron David Miller writes in the current "Newsweek", that the destruction in Gaza won't do much to address Israel's longer-term needs.

But those who raise questions are accused by a prominent reform rabbi of being "morally deficient." One Jewish American activist told me this week that never in 30 years has he seen such blind and binding conformity in his community. "You'd never know," he said, "that it is the Gazans who are doing most of the suffering."

We are in a terrible bind — Israel, the Palestinians, the United States. Each greases the cycle of violence, as one man's terrorism becomes another's resistance to oppression. Is it possible to turn this mindless tragedy toward peace? For starters, read Aaron David Miller's article in the current "Newsweek". Get his book, "The Much Too Promised Land". And pay no attention to those Washington pundits cheering the fighting in Gaza as they did the bloodletting in Iraq. Killing is cheap and war is a sport in a city where life and death become abstractions of policy. Here are the people who pay the price.

Obama on This Week

He sure seems commanding and presidential. But as he discusses his plans, I find myself unable to fully grasp it. This is what commentators commonly reference when they say he needs to be "more specific".

How specific can he be, frankly? And no matter how much detail, aren't we in essence taking a leap of faith, regardless of what array of policies are ultimately enacted? It all seems to be as much a matter of religion as anything else. Republicans insist that business tax cuts and credits are what "create jobs and grow the economy". Democrats want more federal spending (called "investments" for marketing purposes) and say that "creates jobs and puts a down payment on fixing the structural deficiencies of the current economy".

What works?

How the hell can you prove it?

I know that giving massive tax cuts to incredibly wealthy people and big business, as Bush did, sounds pretty stupid (and immoral) to me.

Peggy Noonan made a good point in the roundtable after Obama's appearance, where she said, "I hope he wants the right things because he is probably going to get most or all of what he wants."

I second that emotion

Today Navi Pillay, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, called for an investigation into whether war crimes were being committed by Israel in Gaza:

"The vicious cycle of provocation and retribution must be brought to an end," she said.

Scores of people, including children, had been killed or wounded in "Israel's totally unacceptable strikes" against clearly marked U.N. facilities sheltering Gaza civilians, she said. Harm to civilians caused by rockets fired from the Gaza Strip into southern Israel was also "unacceptable".

Pillay was addressing a special session of the U.N. Human Rights Council a day after the Security Council adopted a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in the 14-day-old conflict and a withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza.

But check out this nugget at the end about the U.S. response:

The United States, Israel's main ally, has virtually stopped taking part in the Council, which it says has lost credibility.

Why, because the Council criticized Israel? Is it now the 51st state or something?

Maybe Jeremiah Wright was right: "God damn America" indeed. My government fails to represent me fairly in these types of decisions, I complain to my elected officials, they ignore me, I vent about it to the three or so people who will read it here. I sign petitions. I join in e-mail campaigns. I march in the street. Nothing changes.

I will be seriously pissed if President Obama doesn't change course in a meaningful way after January 20.

Update: This is a hopeful sign. If Obama is actually going to engage in direct diplomacy with Hamas, that's already a quantum improvement from the fucktardedness of the Bush years. And it beats the spineless, amoral, ethically challenged national Dems - not a huge feat but better than nothing.

Marvel Team-Up starring Spider-Man and... Barack Obama

So, so, so cool:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Spider-Man has a new sidekick: The president-elect.

Barack Obama collected Spider-Man comics as a child, so Marvel Comics wanted to give him a "shout-out back" by featuring him in a bonus story, said Joe
Quesada, Marvel's editor-in-chief.

"How great is that? The commander in chief to be is actually a nerd in chief," Quesada said. "It was really, really cool to see that we had a geek in the White House. We're all thrilled with that."

The comic starts with Spider-Man's alter-ego Peter Parker taking photographs at the inauguration, before spotting two identical Obamas. Parker decides "the future president's gonna need Spider-Man," and springs into action, using basketball to determine the real Obama and punching out the impostor.

Obama thanks him with a fist-bump.

Obama has said that as a child, he collected Spider-Man and Conan the Barbarian comic books. His Senate Web site used to have a photo of him posing in front of a Superman statue.

The Obama story is a bonus in Marvel Comic's Amazing Spider-Man #583,
available in comic book shops nationwide on Jan. 14 for $3.99 and is expected to
sell out, with half the covers devoted to Obama.

Harry Reid, shmendrick

Jane Hamsher at Firedoglake has the definitive takedown of the incompetence of Harry Reid. Go check it out.

Who does the Senate represent?

Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell just pushed a Senate resolution voicing support for Israel and repeating the same bogus lines about what the US would do if we were attacked with rockets from Mexico or Canada. Jon Stewart disposed of this crap pretty easily last night.

Is this the American Senate or the Israeli Senate? How fucking tone-deaf to public opinion, both in and out of the US, is this idiotic resolution?

Just saying.

"A big concentration camp"

That's what a spokesman for the Vatican is calling Gaza today. Israel condemned this characterization, likening it to "Hamas propaganda." On the other hand, we have this from the International Red Cross:

Workers of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Gaza say they have gone into houses and discovered horrific scenes of corpses, and of living children still next to the body of their mother. Physicians in Gaza are convince that the official death and casualty totals for this military operation are gross underestimates, and that there are lots of buildings with undiscovered corpses in them alongside orphaned children.

The real history behind the Gaza crisis

Rashid Khalidi, a professor whom you may remember as a former colleague of Barack Obama in Chicago, offers a succinct explanation of the recent history of relations between Israel and Gaza in today's New York Times.

I'm actually surprised the NYT published this, since it has put forth a relentless pro-war tilt in its coverage.

The standoff continues as our "friend" digs us in deeper with a huge chunk of the world's population.

And More Blowback Courtesy of Our "Friend" Israel

Or, with friends like these.... As if to underscore my previous point about Gaza, now we have this:

Iraq's Sadr urges reprisals against US over Gaza war
AFPAFP Global Edition
Jan 07, 2009

The Shiite radical movement of Moqtada al-Sadr, which fought two wars with US troops in 2004, threatened on Wednesday to resume attacks on American targets inside Iraq over Washington's support for the Israeli assault on Gaza.

"I ask the Iraqi resistance to engage in revenge operations against the United States, the biggest partner of the Zionist enemy," Sadr said in a statement issued by his office in the central shrine city of Najaf.

He called on "all countries which host Israeli embassies on their territory to close down those missions which are the source of terrorism in Arab and Islamic countries as a sign of support for the Palestinian people."

Sadr also urged Iraqis to "place Palestinian flags on the roofs of all buildings, mosques and churches in a show of support for the mujahedeen (holy warriors) in Gaza."

Again, I ask: why the hell do we think Israel is such a great ally?

Blowback

Juan Cole has a great post today suggesting that Israel's incursion into Gaza will almost certainly result in more blowback for the US from the Islamic world. Read the whole thing, but here's the money part below:

In 1996, Israeli jets bombed a UN building where civilians had taken refuge at Cana/ Qana in south Lebanon, killing 102 persons; in the place where Jesus is said to have made water into wine, Israeli bombs wrought a different sort of transformation. In the distant, picturesque port of Hamburg, a young graduate student studying traditional architecture of Aleppo saw footage like this on the news [graphic]. He was consumed with anguish and the desire for revenge. He immediately wrote out a martyrdom will, pledging to die avenging the innocent victims, killed with airplanes and bombs that were a free gift from the United States. His name was Muhammad Atta. Five years later he piloted American Airlines 11 into the World Trade Center.

On Tuesday, the Israeli military shelled a United Nations school to which terrified Gazans had fled for refuge, killing at least 42 persons and wounding 55, virtually all of them civilians, and many of them children. The Palestinian death toll rose to 660. The Israelis say they took fire from one of the schools. Was it tank fire?

You wonder if someone somewhere is writing out a will today.

In fact, you know that the Israeli leaders know that likely their atrocities against civilians in Gaza will produce further terrorism, both against the United States and Israel. They are obviously entirely willing to take that risk. Why? The Israeli far right thrives on ethnic conflict. It may be worried that Obama will try to curb it. What is the worst that could happen, from their point of view? That Obama's presidency would be destroyed by an alleged failure to prevent such an attack, and that the US public would be shifted to the Right and rededicate itself to its flagging crusade against Islam-- oops, I mean "war on terror"?

Michael Scheuer, who headed the CIA Bin Laden desk for some years and knows something about radical fundamentalism, concludes, "What is likely to become known across the Islamic world as the "Gaza slaughter" will ensure the continued growth of the Sunni insurgency al-Qaeda leads and inspires."

And as though on cue, Ayman al-Zawahiri came out with a video Tuesday, saying, ""We will never stop until we avenge the death of all who are killed, injured, widowed and orphaned in Palestine and throughout the Islamic world . . ." He then attacked Barack Obama, saying "These air strikes are a gift from Obama before he takes office, and from Hosni Mubarak, the traitor who is the primary partner in your siege and murder."

What I am saying is that Israeli leaders like Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni, Ehud Barak and the Israeli high command and intelligence all knew this danger very well when they launched this bloodbath. They subjected you and me to it anyway, because it is immaterial to them what happens to the United States as a result of their bloody-mindedness. They want theirs. They are no different in that regard from American hawks. Bush knew he was endangering Madrid and Glasgow when he attacked Iraq. He didn't care about his allies, either. In the Hawk Business, provoking terrorism is all to the good. Nor are they different in this regard from the leadership of Hamas, which also acted provocatively without regard to the wider consequences.

If you read the whole thing it gets worse. We learn that the Israeli bombing of a UN school in which hundreds of Gazans had taken refuge was not, as we're being told today in the American media, a haven for rocket attacks on Israel. It was full of civilians, and the UN had even given the coordinates to the Israeli military so it would be spared.

We need to cut these fanatics off from the money spigot. It makes me livid and heartsick to know that my tax dollars are helping pay for bombs and ammo to kill women and children so that Shecky from Brooklyn can have a suburban house in a gated community in the illegal settlements and "find himself" in the land "promised" by the Bible.

Every time I see a "settler" (terrible euphemism), wild-eyed, spittle flying, demand to know if critics of Israel are "anti-Semitic" I wonder how many people think "not yet, keep pushing me."

Jon Stewart, National Treasure

Here he is with the perfect sendup of our current Senate circus:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Crisis in the Senate - Deliberative Disorder

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

Manu Ginobili awesomeness

Since You Sucked Last Time

OK, I guess we both "sucked" but who knew that Pennington was going to channel Jay Fiedler in that game? Miami "pwned" themselves. On the other hand, you should have foreseen the Tavaris factor - the guy is a pick-six machine. Not exactly a Jedi-like prediction. Here are my picks:

Tennessee 24, Baltimore 10

I see a wider margin than you in this one. I think TN will score at least one defensive TD, and TN has the power running game to go right at Baltimore instead of trying to run around them (too fast) or trick them (too smart). Even Miami was able to control the clock for most of last week's game, so imagine TN going on long drives and pounding Baltimore into frustration. LenDale White and Chris Johnson are not Eddie George. You have to expect Kerry Collins would like to get revenge for that Super Bowl beating he took back in 2000.

Pittsburgh 20, San Diego 10

You predict Sproles will break a big play and Big Ben gets knocked out of the game; I see the exact opposite. Pitt's D is faster and harder hitting than Indy's - we'll learn this week why Sproles can't be an every-down back. He goes down. As for Ben, I just have a feeling that he will have a big game. San Diego has a terrible pass D, and not much of a rush, even though Pitt's awful line play may make them look good.

Also, I think Tennessee will beat either one of these teams. The only real threat left to them is Baltimore.

Carolina 38, Arizona 17

I couldn't disagree more with your upset special. Arizona is a soft finesse team that will get crushed by the more physical Panthers, who also can match AZ's team speed better than Atlanta could. Watch the Panthers get numerous turnovers out of Warner, with at least one defensive TD. In fact, I bet Matt Leinart gets to finish the game. Time to go back to Wal-Mart Kurt.

And now, my Upset Special:

Philly 31, NY Giants 21

I think McNabb and Westbrook are both due for breakout performances, and I think the Giants are not the same team without Plaxico. In fact, I think it will be Philly, not the Giants, who get a defensive TD.

The only way this pick works, though, is for Philly to jump on them early, get a big early lead, like 10-0 or 14-0, and take out the Giants' running game. I watched Philly beat the Giants a few weeks ago, and they stuffed the run, but no Brandon Jacobs in that one. He is the X-factor. A smash-mouth Jacobs game and this pick is toast. But I just have a feeling.

This would put Philly at Carolina for the title, a rematch of that embarrassing choke-job defeat by McNabb a few years ago. But I think McNabb does much better as the underdog so watch out.

Divisional Playoff Round -- Since We Sucked Last Time

OK BB, we were both 1-3 last weekend. : )

We each got one game right that the other got wrong.

You chose Miami over Baltimore, 17-13, but instead they were pwned, 27-9 (I had it 20-7 Baltimore).

I chose Minny to beat Philly, 16-10, but Philly won 26-14. You had Philly winning 20-13. I suppose I should have considered the Tavaris factor.

So how about this weekend? We can't possibly screw this up again.

Here are mine:

Tennessee 17, Baltimore 13
NY Giants 23, Philadelphia 10
San Diego 24, Pittsburgh 14

Now that's an upset, although SD played them to a one point game in Pittsburgh earlier this year, so not a shock.

But here comes a BIG upset special...

Arizona 31, Carolina 30

I don't think Carolina can cover those receivers, and their pass rush hasn't been as strong lately. Warner's big weakness is that he is a turnover machine when you put the presh on him, but Carolina hasn't had enough of a rush of late. The Giants will destroy Arizona, but this is my upset special.

In-game predictions:

1. Darren Sproles will break a looooooong, get out of your seat touchdown.
2. The Giants will run the ball for over 150 yards, and will get a defensive TD.
3. Roethlisberger will get knocked out of the game.
4. Warner will throw for over 350 yards, and Delhomme will throw a couple of really costly INTs. Steve Smith will kick much a$$, but it won't matter.

Burris

...is a real crackpot, it appears. The dude says he was "ordained by God" to take the seat. Really? God spoke through Rod Blagojevich?

Plus, check this out:



This is Burris' monument to himself. See how he calls himself a "Trail Blazer" on the top middle stone? Niiiiice. I believe it, if the Trail Blazer is Sam Bowie.

So God spoketh through the prophet Blago and deemed it His will that Burris should taketh this seat. But our Divinely favored new Senator is also not above vicious political corruption, beyond anything even the risible Blago has been accused of. It seems that Burris wasn't too holy to pursue a death penalty conviction against a man he knew to be innocent when he thought it helped his gubernatorial ambitions. Perhaps we should all be grateful that, should this civic insult of a human being become Senator, at least no innocent people died along the way.

Obama's First Real Staffing Mistake?

I don't count Richardson, because Commerce is a symbolic position anyway and because Richardson's problems are of his own making. However, Leon Panetta as CIA Director makes very little sense to me.

With all the systemic intel failures over the last eight years (and even earlier, really), why put somebody in charge who has virtually no experience? OK, OK, he served on the Iraq Study Group, but that sure doesn't count for much. Even assuming that he's a strong administrator and good bureaucratic operator, what's his knowledge base? If, for example, he sees two competing proposals on how we structure our human intelligence capabilities in Arab countries, how will he know which one to accept, or how will he take the best ideas of both and synthesize them into an even better third alternative?

Next we'll hear about how he'll have strong assistant directors who have that knowledge base. Great. But he'll be overly dependent on those people, and what if there are intra-agency turf battles (which, if my reading is to be believed, there always are)? What does Director Panetta do about that?

Was it that hard to find somebody with knowledge of intelligence operations who wasn't somehow compromised by Bush's torture policies?

Lastly, Obama has repeatedly hammered home the fact that he wants to get serious about taking out al Qaeda along the Pakistan/Afghan border. To do so will surely require a greatly enhanced, sophisticated intelligence operation there. Leon Panetta is the right guy to do that? The former WH Budget director? The former Congressman 20 years ago? The guy who teaches government and works part-time at a think tank? What will the CIA pros think of this, by the way?

I generally like Leon Panetta (seems like everybody does, from what I read), but this doesn't seem like a good fit at all.

Frank Rich Destroys Bush

Wow. I didn't think anyone could capture this much of the absurdity of Bush in a single essay, now that Albert Camus is no longer with us. Read the whole thing here, but the first paragraph alone seems to nearly say it all:

WE like our failed presidents to be Shakespearean, or at least large enough to inspire Oscar-worthy performances from magnificent tragedians like Frank Langella. So here, too, George W. Bush has let us down. Even the banality of evil is too grandiose a concept for 43. He is not a memorable villain so much as a sometimes affable second banana whom Josh Brolin and Will Ferrell can nail without breaking a sweat. He’s the reckless Yalie Tom Buchanan, not Gatsby. He is smaller than life.

2008 Burning Bush Awards - Funny Video of the Year: "Hillary's Downfall"

From the Democratic primary, this came out after the North Carolina and Indiana primaries. Cracks me up every time: